What historical biases impacted textured hair research?

Roots

In the quiet contemplation of a single strand, a universe of heritage unfolds. For generations, textured hair has served as a profound repository of ancestry, a living archive of community, and a testament to enduring spirit. Yet, the paths of scientific inquiry, meant to illuminate and understand, have often cast long shadows of bias upon this vital aspect of identity. These historical biases, subtle yet pervasive, have shaped not only our understanding of textured hair biology but also the very language used to describe it, distorting its natural wonder into something viewed through a lens of imposed normativity.

The Architecture of Being Twisted ❉ Early Misinterpretations of Hair Anatomy

The journey into understanding textured hair begins at its very core ❉ its unique anatomical structure. Early scientific examinations of hair, however, were not free from the prevailing societal prejudices of their eras. Historically, research on human hair variation has frequently relied on subjective and qualitative descriptors, with samples historically showcasing a strong Eurocentric bias. This narrow focus led to a fundamental misunderstanding of the inherent qualities of hair that grows in coils, kinks, and waves.

For instance, the assumption that straight hair represented the universal standard meant that anything deviating from this norm was often labeled as “abnormal” or “unruly.” Hair of African descent, with its distinct elliptical cross-section and characteristic curl pattern, was sometimes described with terms like “wool” or “fur” by European colonists. This dehumanizing lexicon seeped into nascent scientific discourse, framing a natural biological variation as a defect rather than a unique adaptation. These descriptions were not merely observational; they served as a tool for dehumanization, supporting enslavement and exploitation.

Systems of Division ❉ When Classification Became Segregation

The very systems created to classify hair types bear the indelible marks of historical bias. These systems, while seemingly objective, often served to reinforce social hierarchies tied to skin tone and hair texture. One particularly chilling example is the “hair gauge,” created in 1908 by Eugen Fischer, a German Nazi ‘scientist’.

His device was designed to determine Namibians’ proximity to ‘whiteness’ based on their hair texture. This tool, born from a racist ideology, explicitly linked hair texture to racial categorization and social standing, valuing looser curl patterns over coiled textures.

The origins of hair typing systems are intertwined with racial categorization, crafted to justify prejudiced ideologies rather than celebrate natural diversity.

Another stark illustration of such discriminatory practices is the Apartheid “Pencil Test” in South Africa. This test, employed to classify individuals as ‘white’ or ‘Black’, involved placing a pencil in a person’s hair. If the pencil remained, indicating tighter curls, the individual was classified as Black and subjected to segregation.

These practices, while now largely defunct, underscore how classification systems were weaponized, not to understand hair, but to police identity and enforce racial stratification. The Walker Hair Typing System, while popular today, has also faced criticism for prioritizing looser curl patterns, reflecting these deep-seated biases.

Language as a Shaper of Perception ❉ The Power of Words

The lexicon surrounding textured hair has long reflected and perpetuated societal biases. Terms such as “bad hair” for natural, untreated curls and “good hair” for straightened hair became commonplace, deeply tied to the era of slavery and the devaluation of African aesthetics. This binary, imposed by Eurocentric beauty standards, associated straight hair with “civility” and “respectability,” while hair with texture was deemed “unprofessional” or “unruly.”,

This negative framing persists even today. Many individuals with textured hair internalize apologies for its natural state, using terms like “unmanageable” or “wild,” reinforcing the idea that their hair needs “fixing” to conform. Yet, this perspective overlooks the profound cultural symbolism hair held in pre-colonial Africa.

Hairstyles served as a complex system of communication, signifying wealth, age, marital status, ethnic identity, and even social rank. The intricate artistry involved in these styles, often spanning hours and days, underscored the deep cultural value placed upon hair as a symbol of self and community.

The historical preference for straight hair was reinforced by advertising, with products marketed on a philosophy of “cleanliness and loveliness,” subtly suggesting that Black hair in its natural state was somehow deficient. This historical narrative highlights a deliberate effort to disconnect Black people from their ancestral hair traditions, promoting an appearance that was a step closer to whiteness.

Growth Cycles and Unseen Factors ❉ When Research Overlooked Reality

Even the seemingly objective study of hair growth cycles has not been immune to bias. For a long time, hair research operated under the assumption of a universal growth rate, roughly 1 cm per month. However, subsequent studies have shown that hair growth rates can vary significantly across different ethnic groups. Research by Loussouarn et al.

(2001) found that individuals of African descent have a slower growth rate (256 ± 44 μm per day) compared to Caucasians (396 ± 55 μm per day). This difference, when unacknowledged, could lead to misinterpretations in hair strand testing, for instance, in forensic or health contexts.

The historical neglect of these distinct physiological characteristics of textured hair meant that solutions for hair health were often developed without considering the specific needs of these hair types. Traditional hair care practices, deeply rooted in ancestral wisdom, frequently addressed concerns like hydration and scalp health with natural ingredients. Many African plants, such as Rooibos Tea, Marula Oil, and Rhassoul Clay, were and continue to be used for hair treatment and care, showcasing a deep knowledge of topical nutrition that modern science is only now beginning to validate.

Ritual

The very rituals of hair care, from daily practices to celebratory adornments, are imbued with profound cultural and historical meaning. Yet, the history of scientific and societal perceptions has often dismissed or devalued these practices, seeing them through a distorted lens of bias. This section explores how textured hair styling, tools, and transformations, rooted deeply in heritage, have been influenced by a history of misunderstanding and prejudice.

Protective Styling ❉ A Legacy Misconstrued?

The art of protective styling, with its intricate braids, twists, and locs, stands as a testament to the ingenuity and ancestral wisdom within Black and mixed-race communities. These styles served not only aesthetic purposes but also provided practical benefits, safeguarding hair from environmental damage and promoting growth. In pre-colonial Africa, hairstyles communicated tribal identity, marital status, age, and social rank. They were a visual language, a living chronicle worn on the head.

However, with the onset of the transatlantic slave trade and colonialism, this connection to tradition was severed. Slave traders frequently shaved the heads of captives, a brutal act aimed at erasing cultural identity. The very term “dreadlocks” reportedly has origins in slave traders’ descriptions of naturally formed locs during the Middle Passage as “dreadful.” This historical trauma created negative perceptions that continue to resonate, often leading to the misconception of protective styles as “unprofessional” or “unacceptable” in Western contexts.

• Braids ❉ Ancient African communities used braiding to signify social status, age, and ethnic affiliation, often involving communal care rituals.
• Locs ❉ Beyond their aesthetic, locs hold spiritual and cultural significance in various African and diasporic traditions, symbolizing connection and commitment.
• Twists ❉ A versatile protective style, twists were part of ancestral methods to maintain hair health and manage texture without harsh manipulation.

Natural Styling and Defining Texture ❉ The Push for Conformity

The inherent versatility of textured hair, its ability to be sculpted and molded into various shapes, was traditionally celebrated. Yet, the pervasive influence of Eurocentric beauty ideals led to a long-standing devaluation of natural texture. Straight hair became synonymous with “civilized” and “respectable,” leading to immense social and professional pressure to alter hair’s natural state.

For example, a study in 2023 indicated that Black women’s hair is 2.5 times more likely to be perceived as “unprofessional” compared to white women’s hair. This societal bias has historically driven the widespread use of chemical straighteners and hot combs to “tame” hair and make it conform to European textures. The creation and popularity of such products, often by self-made Black millionaires like Madam C.J. Walker, highlight the deep societal pressures that pushed Black women towards these practices for social and economic advancement.

Societal pressure to conform to Eurocentric beauty norms has long dictated the perception and treatment of textured hair, overshadowing its natural beauty and versatility.

Wigs and Hair Extensions ❉ Ancient Roots, Modern Misunderstandings

The use of wigs and hair extensions, often viewed as modern styling choices, has deep historical roots in African cultures. From ancient Egypt where alkaline substances were used to relax curls, to elaborate hairstyles adorned with beads and shells in pre-colonial Nigeria, hair manipulation for aesthetic and symbolic reasons was widespread. Wigs, too, played a role in signifying status and identity in various African societies.

However, the cultural significance of these practices was often lost or distorted in the Western gaze. As Black women were forced to cover their hair during slavery or emulate enslavers’ hairstyles, the original meanings shifted. In the 19th century, in cities like New Orleans, discriminatory “Tignon Laws” compelled free Creole women of color to cover their elaborately styled hair with headscarves, symbolically linking them to the enslaved class.

This historical policing of Black hair, whether through forced alteration or mandated concealment, further underscored the racial biases influencing societal views on textured hair and its adornment. This historical context reveals how even choices meant to assert personal style could become entangled in systems of oppression.

Heat Styling and Chemical Alteration ❉ A Quest for Acceptance

The widespread adoption of heat styling and chemical relaxers among Black women, particularly in the 20th century, stands as a stark indicator of the prevailing beauty standards. Products like hair relaxants, often containing harsh chemicals, were aggressively marketed with imagery promoting “straight,” “smooth,” and “silky” hair, reinforcing a negative perception of naturally curly hair.

A 2023 study found that among Black women, 41% changed their hair from curly to straight for a job interview. This statistic speaks volumes about the enduring pressure to conform, even at the cost of hair health, as chemical straighteners have been linked to adverse health outcomes. The historical narrative surrounding these tools and products is one where scientific development in hair care was often driven not by genuine understanding or support of textured hair, but by a biased ideal of conformity. The journey towards embracing natural texture, as seen in the Natural Hair Movement, is a direct response to centuries of such pressures.

Relay

The currents of historical bias have flowed through the very conduits of scientific inquiry, impacting not only what was studied but how it was understood, particularly concerning textured hair. This exploration delves into how these biases shaped research methodologies, influenced funding allocations, and colored the dissemination of knowledge, all while suppressing ancestral wisdom.

How Did Research Methodologies Perpetuate Bias?

Scientific research, ideally, seeks objective truth. Yet, the lens through which it has historically viewed textured hair has been anything but neutral. Early scientific investigations into human hair variation frequently relied on subjective descriptors, and samples often displayed a strong Eurocentric bias. This narrow focus established straight hair as the de facto standard, rendering studies on textured hair as niche or secondary.

Consider the field of neuroscience, for instance, where methods requiring access to the hair and scalp, such as electroencephalography (EEG), have systematically excluded Black communities. Researchers often preemptively exclude Black participants based on hair texture or style, assuming poor contact between electrodes and the scalp. This assumption, whether conscious or not, demonstrates a lack of cultural competency and directly limits the diversity of research samples, resulting in a body of knowledge that does not fully apply to many populations.

Such exclusionary practices are not benign. They perpetuate a cycle where textured hair remains understudied, its unique biological properties and care requirements insufficiently explored. The very design of experiments and the selection of participant pools reflect these deep-seated biases, leading to research outcomes that are, at best, incomplete, and at worst, actively harmful by reinforcing existing stereotypes of hair as “difficult” or “incompatible.”

Funding and Research Priorities ❉ A Reflection of Societal Devaluation?

The allocation of research funding often mirrors societal priorities and perceived needs. For generations, the mainstream beauty and medical industries, shaped by Eurocentric standards, placed minimal scientific and financial investment into understanding textured hair. This neglect meant that despite hair and scalp disorders being common concerns for Black patients, many perceive their dermatologists as lacking knowledge of Black hair. This gap is a direct consequence of historical biases that steered research away from textured hair, limiting academic and commercial interest.

Instead, significant financial resources flowed into products designed to alter textured hair to conform to straight standards. Madam C.J. Walker, for example, built an empire selling hair relaxants, demonstrating the immense market demand created by these biased beauty norms. This economic reality reinforced a cycle ❉ less research on natural textured hair meant fewer products tailored to its health, further pushing individuals towards chemical alteration, which then became the focus of what little research existed, primarily on damage mitigation.

The lack of investment in textured hair research created a reliance on ancestral knowledge within communities, forcing individuals to become their own experts in care and maintenance, often without the backing of formal scientific validation. While traditional remedies and practices possess immense value, the systemic neglect of scientific inquiry denied these communities the benefits of advanced dermatological and cosmetic science tailored to their unique hair structure. Research on traditional African plants for hair treatment, like those using Marula Oil or African Black Soap, remains largely within ethnobotanical studies, with limited mainstream scientific validation despite their historical use.

The Dissemination of Knowledge ❉ A Filtered Reality

The way scientific findings are communicated, and which findings gain prominence, is another arena where historical biases have played out. Information that supported Eurocentric beauty standards often received wider circulation, while studies or observations that challenged these norms were marginalized. The concept of “good hair” versus “bad hair” pervaded societal discourse, influencing media portrayals and even scientific literature.

This systematic neglect had tangible consequences. For instance, a 2020 study by Duke University and Michigan State University, titled “The Natural Hair Bias in Job Recruitment,” offered empirical evidence that societal bias against natural Black hairstyles infiltrates the workplace and perpetuates race discrimination. The study found that Black women with natural hairstyles received lower scores on professionalism and competence and were less frequently recommended for interviews compared to Black women with straightened hair or white women with any hair type.

This is a profound example of how scientific inquiry, when applied to societal structures, reveals the enduring impact of historical biases on tangible opportunities and perceptions. It highlights that the bias against textured hair is not merely aesthetic; it translates into real-world barriers for Black individuals seeking employment or academic advancement.

Biased research not only misrepresents textured hair but also perpetuates tangible societal disadvantages and erodes trust in scientific institutions.

The exclusion of Black individuals in research samples, whether in neuroscience or broader health studies, means that the resulting body of knowledge does not accurately or equitably apply to a significant portion of the population. This lack of representation contributes to continued mistrust in institutions, given historical and current experiences of racism and discrimination in medical and academic settings.

Efforts to counteract these biases are gaining momentum. The CROWN Act, passed in several states, prohibits discrimination based on natural hair texture and protective hairstyles. This legal movement acknowledges the systemic nature of hair discrimination, which is deeply rooted in Eurocentric beauty standards that stem from white supremacist ideologies.

Its existence highlights the ongoing need to dismantle prejudiced frameworks within all spheres, including scientific research and societal norms. This struggle is, in essence, a reclamation of heritage, a fight for the right to wear one’s ancestry with pride.

Reflection

To truly understand textured hair, one must look beyond the microscope and beyond the current trends, reaching back into the echoes of ancestral whispers. The biases that have shaped textured hair research are not mere academic footnotes; they are indelible marks upon the collective memory of Black and mixed-race communities, affecting self-perception, societal acceptance, and even economic opportunity. This journey has shown us that the scientific gaze, when unmoored from cultural sensitivity and historical context, can unwittingly perpetuate harm, labeling difference as deficiency.

Yet, amidst the shadows of historical oversight, a profound resilience shines. The ancestral knowledge, passed down through generations, continues to guide practices that honor the unique spirit of textured hair. Our understanding of Marula Oil’s moisturizing qualities or Rhassoul Clay’s cleansing prowess, for instance, finds its roots not solely in modern scientific validation but in centuries of lived experience. These practices, once dismissed, are now reclaimed, forming a vital part of a growing movement to reconnect with heritage and to nurture textured hair from a place of deep respect.

The path forward demands a conscious dismantling of old frameworks. It requires researchers, wellness advocates, and communities to collaborate, ensuring that future studies are rooted in inclusivity, respect, and a genuine appreciation for the diverse manifestations of human beauty. The history of bias in textured hair research serves as a poignant reminder that science, like all human endeavors, is not immune to the societal forces that shape it.

But by acknowledging these past missteps, we can collectively steer towards a future where every strand, in its natural glory, is seen, understood, and celebrated for the profound heritage it carries. This is the enduring spirit of Roothea’s ‘Soul of a Strand’ ❉ a living, breathing archive of resilience, beauty, and ancestral wisdom.