The politics (and economics) of hair
CVK
By now you’ve probably heard the “much ado about a hairdo” hoopla surrounding Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney. Today we just heard (thanks Tariq!) about this story, in which a woman is suing the Dillard’s chain of hair salons because they charged her extra for having “ethnic” hair.
It’s interesting how political hair can be for women, particularly for black women. The Washington Post ran a provocative analysis of this issue a few weeks back:
But for McKinney, hair is part of her politics. And dismissing queries about it seems a bit disingenuous, since so much of her public persona, from the moment she arrived in Congress in 1992, has been based on her hair. Up until this year, she wore it in two thick braids wrapped around her head — often held together by a large bow — despite suggestions from her own advisers to change it. It was a hairstyle sometimes seen on elementary school girls, but rarely on professional women. The braids made her look as though she should be hiking up the Alps wearing a gingham dress and carrying two milk pails.
…The style seemed calculated to portray her as the underdog. It was purposefully out of fashion. Aggressively not slick. Ostentatiously humble.
Anyone who has the smarts and the tenacity to be the first black woman elected to Congress from Georgia clearly understands the visual politics of wearing milkmaid braids and gold tennis shoes into the corridors of power. Her choices drive home the point that she is exceptional. She rolls hair, clothes and race into a tight ball. And it becomes impossible to talk about one without getting tangled up in the others.
Quite a few people have suggested to us that we should start a regular roundtable or debate segment on Addicted to Race, where people with different points of view would face off on a specific issue. It seems to me that the politics of hair would be a perfect topic for this. Would anyone be up for appearing on Addicted to Race to discuss this issue? If so, please email us and let us know! 
Unlisted wrote:
This is a very politically and emotionally charged topic because in the black community there is something known as “bad hair” and “good hair”.
“Bad” hair = short, “nappy” hair that is very hard to style
“Good” hair = long straight or wavy hair
As I am sure many who read this site know, Spike Lee’s movie “School Daze” highlighted this as well as the color issue.
They even had a song where the girls with “good hair” sang:
“Don’t you wish you had hair like this, then the boys will give you a kiss”
It was from this movie that I learned the word “kitchen” which refers to the back of the head where the neck starts that remains “nappy” underneath because it is not straightened
Apparently, the “pride movement” lost steam because nowadays weaves from non-black women are so common in the black community that it is rare to find a black woman NOT wearing it.
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 8:53 am ¶
gatamala wrote:
[sigh]…I think Ms. Thomas’ counsel said it best:
“The day they can show me that every black woman in the country has the same hair is the day I’ll ask the judge to dismiss the case immediately,”
Not only do we not have the same hair texture, we don’t need the same processes (if you get them) all the time. Wash, condition (I’m sure white women get these, if not then all beauty companies are wasting their money) blow-dry, flat iron is the same for all.
Besides, Ms. Thomas doesn’t have that much hair & she will still be charged more?
Now, I do know for a fact that different hair textures (ethnicity notwithstanding) require distinct care. For example, my mother (perm), my sister (natural) and I (perm) all have different hair textures and use different products.
“The brief, which is based in large part on Westman’s declaration and a study published in 2003 in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, highlights the “highly brittle, tightly curled” texture of ethnic hair as a factor that prolongs the cleansing portion of the treatment.
The brief also refers to “lack of resiliency” and the frequent use of “intricate coiffures” and extensions as other factors that affect the complexity of drying and styling the hair of black customers.”
OKAAYYY.. so if it’s about brittleness and tight curls, why limit the charge to “ethnicity”. There are no White women with brittle, tightly curled hair (if not, someone needs to contact the beauty companies again).
Yes, “ethnic” (this word is the cute cousin of exotic) hair may mean not using clarifying shampoos that could strip brake dust off a Mustang. Or not raking that cheap plastic brush through someone’s head. Or cutting while dry instead of wet. But let’s face it, “ethnic” encompasses alot of people on planet Earth (& Montgomery too). The last person who recommended an “ethnic” product to me was a non-African Arab. She’s not Black, but she is rather “ethnic”, but does she fit the inflated charge schedule???? A friend (Sephardic Jewish Mexican of Syrian heritage POW! how’s that for “ethnic”?!) ask me about relaxers. Does she get charged the ethnic price for a wash & blow dry?
This kind of litigation will end up as a battle between “experts”. Mr. Cooper has a strong chance if he dismantle Dillard’s silly arguments and afford to hire his own expert.
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 8:58 am ¶
Unlisted wrote:
Sorry, but I meant to make these comments too:
As a result of the “good hair”/ “bad hair” thing, it is not seen as professional for a black woman to wear her hair naturally.
Those black women that DO wear their hair naturally are seen as trying to make some political statement. I must admit. I see it that way too. And, being honest with myself, I perceive that she is probably angry.
Obviously, I know that it is wrong to pre-judge, but this IS the perception for some reason that comes to my mind and I don’t think I am alone on this one.
The politics and economics of this country demand that a black woman wear her hair more like non-blacks.
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 9:05 am ¶
gatamala wrote:
“Apparently, the “pride movement” lost steam because nowadays weaves from non-black women are so common in the black community that it is rare to find a black woman NOT wearing it.”
Unlisted-
the “pride movement” of which you speak encompassed much more than hair. I’m assuming you’re thinking of the numbers of people who went natural in the early-mid 70s. It didn’t lose steam so much as external manifestations of “pride” became less important.
Attributing the “end” of a movement to hair weaves is silly.
FYI most Black women DON’T wear weaves.
I understand the link that
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 9:09 am ¶
gatamala wrote:
disregard that last phrase. My keyboard is acting up.
Unlisted…..no you are not alone in your perception. & yes, your perception does indicate that you (and others you feel that way) are a racist. Yes, I used the word and I wholeheartedly mean it.
This does not mean you need to get defensive and try to prove to everyone that you are NOT a racist. I am glad that you are being open and honest and not dancing around the issue.
What you are saying literally is that leaving my hair as evolution/genetics has made it to be illustrates that I have a natural, normal tendency to be “angry”. Moreover, any woman that is making such statement is making an angry one.
Yes, there are political and economical issues concerned. These political/economic issues are born of racism. They are not separate, nor distinct from it.
There is no other group of peope in this nation that has been subject to such vitriol, derision and contempt for what they are.
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 9:20 am ¶
mr guy wrote:
All the women I have seen with natural hair styles never came off as angry unless they were a complete a$$hole to people.
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 9:47 am ¶
Ben wrote:
I have an opinion!
But I’m not sure what exactly the debate is.
If it’s whether or not it was fair for Dillard’s to charge more for difficult hair, I think it was fair. Stupid of them to refer to it as “ethnic” hair, but fair to charge more.
If it’s about McKinney, I don’t really see what the deal is. Girl got some hair. She seems to be doing alright for herself, other than the whole assaulting a police officer thing…
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 11:59 am ¶
Unlisted wrote:
gatamala:
Firstly, I was talking about the external manifestation of the “pride movement”
You missed my point.
I mentioned my perception for a reason. I am a product of this society and women like this appear this way to us.
1. - Upon further analysis, the black women I work with (those that don’t have “good hair”) all have processed hair and/or currently have or have had weave in their hair. I work in an office with professionals. Other than that I must admit that my contact with black women is pretty limited. (I’m realizing much of this as I type and being honest with myself as well)
Other than work, my contact with them is only at stores, banks, malls, and other places of mundane contact with other human beings. I just don’t see black women with natural hair very often. I am excluding biracial and multiracial women.
Those that I *PERSONALLY* see (however rarely) that go natural are indeed trying to make some political statement and (maybe because they are frowning) they appear angry. It is usually on TV.
But then again, by ‘natural’ I mean a short afro or a style similar to the picture of Cynthia McKinney above. (a woman who many do see as angry)
Just wanted to note that black women that have hair similar to TLC’s ‘Chili’, Christina Milian, or Tatyana Ali are wearing their hair natural too. This is all about texture
2 - I’m NOT saying black women have a natural tendency to be angry. I am being honest with you in that when many non-blacks see a black woman with that hairstyle, he is going to percieve that she has a chip on her shoulder until proven otherwise. The women I work with are not angry. Where does this perception come from? Perhaps the media, some personal experiences…
The fact is that this is the truth. I am just candid enough to admit it. As I meet more black women that wear their hair natural that automatic perception I am sure will change.
3 - Many black men seem to prefer the longer more wavy hair as well. As I stated, this is a big issue WITHIN the black community. I showed a picture of Alek Wek to some black AMERICAN men I know. I haven’t had one to tell me yet that she is beautiful. One of them thought that I was joking. I don’t think that they are wrong. It is just a preference in what they like.
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 12:44 pm ¶
Merq wrote:
Unlisted:
Honestly, dude, I take issue with a lot of what you say here, largely due to your tendency to make assumptions about black people, and refer to some monolithic “black community” in your expert analysis.
Still, would I call YOU racist? I don’t think so. Are many of your views borne of America’s racist system? Hell yes.
Guess what, dude. “some black AMERICAN men I know” is not nearly a representative sample of black men in America, so I don’t know what your point is. I’m black, and I like women with long, wavy hair. But guess what, I also love women with short, curly hair. I love women with short, spiky hair, and I think Grace Jones was one of the incredible-looking women of her time.
While you’re certainly entitled to your opinion, I suggest you stop making ill-advised assumptions about the aesthetics/culture of “the black community” if you want to avoid situations like the one you’re facing with gatamala right now.
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 12:59 pm ¶
Merq wrote:
OK, I just read your last post in its entirety (I initially skipped over much of it to avoid writing an angry response), and I’m really disturbed.
You admit you don’t have much contact with black women. Yet, you feel entirely comfortable with your asinine belief that natural-hair-wearing black women are “angry?”
See, sistas, this is the same shit they used to brainwash generations into believing their hair had to be bone-straight in order to fit in.
A woman with natural hair doesn’t look “PROFESSIONAL???” You’ve gotta be fuckin’ kidding me, man. Gee, aren’t white women lucky their natural hair texture just happens to coincide with what “objective judges” like Unlisted would consider professional?
That’s fairly close to that radio douchebag’s assessment of McKinney’s hairdo as fitting for “a ghetto slut.”
Plus, I love how you’ve exposed your chronic White-American frame of thought: white people act as individuals, and black people act as samples of a race.
(Yes, I’m aware that not nearly all white people think like this. But guess what, dominant America is mostly Caucasian.)
Plus, “they appear angry?”
This is something a black female friend of mine said in my doc. It’s like America automatically sees black people as “angry,” so once the black woman opens her mouth, whatever she says is labelled as her “having an attitude,” or being a bitch/”diva.”
You know what, dude. I take back my last post. You may very well be racist.
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 1:14 pm ¶
Unlisted wrote:
Merq:
Before I respond, I want to say that I respect you and others and I hope that we can continue to debate these points here on this forum without name-calling. I hope that we can disagree without there being animosity
To proceed:
Just calling it like I see it. I work in corporate America, and I am telling you the reality of the situation. Is it right? No. Is it reality? Yes.
Any non-black office manager who is honest (which most will not be) will tell you that they will feel more comfortable INITIALLY with a black woman with pressed hair than one who keeps her hair natural. Given equal qualification, the ones with permed hair will get the job 99% of the time over the one with natural hair. So it is not just me.
I know black professional males who feel the same way. Do they represent ALL of black men? Of course not, but that shows that this is a way of looking at things here in corporate America and this cuts all kinds of ways as there are blacks on the other side of the “professional look” debate.
Once again, I did not say that ALL black natural hair wearers are angry. That is the initial PERCEPTION that many have. Sorry if that offends, but that’s the truth.
And I can give you a blizzard of evidence from segments of the black community about their feelings about “bad hair”. [Once again, refer to School Daze for starters]
When we shut people up, they internalize things and keep perceptions. I mentioned that as a way of trying to shake that perception. I could have chosen not to mention it. First step is being honest with oneself.
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 2:25 pm ¶
Daniel wrote:
I know that I am in the minority here, but I really don’t care how women wear their hair. I think that the earlier writer who thinks that just because a black woman wears her hair naturally means that the woman is angry is completely ridiculous. Some of the nicest women I’ve ever known wear their hair naturally and they are definitely not angry. Hair style is a personal choice, period. While certainly, in specific organizations such as a corporation or the military, there are hair guidelines that limit personal freedom; this is still a choice the individual makes as part of joining the organization. Even though it is true that hair is a big issue in general among black women, there are a lot of black women who don’t really care that much. I would say, get out and meet some more people before posting any more hair-brained opinions. (Sorry, couldn’t resist)
As for the congresswoman, I think her hair looks just fine. If she appears angry, it is the words coming out of her mouth that make her seem so, not the hair coming out of her head. I do not think working for her would be very pleasant, but maybe she was just having a bad day. We all have them.
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 2:36 pm ¶
Adrianna wrote:
As a black women who does wear her hair naturally. I have to say that the reason I did it is because 1 I wanted to live a more natural chemichal free life 2 perms made my hair fall out 3 I wanted to be able to swim, not worry about rain. Basically when a black women dicides to wear her hair naturally It might just be about leaving a healty life, it might not have anything to do with politics at all
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 3:11 pm ¶
merq wrote:
but it’s that same “angry black woman” idea that a bunch of people are pushing onto the victim of the alleged Duke rape scenario.
She’s another “angry black woman, trying to get back at whitey.”
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 3:42 pm ¶
merq wrote:
Unlisted:
Just saw your response. Dude, nobody’s shutting you up. I’m simply asking that you stop making assumptions about a culture you obviously know only through movies and rap music. Feel free to express yourself, but don’t be surprised if people object you TELL them what black people are and like.
Now, as far as your views go:
As a result of the “good hair”/ “bad hair” thing, it is not seen as professional for a black woman to wear her hair naturally.
Those black women that DO wear their hair naturally are seen as trying to make some political statement. I must admit. I see it that way too. And, being honest with myself, I perceive that she is probably angry.
Let’s look at this for a second.
So what you’re saying is that when you see a black woman with unprocessed hair, your mind goes:
“So she refuses to chemically alter her hair to make it closer to what I’m used to. What’s she trying to prove here? She knows she’s putting me at ease with her natural hair… must be one of those angry ones.”
And you sit there defending society’s right to think this? Or wait, maybe my little translation of your comment is completely off base. Please, feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 3:55 pm ¶
merq wrote:
*correction… “she’s making me uneasy with her natural hair…”
but I’m sure you got the picture.
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 3:56 pm ¶
Daniel wrote:
Good one, Adrianna! I loved your comment. It’s so true!
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 4:26 pm ¶
K-Pow wrote:
If I wasn’t in the middle of exams I would elaborate more on this topic. I just want to say that I agree with merq, gatamala, and Adrianna. My mother has kinky hair and started to wear it natural several years ago because it is more convienent, less expensive, healthier, and it looks better. She’s not angry. Hell I even went natural not too long ago. Although my hair is not kinky, it is curly and prone to frizz in the summer. I use to struggle once a week blow-drying it straight (my hair was long and I have quite a head full) and then I just got tired of doing that. My arm got sore so I cut my hair short and I now wear it “natural” and guess what, I think I even look better.
My curls fit my face. Anyone who thinks like Unlisted is a fool. That doesn’t mean there are not people who think like him, but African-American women shouldn’t suffer fools like that.
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 4:48 pm ¶
Unlisted wrote:
Merq:
Your ‘translation’ pretty much hit it on the spot.
I am not defending society’s right to think this, but I am telling you that they DO think this. And when I wrote my first post, I analyzed my own feelings and found that I have those feelings too for some reason. Media or otherwise, I don’t know, but it is there.
Yes, to be honest the thought comes: “Is this woman is trying to make some point here by “rebelling”?” And when a man (particularly a white man) in a position of power, perceives that she is “rebellious”, then (he thinks that) she will not be a team player in the office.
Right or wrong, this is the first thought. It is not right, but I can tell you that corporate white guys’ greatest fear is some “soul sister” complaining every minute or bringing some lawsuit. (Part of the underlying reason Bill Clinton’s rebuke of Sista Soulja in 1992 was a stroke of political genius. How was it seen? A white guy with the guts to stand up to one of those “loud mouths”)
And finally, my experience with black people is a little more than movies and rap music. I also have candid conversations on things like this with black people and have dealt with them for a number of years, so many of the things discussed here are nothing strange to me.
I look forward to discussing other issues with you, and because I point out the blatantly obvious that few like to acknowledge, I’m sure you’ll find some of my other views to be quite interesting…
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 5:10 pm ¶
merq wrote:
Whatever you say, man. I’m done.
It’s not my job to “teach” you, so why continue?
(But isn’t it funny how you still have to question whether this belief is “right or wrong?”)
As far as us discussing other issues go, I don’t believe it will be because you “point out the blatantly obvious that few like to acknowledge.” See my post on Carlos Mencia for my views on that bullshit cop-out.
Enjoy.
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 6:06 pm ¶
Adrianna wrote:
Who gives a rat’s ass what white or black people think when it comes to black women’s hair. That is one of the reason why i’d rather be my own boss so i don’t have to deal with the ignorance of people. And i don’t care anyways cause i refuse to base my self worth and the texture of my hair on what other people think is ” good hair ” . But i have to admit I find it more despicable when it is people of color that say the “Good hair vs Bad hair crap it just shows their inferiority complex. The whole idea that someone would base your own standard of beauty on Eurocentric ideals just shows that they have no love for themselves. everyone have their unique feartures. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 7:03 pm ¶
merq wrote:
“But i have to admit I find it more despicable when it is people of color that say the “Good hair vs Bad hair crap it just shows their inferiority complex.”
Definitely agree with you, Adrianna.
What peeved me was Unlisted’s assumption that black people are divided into 2 groups:
a.) those who believe in “good hair/bad hair” dichotomy, and
b.) the most-likely-”angry” people who don’t
But hey, why get all heated over that? He’s obviously one of those “I know black people” types. What I love about the attitude he’s expressed is the fact that people like him are often the types who shout about black people “using racism as a crutch.” Yet, the potential careers of thousands of black people are in the hands of people who have you all summed up from one look at your hair and skin.
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 8:15 pm ¶
the joy princess wrote:
You know we black women must be some exceptionally powerful people the way we just instill fear and all sorts of other foolishness in people by our HAIR STYLES! When are people going to get a clue once and for all and realize we have different textures and different styles. It pisses me off that white women don’t get questioned about wearing their hair natural, but black women have to waste time explaining things. Leave our hair alone!
I have experience working in Corporate America and a summer with the federal goverment with relaxed hair, but mainly with double strand twists, a twist out and now locs! I was always a shoo in for jobs because I’m smart as whip and peppier than a puppy. I never once thought my hair would get in the way of getting a job. Now I did take my nose ring out when I interned at the State Department, long ago, LOL.
@Merq: Nice try. I started to address Unlisted but then I gave up in frustration!
@Adrianna: I agree with you completely. I left relaxed hair behind because I wanted to be free of chemicals too. I was sick of not being able to scratch my head like a normal person. No-lye is a lie! And I went to locs not for any spiritual reason but because I saw so many sisters with beautiful glossy locs and I wanted some too. It was all vanity! The rastas in NY used to get salty at me when they wanted to know what was up, LOL.
Funny story: A friend of mine wore her hair in a cute twist out at work and the white man in charge (LOL, I wrote it that way on purpose!) got the black woman second in command to talk to her about her hair. My friend told her don’t tell me I can’t wear this hairstyle when there are other women here with “ghetto” hair styles: blue buns and red strands, alternate black and blond woven together weaves, etc. They left her alone after that.
I interned with McKinney’s office (hated it!) in high school and guards didn’t recognize her back then even with her standby big braids and gold shoes, LOL.
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 8:56 pm ¶
Adrianna wrote:
a.) those who believe in “good hair/bad hair” dichotomy, and
b.) the most-likely-”angry” people who don’t
Well merq some people feel the need to lump all black people together. Isn’t more refreshing to see everyone as an individual, regardless of color, gender and sexuality.
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 11:24 pm ¶
Adrianna wrote:
It pisses me off that white women don’t get questioned about wearing their hair natural, but black women have to waste time explaining things. Leave our hair alone!
the joy princess I agree with you!!! Well in this crazy demented world. everyone else’s beauty has to be put to the test unlike the ” perfection” that is European beauty ( rolling my eyes). Imagine this: going to a work place and the people at odds are all the people who have straight hair aka ” good hair” now that would be interesting. Like I said everyone has their own unique feartures and hair texture, it should not matter .
Posted 27 Apr 2006 at 11:53 pm ¶
half monarch half viceroy all orange wrote:
{kiss} merq
I just don’t have the energy….for Unlisted. He will not understand that (1) we KNOW what the perceptions are. I’ve never understood why Whites think they are being slick and you don’t know they’re racist! (2)his perception, is a racist perception (3) that perception unfairly affects the livelihoods of millions of women
Adrianna you are killing me!! My sister, best friend, and 2 cousins went natch too! Are there political reasons? Nope, not for them. They just couldn’t take either the burn or breakage! My hairdresser uses sensitive scalp
I went to an HBCU where hair was a mixture of politics, trends and maybe even sheer laziness (hehehehe). In one class we discussed it and of course it got heated in there. It is such an intensely personal matter that is punted around so publicly and wears me out. At that point, I decided to [try] de-politicize in my own mind.
I have had my hair cut off (1 cm.), braids to my ass, micros, cornrows, bad-dye-job-must-cut-and-start-over and now I’m back to the perm! I just like to change my look.
Posted 28 Apr 2006 at 8:06 am ¶
Erin wrote:
What a hairstyle can do! She looks so much better now. This hairstyle suits her really well.
Posted 28 Apr 2006 at 9:23 am ¶
Meg wrote:
As a non-American I find this whole thing hard to follow. I have nothing to add since i know nothing about ‘good’ hair ‘bad’ hair except to say that i have never realised hair was capable of conveying so many messages.
american hair must be quite talkative, and i shall read on with interest.
Posted 29 Apr 2006 at 1:34 am ¶
tmj wrote:
Unlisted, I applaud your honesty. Thank you, I know it wasn’t easy. I went natural a few years ago after a bad breakup. Initially I just didn’t want to be “pretty”–you know the society’s version of what makes a Black woman pretty. Later, it grew on me.
I believe that society (white society) wants people to look at Black women with natural hair as threatening…that’s how they feel so that’s the ideal they put forth. There is no shame is seeing things their way, shoot, that was the plan, and that’s how we all were at some poin, on some issues. I wore a perm too long for that reason alone. The problem becomes when you continue to believe that when faced with info that tells you that view is not valid.
Black women go natural for many reasons.
The question is, why are we the only women who are looked down upon for wearing what God gave us???
Posted 01 May 2006 at 3:04 pm ¶
Adrianna wrote:
“The question is, why are we the only women who are looked down upon for wearing what God gave us???”
Because tmj it is a crazy world out there!!lol And I think that black women should demand that we be treated the same as any other women when it comes to hair.
Posted 02 May 2006 at 12:11 am ¶
eva wrote:
Hmmm where to begin, I would have sent this earlier but I would get so disturbed at unlisted. And while a lot of us have by passed in out attempts to enable him or her see the light LOL, I will say a few words.
UNLISTED- As much as I appreciate your honesty, your opinions about the ANGRY BLACK WOMAN is saddening, and its your opinion and line of thinking to be prejudice and perhaps even racist.
In reference to your miniature information of the Pride Movement, as with any other major political movement, externalization diminishes over time.
Also I must say that in reality these women do not even appear angry, You and people with similar deluded thinking patterns, create mental imageries of this women , and use this ANGRY model to justify this skewed view.
Its also quite comical to see that you admit that your contact with black women outside your professional setting is minimal, doesn’t that automatically disqualify you from making generic observations about such a vast group of people? I guess not, I see that via watching Spike, my bad, studying the works of Spike Lee( lol ) you have some how gained this deep insight into the life of black people as well as the two broad groups that we fall into as Merq put it. Angry and rebellious with natural hair or Conformists who have decided to wear their hair in a way that makes you more accepting of them. Wow. And I thought that we have made some lead way in present day America. Apparently I was mistaken.
And I have to say the media representation of Angry black women via shows was a highlight, which again is more reason in your delusional way of thinking that you are capable of making this assumption.
You must come to realize that a perception is not reason enough to categorize people, and because there are other people that share your thought process does not make it reasonable or valid.
And common deciding what black men like via the picture of Alek Wek, C’MMON, I think that was where I decided that you need to stop while you are at it.
To end this I must say that I too work in corporate America, as well as others here, so you are definitely not providing us some insight that we are not aware of. I must let you know that you do not point out the obvious, oh NO NO NO, you rather showcase your inability to self-reason and determine for yourself what is right or not. And all others this is why we have the issues that we have in Corporate America, LOL
To everyone who made a comment regarding wearing your hair natural for sake of ease and to maintain its health, I hear you. And Meg that was hilarious, that American hair can be talkative, that was a good one, perhaps Unlisted can shed more light on how different hair types convey, perhaps some other movie and talk show have deemed you with wisdom, lol
Posted 02 May 2006 at 1:40 am ¶
eva wrote:
yeah I know the last post was lengthy and I apologize but I had a pressing urge to say sth to Unlisted, it had to be done and since joyprincess and someone else mentioned that they had no energy to even go there with unlisted , I had to , I hope she or he, says sth else, perhaps there have been more exposure , maybe a new movie by Spike perhaps has provided more enlightement.LOL
Posted 02 May 2006 at 1:46 am ¶
Unlisted wrote:
Ok, here we go again,
First of all tmj, thank you, and I intend to keep being honest.
Others:
Didn’t know that I would create so much controversy.
Let me try this one more time. I know that it is WRONG to assume that black women who wear their hair natural is angry. But I admitted that this is the FIRST image comes into my head. Why? I don’t know, but it DOES. I know that every woman who wears their hair natural can’t possibly be ANGRY. I am speaking of the first IMPRESSION that many get. (Let’s say at a job interview)
I stand by what I said. Given two equally qualified black women, one with pressed hair, the other with natural, and the interviewer is white, guess who gets the job.
And many others feel the same way. If Condi Rice suddenly decided to wear dreads or a Cynthia McKinney-like hair style in the picture above there would be a small uproar. Why? Think about it.
Eva:
So basically you are telling me that there are no blacks that fall into the “good hair/bad hair” thing? Never at any time did I say that ALL blacks were like this. But on the other hand, my lying eyes have seen light skinned blacks complimented all the time by other darker skinned blacks for having “pretty hair”.
Are you telling me that Spike’s movie did not reflect reality, even in the most remote way?
Posted 02 May 2006 at 9:44 am ¶
Merq wrote:
people. PLEASE just let this go. like i said, Unlisted is obviously one of those “I know black people” types, despite his admittedly limited exposure to them.
just let it go. you can’t make your views any clearer to him.
Posted 02 May 2006 at 11:27 am ¶
eva wrote:
i hear you Merq its a lost battle and a shameful reality
Posted 02 May 2006 at 12:50 pm ¶
Lyonside wrote:
Unlisted, your ignorance is showing: you can’t “suddenly” wear dreads, they take time. Unless they’re fake, in which case I will mock.
As for whether Spike Lee shows “reality,” I don’t look to any film to show me “reality.” The medium is by definition allegorical and/or subjective. Doesn’t mean it’s FALSE or TRUE, but somewhere in between, even in a documentary. It’s a false dichotomy that you propose: good vs. bad, angry vs. not angry, rebellion vs. conformity, power vs. powerless. The real world doesn’t work that way.
“What is truth? Is truth unchanging law? We both have truths, are mine the same as yours?”
And yeah, it’s like talking to a wall, but maybe someone else can read this thread and learn a little.
Posted 03 May 2006 at 1:38 pm ¶
Shanda Smalls wrote:
I wear my hair natural and am not angry… I just don’t feel the need to try to look “white” to be beautiful.
Posted 12 May 2006 at 8:07 pm ¶
rainshiny day wrote:
from the joy princess: “You know we black women must be some exceptionally powerful people the way we just instill fear and all sorts of other foolishness in people by our HAIR STYLES!”
yes we are, for more reasons than i could possibly list here.
and i don’t think the caucasian-american majority (a majority which is rapidly sliding towards minority) can fully appreciate or understand what it means for us not to wear our hair natural.
for those of us who do lead the busy corporate life, sitting under a drier for five hours or wrapping our hair at night is just not feasible, the latter being wholly unattractive should you sleep with a partner.
i wear my hair air-dried most of the time and blow-dried straight on occasion. if i go to the salon, it is quite rare and i have NEVER had a problem finding and retaining a high-powered job due to my hair. i am well-qualified, supremely educated and well-mannered and find that is all i need. and i doubt this scenario applies only to me.
there is an interesting transition going on in america. these conversations prove it.
and in terms of the afore mentioned salon lawsuit, all services and goods should be charged by the hour based on the service. that takes care of that problem, now doesn’t it?
finally, for the edification factor: bi-racial hair can be very tightly coiled as well. i hesitate to use the word coarse, because i have never felt a head of hair that i would qualify with that word…
Posted 07 Jun 2006 at 2:44 pm ¶
Nathalie wrote:
I am wearing my hair beautifully braided and have recently moved from Florida to Chicago. Let’s just say that I’ve been on half a dozen interviews lately and have been turned down for all of the jobs. Do they love my experience, work ethic, team spirit, and glowing letters of reference? YES. Am I still looking for a job? YES. My family here in Chicago has been telling me recently-”Honey, I know you don’t want to hear this but it’s the braids.” Am I angry, disgusted and hurt? You know it! Am I going to go back to chemicals and not learning how to swim and freaking out when it rains? Hell no! LOL. I am truly amazed at this whole thing. I will keep looking and wearing my braids. I believe that I will find a place of employment that is not threatened by hair.
Posted 18 Sep 2006 at 5:11 pm ¶