In what ways do historical biases against textured hair still impact current perceptions?

Roots

Do you ever find yourself pausing, perhaps in front of a mirror, contemplating the curl, the coil, the unique wave that springs from your scalp? For those whose hair bears the ancestral mark of Africa, this simple act of observation carries generations of history, a profound connection to a heritage often misunderstood, even disparaged. It is a story etched not just in genetic code, but in the collective memory of communities, in the very fibers of identity.

The historical biases against textured hair, particularly those deeply rooted in the transatlantic slave trade and colonial imposition, continue to shape perceptions today, creating a complex interplay between biology, beauty, and belonging. To truly grasp this enduring influence, we must journey back, to a time when hair was not a site of shame, but a vibrant testament to lineage, status, and spirit.

The Sacred Strand and Early Disregard

In pre-colonial African societies, hair was far more than mere adornment; it was a living chronicle. Hairstyles served as intricate forms of communication, broadcasting a person’s geographic origin, marital status, age, ethnic identity, religion, wealth, and even their rank within society. Imagine the meticulous hours, sometimes days, spent in communal grooming, a cherished ritual of bonding and shared stories.

This was a time when thick, long, clean, and neatly styled hair, often braided or twisted, symbolized prosperity and the ability to bear healthy children. The Yoruba people, for instance, held hair as the most elevated part of the body, believing braided styles could send messages to the divine.

Then came the brutal rupture of the transatlantic slave trade. One of the first acts of dehumanization inflicted upon enslaved Africans was the forced shaving of their heads. This act, seemingly simple, was a deliberate, violent severing of identity, a forced erasure of the rich cultural narratives woven into every strand.

Stripped of their tools, their traditional oils, and the very time needed for care, hair became matted, tangled, and often hidden. The tightly coiled hair, once a symbol of spiritual power and communal pride, was now pathologized, negatively labeled by European colonizers as “reclusive, elusive, and shrinking kinks,” or even “woolly” and “bushy.” This marked the genesis of a deep-seated bias, a distortion of natural biology into a marker of inferiority.

The forced shaving of heads during the transatlantic slave trade was a deliberate act to erase African identity and sever cultural ties.

Shaping Modern Perceptions through Historical Classification

The 18th and 19th centuries saw the rise of so-called “scientific racism,” where European scholars sought to categorize human populations based on physical characteristics, including hair type. This pseudo-scientific endeavor was deeply intertwined with colonial ambitions, serving to justify the domination and exploitation of non-European peoples. Naturalists like Ernst Haeckel, in the 1800s, created taxonomic categories such as “wooly-haired” humans, lumping together diverse African and Papuan peoples.

Peter A. Browne, a Philadelphia lawyer and naturalist, even claimed that different “races” had characteristic hair textures—straight for Native Americans, wavy for whites, and “kinked” for Black individuals—using this as supposed evidence for polygenesis, the theory that races were separate species.

This historical categorization, though devoid of biological basis, laid a pernicious groundwork. The concept of “good hair” versus “bad hair” emerged, with “good hair” aligning with European textures (soft, silky, straight, wavy, or loosely curled) and “bad hair” denoting tightly curled, coarse, or kinky textures. This racial dichotomy directly denigrated African-origin hair, exalting European textures, regardless of skin color. The insidious message, often overt or subtle, that natural African hairstyles were “ancient and unprofessional” in the modern world, forced many to straighten their hair to conform.

The enduring impact of these historical biases is evident even in contemporary hair typing systems. While some modern classification systems, like Andre Walker’s, attempt to categorize hair types from straight (Type 1) to kinky (Type 4C), the very language and underlying assumptions can sometimes inadvertently echo historical prejudices, despite intentions. The Irizarry Hair Texture Scale (IHT) seeks to move beyond this, aiming to capture both the physical and socio-cultural dimensions of hair texture, acknowledging how hair has been used as a marker for societal stratification.

Ritual

As we step into the realm of ritual, we consider how historical biases against textured hair have not merely lingered as abstract concepts, but have actively shaped the practicalities of care, styling, and personal expression for generations. It is a journey from ancestral practices, where hair was tended with reverence and purpose, to a landscape where the weight of external perceptions often dictated the very methods and products employed. The pursuit of specific hair textures, often those deemed “acceptable” by dominant societal norms, has historically influenced daily regimens, tools, and the very transformations individuals seek for their hair.

How Have Historical Perceptions Influenced Hair Care Rituals?

The forced assimilation during slavery meant a loss of traditional hair care practices, tools, and ingredients. Enslaved people, deprived of their cultural heritage, found their hair becoming matted and damaged. This drastic shift necessitated adaptation, often leading to makeshift solutions under dire circumstances.

After emancipation, the stigma attached to tightly coiled hair persisted, driving many Black individuals to seek methods of straightening their hair to align with Eurocentric beauty standards. This pursuit of a “desirable” texture directly impacted the evolution of hair care rituals.

The early 20th century saw the rise of entrepreneurs like Madam C.J. Walker, who, while creating a hair care empire to assist Black women, also introduced methods for straightening textured hair, including the use of chemical relaxers. While her innovations provided solutions for hair health and styling in a challenging environment, they also contributed to the widespread adoption of practices that altered natural hair texture to conform to prevailing beauty ideals. A 2023 survey indicated that 61% of Black respondents used chemical straighteners because they “felt more beautiful with straight hair,” highlighting the enduring influence of these historical standards.

This historical pressure has created a complex relationship with hair care. For many, the ritual of hair care became a balancing act ❉ tending to the intrinsic needs of textured hair while simultaneously navigating a world that often judged its natural state.

The Tools of Transformation and Their Ancestral Echoes

Historically, African communities crafted specialized combs from wood, bone, and metal, often imbued with symbolic meaning, to maintain intricate hairstyles. These tools were not merely functional; they were extensions of a deep cultural connection to hair. The forced removal from native lands meant the loss of access to these traditional implements. The subsequent shift towards straightening methods introduced new tools, such as hot combs and chemical relaxers, which became central to the hair care ritual for many.

The very concept of “protective styling” itself has deep ancestral roots. Styles like cornrows, braids, and locs were not only aesthetic but served to protect the hair from environmental elements and facilitate healthy growth. While modern protective styles often serve similar purposes, the historical context of their suppression and later reclamation adds layers of meaning.

In apartheid-era South Africa, for example, the “pencil test,” where a pencil placed in hair determined racial classification based on whether it stayed in place due to tight curls, starkly illustrates how hair texture was weaponized for segregation. This history underscores the profound resilience embedded in the continued practice of these styles.

The adoption of chemical straighteners was a response to societal pressure, reflecting a painful negotiation with Eurocentric beauty standards.

The Weight of “Professionalism”

The enduring impact of historical biases is perhaps most acutely felt in professional and academic settings. For decades, Black women, in particular, have faced discrimination for wearing natural hairstyles in the workplace. Policies often rooted in Eurocentric values have deemed natural hair as “unprofessional,” “untidy,” or “inappropriate.” This has led to Black women being excluded from jobs, or feeling compelled to alter their hair to conform.

A 2020 study from Michigan State University and Duke University found that Black women with natural hairstyles were less likely to receive job interviews than white women or Black women with straightened hair. This research also indicated that natural styles like afros, twists, or braids were perceived as less professional. This bias forces individuals to make choices about their appearance that can impact their career trajectories, highlighting a direct link between historical prejudice and current systemic barriers.

The contrast in expectations is striking ❉ while Black men are often expected to wear their hair in a short, natural Afrocentric state, Black women are frequently expected to wear their hair in an altered, Eurocentric state for professional settings. This difference creates unique obstacles for Black women seeking to maintain a professional image while honoring their natural hair.

This societal pressure, rooted in historical biases, can lead to significant psychological consequences, including feelings of inauthenticity and internal conflict, as individuals suppress aspects of their ethnic identity to conform. The continued fight for legislation like the CROWN Act in the United States aims to dismantle these discriminatory practices, affirming the right to wear natural hair without fear of professional repercussions.

Relay

How do the echoes of historical biases against textured hair continue to shape our collective understanding and expression of identity, particularly within the dynamic interplay of science, culture, and heritage? This question invites us to delve beyond surface-level observations, to examine the profound, often subtle, ways in which past prejudices have permeated the very fabric of societal norms, influencing everything from scientific inquiry to the very language we use to describe hair. It is a complex landscape, where the resilience of ancestral practices meets the ongoing challenge of decolonizing beauty standards and asserting a deeply rooted heritage.

Deconstructing the “Unruly” Narrative

The historical labeling of textured hair as “nappy,” “kinky,” or “woolly” was never merely descriptive; it was a deliberate act of denigration, serving to justify racial hierarchies and white supremacy. These adjectives, employed for centuries, were instrumental in constructing a narrative of “unruliness” and “otherness” that continues to echo in contemporary perceptions. The idea that tightly coiled hair is inherently difficult to manage or unprofessional stems not from its biological properties, but from a legacy of imposed aesthetic standards. This deep-seated bias meant that the very characteristics that make textured hair unique—its ability to defy gravity, its incredible versatility in styling, its rich variation—were twisted into perceived flaws.

Anthropology, as a discipline, carries a complex history in this regard. While modern anthropology largely recognizes race as a social construct rather than a biological reality, earlier iterations of the field, particularly in the 19th century, contributed to the very “scientific” racism that pathologized textured hair. Researchers in the 1800s, like Samuel Morton with his craniometry studies, attempted to link physical characteristics, including hair type, to intelligence and moral behavior, thereby creating hierarchies that placed certain races as superior. The study of hair morphology, though now used for genetic variation analysis, historically played a role in these discriminatory classifications.

The CROWN Act and Legislative Acknowledgment

A significant modern response to these enduring biases is the movement for legislative protection against hair discrimination, exemplified by the CROWN Act (Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair). This legislation, gaining traction across various states in the United States, seeks to prohibit discrimination based on hair texture and protective hairstyles associated with race.

• Origins of the CROWN Act The movement for the CROWN Act arose from countless instances of discrimination in schools and workplaces where individuals, particularly Black women and girls, faced negative consequences for wearing their natural hair or traditional styles like braids, locs, and twists.
• Impact of Legislation These laws represent a crucial step in dismantling systemic racism embedded in appearance policies, affirming that such discrimination is a form of racial bias. They challenge the notion that Eurocentric hair standards should be the default for professionalism or acceptability.
• Connecting to Heritage The CROWN Act acknowledges that Black hair is not merely an aesthetic choice, but a profound expression of identity, culture, religion, and history, carrying deep emotional significance.

Reclaiming Narratives and Challenging Perceptions

The “Black is Beautiful” movement of the Civil Rights era in the 1960s and 70s marked a powerful turning point, encouraging African Americans to embrace their natural appearance. The Afro, in particular, became a potent symbol of Black pride and activism, a political statement that reclaimed natural hair texture. This period witnessed a collective reassertion of ancestral beauty, challenging the imposed Eurocentric ideals.

However, the journey of decolonizing beauty standards is ongoing. Even within the natural hair movement, there have been critiques regarding colorism and the privileging of looser curl patterns over tightly coiled textures, sometimes inadvertently perpetuating hierarchies that still favor Eurocentric ideals. This phenomenon, sometimes termed “texturism,” reveals the subtle ways historical biases can persist even within movements intended to liberate.

The ongoing re-emergence and celebration of natural hair in the 21st century signifies a powerful act of reclamation. It is a collective expression of racial pride and an acceptance of the diversity of African genetic expression. This movement is not just about aesthetics; it is about challenging deeply ingrained societal biases and fostering an environment where all hair textures are recognized, respected, and celebrated for their inherent beauty and connection to a rich heritage. The narrative around textured hair is being rewritten, strand by strand, moving from a story of imposed standards to one of ancestral celebration and self-determination.

The natural hair movement represents a powerful act of reclamation, challenging centuries of imposed beauty standards.

Reflection

The journey through the intricate world of textured hair, from its ancient roots as a symbol of profound cultural significance to its contemporary struggles against lingering historical biases, reminds us of the enduring power held within each strand. It is a story of resilience, of ancestral wisdom passed down through generations, and of an unwavering spirit that refuses to be confined by narrow definitions of beauty. The Soul of a Strand, truly, is a living archive, a testament to the continuous dialogue between past and present, between inherited narratives and the vibrant, evolving expressions of identity. Our understanding of textured hair is incomplete without acknowledging its deep heritage, recognizing that every coil and curl carries the weight of history and the promise of an unbound future.

References

• Essel, O. Q. (2021). Conflicting Tensions in Decolonising Proscribed Afrocentric Hair Beauty Culture Standards in Ghanaian Senior High Schools. International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation, 8 (3).
• Fernandez Knight, S. M. & Long, W. (n.d.). Narratives of Black Women on Hair in the Workplace. Psychology in Society, 66, 16-36.
• Guilbeau-Frugier, C. Blanc, A. Crubezy, E. Delisle, M. B. Rouge, D. & Telmon, N. (2006). Hair morphology and anthropological applications. American Journal of Human Biology, 18 (6), 861-864.
• Minella, T. (2018). By Their Locks You Shall Know Them ❉ Race, Science, and Hair in the Nineteenth Century. The History of Science Society .
• Omotoso, S. A. (2013). Human Hair ❉ Intrigues and Complications. Journal of Pan African Studies, 6 (4), 108-124.
• Ramos, A. (2020). Hair Race-ing ❉ Dominican Beauty Culture and Identity Production. Duke University Press.
• Robinson, A. M. (2011). The Cost of Curls ❉ Discrimination, Social Stigma, and Identity Oppression of Black Women Through Their Hair. W&M ScholarWorks .
• Tarver, C. (2023). What Every Dermatologist Must Know About the History of Black Hair. Cutis, 112 (6), 346-348.
• Tarlo, E. (2019). Racial hair ❉ the persistence and resistance of a category. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 25 (2), 350-370.
• Washington, J. (2023). Examining Afrocentricity and Identity Through the Reemergence and Expression of Natural Hair. Scholar Commons .