How Does the CROWN Act Support Textured Hair Heritage?

Roots

The journey to comprehend the CROWN Act’s profound impact on textured hair heritage begins at the very source: the elemental biology and historical lineage of these remarkable strands. From the tightly coiled helix to the expansive crown, Black and mixed-race hair possesses a unique architecture, distinct from other hair types. This inherent structure, often a tight elliptical or flattened cross-section, dictates its tendency to coil, to form intricate patterns, and to defy the smooth, straight lines often held as a universal standard of beauty. These biological distinctions are not mere variations; they are signatures of deep ancestry, adaptations shaped by millennia of human experience across diverse climates and cultures.

Across the African continent, long before the transatlantic crossings, hair was a language spoken without words. Its texture, its style, its adornments, all conveyed complex messages of status, marital standing, tribal affiliation, spiritual beliefs, and even age. Consider the Yoruba, for whom hair, particularly the top of the head, was considered a conduit for spiritual energy, a direct connection to the divine. Intricate braiding patterns could send messages to the gods (Omotos, 2018).

The Wolof, Mende, Mandingo, and Ashanti societies each had their own styles, indicating geographic origins and communal rank. To shave a head, therefore, was not merely a cosmetic act; it was an act of profound dehumanization, severing a person from their identity and ancestral connection. This practice was tragically mirrored during the transatlantic slave trade, where enslaved Africans were often forced to shave their heads upon arrival, a deliberate erasure of their cultural heritage and individual personhood.

The inherent architecture of textured hair carries the signatures of deep ancestry and cultural narratives.

The CROWN Act, in its legislative phrasing, explicitly defines race to include traits historically associated with race, notably hair texture and protective hairstyles. This legal acknowledgment goes beyond superficial appearance; it delves into the very fibers of identity, recognizing that the biological reality of textured hair is inextricably linked to a shared cultural and historical experience. It serves as a legislative echo of the ancestral understanding that hair is not separate from the self, nor from one’s lineage.

How Does the CROWN Act Redefine Racial Discrimination through Hair?

Traditionally, legal frameworks around racial discrimination often focused on immutable characteristics, those aspects of a person that cannot be changed, such as skin color. However, the lived reality for Black and mixed-race individuals presented a glaring gap. Hair, while a biological outgrowth, can be manipulated. Yet, the pressure to manipulate it, to conform it to Eurocentric ideals of straightness, was a direct result of racial bias.

Courts often struggled with cases where individuals were penalized for hairstyles like locs or braids, deeming them “mutable” characteristics not protected under existing civil rights laws. The CROWN Act directly addresses this legal void by expanding the definition of race to encompass hair texture and protective styles. This redefinition is a crucial step in aligning legal protection with the socio-historical reality of racial discrimination, acknowledging that policies targeting natural hair are, in essence, targeting race itself.

This redefinition holds significant weight for the language we use to describe textured hair. Terms like “nappy” or “kinky,” historically used as slurs to devalue Afro-textured hair, become stark reminders of the discriminatory past. The Act’s focus on protecting styles like braids, locs, twists, Bantu knots, and Afros validates the traditional lexicon of Black hair care and styling, elevating these expressions from targets of bias to legally protected forms of identity.

It asserts that the natural inclinations of textured hair, and the styles born from its unique qualities, are inherently professional and acceptable. This legislative affirmation helps to dismantle the pervasive stereotypes that deemed natural Black hair as “unprofessional” or “unkempt,” standards rooted in Eurocentric beauty norms.

Ritual

Stepping into the realm of ritual, we consider the ways our hands have always moved through textured hair, shaping it, adorning it, protecting it. This section acknowledges the living practices that continue to define our relationship with our strands, from the earliest ancestral techniques to the contemporary adaptations that carry forward a profound heritage. The CROWN Act does not merely exist as a distant legal document; it breathes life into these practices, granting them the dignity and freedom they have long deserved in public spaces. It offers a shield, allowing individuals to step into schools, workplaces, and public accommodations with their chosen styles, free from the shadow of judgment or penalty.

For generations, the art of styling textured hair has been a cornerstone of cultural expression and community bonding. From the intricate cornrows of ancient West African societies, which sometimes served as coded maps for escape during enslavement, to the majestic Afros of the Civil Rights era, a powerful symbol of Black pride and unity, these styles are more than aesthetic choices. They are living narratives, carrying forward traditions, wisdom, and the very spirit of those who came before.

The CROWN Act directly supports this heritage by explicitly protecting protective styles such as braids, locs, twists, and Bantu knots, which are deeply rooted in Black and mixed-race cultural practices. This legal recognition affirms that these styles are not merely trends, but significant expressions of identity and continuity.

What Historical Styling Techniques Does the CROWN Act Implicitly Safeguard?

The protective styles mentioned in the CROWN Act are not modern inventions; they are echoes of ancient practices. For instance, cornrows, known as “canerows” in some diaspora regions, have an ancient history, with archaeological evidence pointing to their use in ancient Egypt and other African civilizations. These styles were practical, protecting the hair from environmental elements, and also served as a means of communication, signifying social status, age, and tribal affiliation.

Similarly, locs, while having a distinct cultural resonance in Rastafarianism, have roots in various cultures across the globe, including ancient Egypt and India, with practices of hair coiling and matting dating back thousands of years. The Act’s protective scope ensures that these historical forms of hair artistry, passed down through generations, can continue to be worn without fear of professional or academic reprisal.

The CROWN Act also lends its weight to the freedom of natural styling and definition techniques. For centuries, the emphasis was on altering textured hair to conform to Eurocentric standards, often through harsh chemical relaxers or excessive heat. This pressure was not just aesthetic; it was tied to social and economic mobility. A 2020 study by Michigan State University and Duke University found that Black women with natural hairstyles were perceived as less professional and less likely to secure job interviews compared to Black women with straightened hair (Koval & Rosette, 2020).

The Act’s affirmation of natural hair directly counters this historical bias, allowing individuals to wear their hair in its unaltered state, celebrating its natural coil, curl, or wave, without fear of losing opportunities. This liberation from forced conformity allows for a deeper connection to ancestral ways of being, where hair was honored in its natural form.

The CROWN Act acts as a legislative affirmation, ensuring that ancestral styling practices are no longer a barrier to opportunity.

The tools used in textured hair care and styling also carry historical weight. Before the advent of modern combs and brushes, communities utilized natural materials.

• Combs and picks ❉ Often crafted from wood, bone, or even metal, these tools were essential for detangling and shaping hair. Enslaved people often created their own from available materials.
• Natural oils and butters ❉ Ingredients like shea butter and coconut oil, rich in nutrients, were used to moisturize and protect hair from harsh conditions, a practice that resonates with contemporary holistic hair care.
• Headwraps ❉ Beyond protection, headwraps and turbans, or “tignons” as they were called in historical New Orleans, became symbols of identity and resistance, even when forced upon women by discriminatory laws.

The CROWN Act’s spirit acknowledges that the tools and techniques of textured hair care are not just functional; they are imbued with cultural memory and historical significance, forming an unbroken chain from past to present.

Relay

How does the CROWN Act truly reshape the societal landscape, allowing the enduring legacy of textured hair to thrive and redefine norms for future generations? This section delves into the profound, interconnected ways this legislation reaches beyond mere legal protection, influencing holistic well-being, societal perceptions, and the very fabric of identity for Black and mixed-race communities. It invites a deeper understanding of how the CROWN Act, while a contemporary measure, carries forward a centuries-old struggle for self-determination and respect for ancestral ways.

The CROWN Act stands as a sentinel against a deeply ingrained societal bias, a bias that has historically imposed Eurocentric beauty standards upon textured hair, often leading to psychological and economic harm. Before this legislation, individuals often faced a difficult choice: conform to arbitrary grooming policies by altering their hair, or risk their livelihoods and educational paths. This constant pressure to assimilate not only caused physical damage to hair through chemical processes but also eroded self-esteem and fostered a sense of “otherness.” A 2019 study by Dove found that Black women are 1.5 times more likely to be sent home from the workplace because of their hair, and 80 percent reported feeling compelled to change their hairstyle to align with conservative standards for workplace acceptance.

How Does the CROWN Act Address the Historical Economic Burden of Hair Discrimination?

The economic impact of hair discrimination has been substantial. Beyond job loss or denied opportunities, Black women historically spend more on hair care and products, often due to the need to maintain styles deemed “acceptable” or to repair damage from straightening processes. The CROWN Act directly challenges this burden by creating legal recourse against discriminatory practices. By protecting the right to wear natural hair and protective styles, it theoretically reduces the pressure to invest in costly and potentially damaging alterations.

This shift allows individuals to reclaim their resources and redirect them towards holistic well-being, rather than expending them on conformity. The Act’s passage marks a legislative recognition that hair, far from being a trivial matter, has been a significant barrier to economic equity and social mobility for Black communities for centuries. The case of Chastity Jones serves as a poignant illustration of this systemic issue. In 2010, Ms.

Jones, a Black woman, had a job offer rescinded by Catastrophe Management Solutions because she refused to cut her locs, which the company deemed “messy” despite their actual appearance. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed suit on her behalf, arguing racial discrimination, but the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ultimately ruled against the EEOC, stating that a ban on dreadlocks was not racial discrimination because locs were not an “immutable characteristic” of race (EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 2016). This ruling, and others like it, highlighted the legal loophole that the CROWN Act aims to close, explicitly including hair texture and protective styles as protected traits under anti-discrimination laws. The Act directly confronts the notion that such policies are “race-neutral,” exposing their historical roots in Eurocentric beauty standards that penalize Black identity.

The CROWN Act liberates individuals from the economic and psychological costs of conforming to Eurocentric hair standards.

The CROWN Act also bolsters the continuation of ancestral wellness philosophies, particularly in the realm of nighttime hair care. For generations, rituals of wrapping hair in scarves or bonnets before sleep were not merely about maintaining a style; they were acts of preservation, protecting the delicate strands from friction and moisture loss, practices rooted in deep understanding of textured hair’s needs. This tradition, now widely practiced, speaks to a heritage of self-care and resourcefulness that predates modern hair science.

The Act’s protective umbrella ensures that these practices, and the appearance they create (e.g. wearing a bonnet in public during travel), are not met with derision or disciplinary action, thereby reinforcing the legitimacy of these ancestral rituals in contemporary life.

Problem-solving for textured hair, too, often draws from a blend of ancient wisdom and modern understanding. Issues like dryness, breakage, and scalp health have been addressed for centuries through remedies passed down orally, using local ingredients.

1. Herbal rinses ❉ Ancestral communities utilized plants like hibiscus or aloe vera for their conditioning and soothing properties.
2. Oil treatments ❉ Natural oils, such as castor oil or jojoba oil, have long been used to seal in moisture and promote scalp health, mirroring modern scientific understanding of lipid benefits.
3. Scalp massages ❉ Beyond stimulating blood flow, these were communal acts of care, connecting individuals through touch and shared ritual.

The CROWN Act’s existence fosters an environment where these practices are not just privately observed but publicly validated, allowing individuals to confidently maintain their hair in ways that honor their heritage, without fear of societal backlash.

Reflection

As we consider the journey of textured hair, from its elemental biology to its vibrant expression in daily life, the CROWN Act emerges as a significant milestone, a legislative affirmation of an enduring heritage. It stands as a testament to the power of a strand, a single coil or kink, to carry the weight of history, the spirit of resilience, and the promise of self-determination. The Act does not grant textured hair its beauty or its cultural value; those attributes have always existed, woven into the very fabric of Black and mixed-race identity. Rather, it seeks to dismantle the artificial barriers that have historically obscured this truth, allowing the inherent radiance of these strands to shine without compromise.

The spirit of Roothea, a living archive of textured hair, its heritage, and its care, finds deep resonance in the CROWN Act’s purpose. It is a step towards a world where every hair texture is seen, respected, and celebrated for its unique contribution to the human story. This legislation encourages a societal shift, prompting a collective re-evaluation of beauty standards and professional norms that have long excluded and penalized diverse hair forms.

It calls us to remember that the freedom to wear one’s hair as it naturally grows, or styled in ways passed down through generations, is not a minor privilege, but a fundamental aspect of self-expression and cultural continuity. The work continues, but the CROWN Act marks a vital moment, a legislative embrace of the ancestral wisdom that knows the soul of a strand holds boundless power.

References

• Byrd, A. D. & Tharps, L. (2001). Hair Story: Untangling the Roots of Black Hair in America. St. Martin’s Press.
• Koval, C. Z. & Rosette, A. S. (2020). The Natural Hair Bias in Job Recruitment. Social Psychological and Personality Science.
• Mbilishaka, A. (2019). Hair Love: A Black Hair Psychology and Wellness Guide. The Afrodisiac Publishing.
• Omotos, A. (2018). The Cultural Significance of African Hairstyles. Journal of Pan African Studies.
• Sims, J. (1998). African American Hair: A Cultural and Historical Perspective. Chelsea House Publishers.
• Turner, S. P. (2008). Hair Power: The Story of Black Hair in America. Millbrook Press.
• Walker, A. (2000). On the Purple: Essays on the Color Purple and Its Context. Harcourt Brace & Company.