How does the CROWN Act address systemic discrimination against textured hair?

Roots

Consider the quiet strength held within a single strand of hair, a delicate helix yet a profound storyteller. For those whose lineage traces through the vast, complex narratives of Black and mixed-race experiences, hair serves as a living archive, a continuous link to ancestral practices and enduring cultural wisdom. How, then, does a legislative measure, the CROWN Act, reach into this deeply personal and historically charged realm?

Its very existence speaks to a pervasive societal disconnect from the richness of textured hair heritage, a disconnect that has for too long translated into systemic barriers. This Act represents a vital recognition of ancestral ways, acknowledging that hair, in its natural glory, is not merely a biological feature but a potent symbol of identity, a declaration of lineage, and a testament to resilience forged over generations.

Hair Anatomy and the Echoes of Ancestry

The unique structure of textured hair is a marvel of natural design. Unlike hair that grows with a straight or gently wavy pattern, hair with tighter curls or coils often emerges from an elliptically shaped follicle, resulting in a strand that itself follows a helical path. This coiled formation, often characteristic of African hair types, contributes to its magnificent volume and distinctive appearance. Scientific inquiry into hair morphology reveals that factors such as the distribution of keratin within the hair shaft and the precise angles at which hair emerges from the scalp all play a part in creating the spectrum of textures we observe.

This inherent biological difference, however, has historically been misconstrued, labeled as unprofessional or untidy when juxtaposed against Eurocentric beauty norms. The CROWN Act directly challenges these biased perceptions, affirming that the biological reality of textured hair deserves respect and protection in all spaces. It mandates that no one faces professional or educational penalties for the hair that grows organically from their scalp.

The CROWN Act stands as a legislative testament to the intrinsic worth and dignity of textured hair, recognizing its profound connection to heritage and individual identity.

Understanding Textured Hair’s Rich Lexicon

For generations, communities with textured hair have developed a rich vocabulary to describe the diverse manifestations of their strands and the practices that honor them. Terms like Coils, Kinks, and Locs carry not only descriptive power but also cultural resonance, reflecting specific historical practices and community understandings. These terms existed long before scientific classification systems sought to categorize hair based on curl patterns, often overlooking the deeper cultural meanings. Traditional African societies, for example, used specific hairstyles to denote a person’s age, marital status, social standing, or even tribal affiliation.

Cornrows, for instance, in their ancient forms, were not just a hairstyle but could carry coded messages or map escape routes during eras of forced displacement. The CROWN Act, in explicitly protecting styles such as braids, locs, twists, and Bantu knots, elevates this ancestral lexicon from the realm of informal cultural practice to a recognized legal standard, thereby challenging the long-standing imposition of external, often derogatory, labels on these expressions of identity.

Historical Roots of Hair Discrimination ❉ A Deeper Look

The systemic discrimination against textured hair is not a recent phenomenon; it is a legacy deeply interwoven with the transatlantic slave trade and subsequent colonial influences. From the 15th century onwards, European colonizers often classified African textured hair as closer to animal fur or wool than human hair, a dehumanizing act that served to justify enslavement. Enslaved Africans were often subjected to forced head shaving, a deliberate act to strip them of their cultural identity and sever their spiritual connection to their hair, which had been revered in their homelands as a source of power, status, and communal ties.

Even after the formal abolition of slavery, policies continued to enforce Eurocentric beauty standards. Consider the insidious “Comb Test” used in parts of the United States. Organizations would hang a fine-tooth comb by their entrance, implicitly declaring that if one’s hair could not be easily combed through, entry was unwelcome. This informal, yet widely understood, barrier effectively excluded Black individuals with natural textures from public spaces, workplaces, and educational institutions.

This history underscores why the CROWN Act is not simply about aesthetics; it is about addressing the lingering effects of historical dehumanization and racialized control. By legally recognizing and protecting natural hair and protective styles, the Act directly confronts these historical biases, paving a path for Black and mixed-race individuals to bring their authentic selves into every facet of society without fear of retribution. It serves as a legislative acknowledgment of the ongoing need to dismantle structures built upon centuries of discrimination.

Ritual

The journey of textured hair through generations is a testament to unwavering cultural spirit, marked by rituals of care and artistry that transcended oppression. Styling practices, often passed down through familial hands, became acts of resistance, communal bonding, and self-preservation. The CROWN Act, in its legislative reach, steps into this sacred space, seeking to affirm these practices, protecting them from judgment and sanction in professional and academic settings. It speaks to a profound need to safeguard the living traditions that have kept the soul of textured hair vibrant through trials.

Protective Styles ❉ An Ancestral Imperative?

Protective styling, such as braids, twists, and locs, finds its genesis in ancient African civilizations, where these styles were not merely aesthetic choices. They served vital practical purposes, protecting hair from the elements, minimizing breakage, and promoting growth. Beyond function, these styles were rich with social meaning.

Braiding sessions were communal gatherings, opportunities for storytelling, the sharing of wisdom, and the strengthening of familial and community bonds. The specific patterns and adornments often conveyed status, age, marital state, or even tribal affiliation.

The survival of these practices through the transatlantic slave trade stands as a powerful testament to the resilience of Black communities. Despite forced assimilation and the stripping away of cultural markers, individuals held fast to traditional hair practices, transforming them into quiet forms of defiance and identity assertion. The CROWN Act directly acknowledges this lineage.

By prohibiting discrimination based on these very styles, the Act creates a legal shield for practices that are, in essence, historical acts of cultural survival. It affirms that wearing Cornrows, Bantu Knots, or Locs in a workplace or classroom is not a deviation from professionalism, but a continuation of an ancestral heritage, a deeply personal expression of self rooted in centuries of tradition.

The CROWN Act safeguards traditional styling practices, affirming their enduring place as cultural expressions rather than subjects of scrutiny.

The Alchemy of Natural Styling

Natural styling, encompassing a vast array of techniques to define and celebrate textured hair without chemical alteration, represents a reclamation of authentic self. These methods, from simple washes and deep conditioning to elaborate twist-outs and curl definitions, often draw from ancestral wisdom regarding the properties of natural ingredients and the subtle art of hair manipulation. While modern science illuminates the specific protein structures and moisture needs of textured hair, the underlying principles of nourishing and styling these curls and coils echo practices employed for generations.

The historical journey of Black hair in America includes periods where altering natural texture became a societal expectation. The widespread adoption of hot combs and chemical relaxers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries speaks to the immense social and economic pressure on Black individuals to conform to Eurocentric standards of straight hair to gain access to opportunities. The “good hair” versus “bad hair” dichotomy, rooted in the legacy of slavery, perpetuated the idea that straight hair equated to acceptability and upward mobility. The natural hair movement, gaining prominence in the 1960s with the “Black Is Beautiful” ethos and experiencing a resurgence in the 2000s, actively countered these damaging narratives.

It encouraged an embrace of inherent texture, advocating for self-acceptance and a return to practices that honored the hair’s natural state. The CROWN Act supports this movement by making it legally clear that such a choice to wear one’s hair naturally, without chemical or heat alteration, cannot be a basis for discrimination. It stands as a legislative ally to the personal and collective journeys toward hair liberation.

Tools of Tradition and Transformation

The tools used in textured hair care tell their own stories of ingenuity and adaptation across time. While modern hairstyling offers a multitude of specialized products and implements, many fundamental techniques and the spirit of communal care remain deeply rooted in ancestral practices. In ancient African societies, hair styling involved a range of natural materials and simple tools, often crafted from wood, bone, or gourds. These tools were not just functional; they were part of the ritual, imbued with meaning.

• Combs of Bone and Wood ❉ Early combs, carved from natural materials, were used for detangling and creating partings, a foundational step in intricate braiding. Their gentle construction respected the delicate nature of coiled strands.
• Natural Oils and Butters ❉ Ingredients like Shea Butter and Coconut Oil, used for centuries, were essential for moisturizing, sealing, and protecting textured hair. These natural emollients kept hair pliable for styling and resisted breakage.
• Adornments ❉ Beads, cowrie shells, and other natural elements were woven into hairstyles, signifying social status, tribal identity, or even spiritual beliefs. These embellishments elevated hair into a form of personal adornment and cultural communication.

The CROWN Act implicitly recognizes the historical and cultural significance of these tools and the styles they create. By protecting styles that traditionally incorporate these elements, it acknowledges a continuum of practice that extends from ancient communal hair care rituals to contemporary self-styling. It protects the right to adorn one’s hair with cultural markers without fear of judgment. This legislative stance helps ensure that the toolkit of textured hair care, in its broadest sense, continues to be a source of pride and connection to ancestral ways, rather than a target for societal disapproval.

Relay

The passage of the CROWN Act marks a significant point in a long relay race for recognition and equity, a race stretching back through generations. It is a legislative response to deeply embedded systemic biases, reflecting a collective demand for respect that echoes ancestral wisdom. This Act does not merely legislate against a superficial aspect of appearance; it confronts a pervasive issue of identity suppression, ensuring that individuals can freely wear their hair as it naturally grows or in styles cherished across Black and mixed-race communities.

What is the Systemic Basis of Hair Discrimination?

Systemic discrimination against textured hair stems from a historical imposition of Eurocentric beauty standards as the universal norm. This imposition originated during the era of slavery, where practices of dehumanization included devaluing Black physical features, including hair. Slave owners often enforced strict grooming codes, punishing those who did not conform to European aesthetics. This historical narrative established a hierarchy of hair types, where straighter textures were deemed “good” and desirable, while kinky or coily hair was labeled “unprofessional” or “unkempt.”

This prejudicial view persisted through Jim Crow laws and beyond, influencing dress codes and grooming policies in schools and workplaces. Consider the widely documented case of Andrew Johnson, a New Jersey high school wrestler, who was forced to cut his locs on the mat in 2018 to avoid forfeiting a match. This incident, among many others, illuminated the ongoing policing of Black hair in educational settings, reflecting deeply ingrained biases that equate certain hairstyles with a lack of decorum or professionalism.

The CROWN Act directly challenges these unspoken rules and institutionalized biases by broadening the legal definition of race to include hair texture and protective styles. It effectively removes the loophole that allowed institutions to discriminate based on phenotypical markers of race, making it clear that hair discrimination is, at its core, racial discrimination.

The CROWN Act redefines race in legal terms, explicitly protecting hair textures and styles integral to Black and mixed-race identities from systemic bias.

How does the CROWN Act Challenge Existing Norms?

The CROWN Act’s true power lies in its capacity to dismantle longstanding discriminatory norms by codifying protections for hair textures and styles historically marginalized. Before its enactment in various states and its attempts at federal passage, individuals with textured hair faced a dilemma ❉ conform to Eurocentric standards, often through costly and damaging chemical treatments or heat styling, or risk educational and employment opportunities. A 2023 CROWN Workplace Research Study found that Black Women’s Hair is More Than Twice as Likely to Be Perceived as “unprofessional” as White Women’s Hair, leading approximately two-thirds of Black women to change their hairstyle for job interviews. This statistic paints a vivid picture of the pervasive pressure and implicit bias that the Act seeks to counteract.

By making it unlawful to discriminate based on hair texture or protective styles such as Braids, Locs, Twists, or Afros, the CROWN Act sends a clear message. It validates the natural hair movement’s decades-long pursuit of self-acceptance and cultural affirmation, translating a social movement into legal reality. The legislation compels schools and workplaces to re-evaluate their grooming policies, shifting away from subjective criteria that have historically disadvantaged Black and mixed-race individuals. It empowers those who have been policed for their hair to challenge discriminatory practices, reinforcing that authentic self-expression through hair is a civil right.

Legislative Journey and the Road Ahead

The CROWN Act began its legislative journey in California, where it was first signed into law in 2019 by then-State Senator Holly J. Mitchell. Its success ignited a movement, inspiring similar legislation across the United States. As of 2024, at least 24 states have enacted their own versions of the CROWN Act, with numerous cities also adopting comparable protections.

At the federal level, the CROWN Act has been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives multiple times, passing the House in both 2019 and 2022, though it has faced obstacles in the Senate.

The persistence in reintroducing this bill speaks to the ongoing, nationwide need for universal protection against hair discrimination. Opponents sometimes argue that existing anti-discrimination laws already cover hair-based bias. However, historical court rulings have often narrowly interpreted these laws, leaving a loophole for hair discrimination to persist. The CROWN Act seeks to clarify these ambiguities, ensuring that no one is denied opportunities due to their hair.

Its continued pursuit in legislative bodies reflects a deep understanding that true equity requires addressing all forms of racial discrimination, visible and subtle alike. The relay continues, driven by the collective desire for a world where hair is celebrated as a source of heritage, not a cause for prejudice.

Reflection

To trace the winding path of the CROWN Act is to walk through a landscape steeped in shared memory, a landscape where every curl and coil holds a story, a legacy. This legislation is not merely a modern decree; it is an echo of ancestral wisdom, a formal acknowledgment of the profound connection between textured hair and the collective soul of a people. Roothea’s ‘Soul of a Strand’ ethos finds its grounding here ❉ hair, in its myriad forms, remains a living, breathing archive of identity, resilience, and beauty. The Act’s emergence signifies a societal turning point, a recognition that the policing of Black and mixed-race hair has been a subtle yet potent instrument of systemic oppression, disrupting the sacred thread of heritage.

In allowing individuals the freedom to wear their hair as nature intended or in the traditional styles of their forebears, the CROWN Act reclaims space for self-expression, for the quiet dignity of cultural continuity. It permits the natural helix of hair to unfurl without fear of professional or social consequence, affirming that the richness of one’s hair texture and the ancestral narratives it carries are not liabilities, but sources of strength. This legal movement, born from deep historical understanding and contemporary advocacy, strives to ensure that the heritage carried on one’s head is no longer a barrier, but a celebrated aspect of one’s complete being, forever connecting the past’s struggles with a future’s liberation.