What legislation protects textured hair from discrimination?

Roots

Have you ever considered how a strand of hair, so seemingly simple, could carry the weight of generations, the whispers of ancient practices, and the deep reverberations of identity? For those whose lineage traces through the richly coiled and textured hair of the African diaspora, it is more than a biological outgrowth. It is a living archive, a testament to resilience, a visible connection to a heritage that stretches back across continents and centuries. This inherent strength, this profound beauty, has been, paradoxically, a point of contention and oppression.

The journey of textured hair through history, marked by both reverence and systemic devaluation, brings us to the present moment, where legal frameworks strive to protect a right that should be inalienable ❉ the right to wear one’s hair without fear or bias. What legislation protects textured hair from discrimination, then, is not merely a legal query; it is an inquiry into the very soul of a strand, its history, its science, and its ongoing fight for recognition.

The very structure of textured hair, from its elliptical cross-section to the unique distribution of disulfide bonds, gives it an unparalleled ability to coil, kink, and curl. This biological blueprint, passed down through ancestral lines, is what gives Black and mixed-race hair its remarkable versatility and inherent protective qualities. Yet, for too long, this natural state was deemed “unprofessional” or “unsuitable” within Eurocentric beauty standards. The historical narrative reveals that the marginalization of textured hair was a calculated act, a part of a broader system of dehumanization that sought to sever ties to African cultural identity.

During the transatlantic slave trade, enslavers often forcibly shaved the heads of captured Africans, a deliberate act to strip them of their cultural markers and sense of self. This cruel practice established a precedent for what was considered “acceptable” hair, laying foundations for discrimination that persisted long after formal slavery ended.

Understanding Hair Anatomy and Ancestral Views

The distinct morphology of textured hair sets it apart. While European hair typically has a round cross-section, hair with tighter curl patterns often exhibits an elliptical or even flat cross-section, contributing to its coiling nature. The hair follicle, the root of the hair strand, also plays a part. In tightly coiled hair, the follicle can be curved or hooked, influencing the direction and curl of the hair as it grows.

This intrinsic architecture is not a flaw, but a testament to biological diversity, optimized for specific environmental conditions and cultural expressions that evolved over millennia on the African continent. Ancestral wisdom often viewed hair not as a mere accessory but as a spiritual antenna, a conduit to the divine and to ancestors. The very crown of the head, where hair originates, was considered a sacred entry point for spiritual energy in many African cultures. This deep spiritual connection meant hair care was a ritual, a profound act of honoring the self and one’s lineage.

The story of textured hair is an ancient one, etched into the very DNA of strands, speaking of ancestral wisdom and an inherent beauty often misunderstood.

Hair Classification and Its Cultural Implications

Modern hair classification systems, such as the Andre Walker Hair Typing System, categorize hair into types (1 to 4) and sub-types (A to C), with type 4 representing the most tightly coiled textures. While these systems offer a descriptive language for hair professionals and individuals, it is crucial to understand their relatively recent origins and how they interact with historical biases. Historically, the language used to describe Black hair often carried derogatory connotations, viewing tightly coiled hair as “bad” or “unmanageable”.

This perception was deeply tied to the imposition of Eurocentric beauty standards. The concept of “good hair,” often associated with straighter, softer textures, became a social currency, granting greater access to opportunities and social acceptance.

• Type 1 ❉ Straight hair, no visible curl pattern.
• Type 2 ❉ Wavy hair, a loose S-shape pattern.
• Type 3 ❉ Curly hair, a defined S-shape curl.
• Type 4 ❉ Coily hair, tight coils or Z-shaped kinks. This encompasses the full range of afro-textured hair.

The societal implications of these classifications extend far beyond mere description, reaching into employment and education.

Lexicon of Textured Hair and Legislative Language

The vocabulary used to describe textured hair is rich, reflecting its diversity and cultural significance. Terms such as Locs, Cornrows, Twists, Braids, and Bantu Knots are not simply hairstyles; they are expressions of identity, tradition, and artistry that have been passed down through generations. These styles, once used to signify tribe, status, or even as maps for escape during slavery, became targets of discrimination.

Legislation seeking to protect textured hair, particularly the CROWN Act, explicitly includes these terms to ensure clear legal protection for these historically significant styles. The very specificity of the language in these laws acknowledges the historical attempts to erase or demonize these expressions of heritage.

Ritual

The rituals surrounding textured hair care and styling are as old as the hair itself, deeply embedded in the communal and individual practices of Black and mixed-race communities. These are not merely routines; they are acts of sustenance, connection, and self-definition, passed from elder to child, salon chair to kitchen floor. Yet, for too long, these ancestral practices, often seen as foundational expressions of self, faced hostility in public spaces. The emergence of legislation designed to protect textured hair from discrimination directly addresses this historical tension, seeking to safeguard these living traditions from the judgments of Eurocentric norms.

What legislation protects textured hair from discrimination and how has it influenced traditional and modern styling heritage? This question leads us to examine the very fabric of identity expressed through hair, and the laws striving to keep it unburdened.

Protective Styling Heritage and Modernity

Protective styles stand as a testament to ingenuity and care, shielding delicate strands from environmental stressors and manipulation. Styles like Braids, Locs, and Twists have ancestral roots stretching back thousands of years across various African civilizations, where they served purposes beyond aesthetics. They communicated marital status, age, wealth, spiritual beliefs, and tribal affiliation. During the transatlantic slave trade, cornrows sometimes concealed seeds for sustenance or served as intricate maps for escape, turning hair into a silent form of resistance.

In contemporary society, these styles maintain their functional and cultural significance. However, societal biases, deeply rooted in historical prejudices, have often rendered them “unprofessional” in workplaces and schools. This clash between cultural heritage and imposed standards has been a driving force behind legislative movements.

Natural Styling Techniques and Ancestral Methods

The embrace of natural hair texture, often termed the “natural hair movement,” marks a powerful return to ancestral ways of presenting oneself. This movement, gaining significant traction in the 2000s, echoes the Black Power movement of the 1960s and 70s, where the Afro became a potent symbol of defiance and racial pride. Ancestral methods for defining and enhancing natural curl patterns often involved natural ingredients and patient, gentle handling. Techniques like finger coiling, knotting, and various forms of braiding were not just aesthetic choices but also forms of care, preserving hair health and honoring its natural state.

The CROWN Act stands as a vital shield, protecting a heritage that breathes through every coil and braid.

Wigs, Hair Extensions, and Their Cultural Resonance

The use of wigs and hair extensions, while often seen as modern conveniences, also has a rich historical and cultural dimension within African and diasporic communities. In ancient Egypt, for instance, wigs were worn by both men and women for protection, hygiene, and social status. They were not merely disguises but elaborate statements, sometimes infused with aromatic oils and adornments. Throughout history, hair additions have served a range of purposes ❉ enhancing beauty, signifying status, providing protection for natural hair, or offering versatility in expression.

In contemporary times, extensions continue this legacy, allowing for diverse styles while also serving as protective measures. The ability to wear extensions or wigs without discrimination is part of the broader fight for hair freedom, particularly as these can be integral to cultural practices or simply personal aesthetic choices.

Heat Styling and Historical Context

The history of heat styling, particularly hair straightening, is intimately connected to the painful narrative of assimilation. The invention and popularization of the hot comb by figures like Madam C.J. Walker in the late 19th and early 20th centuries offered a means for Black women to conform to prevailing Eurocentric beauty standards. While these tools provided pathways to social and economic advancement for some, they also perpetuated the idea that natural textured hair was “unprofessional” and needed to be “tamed”.

This historical pressure to straighten hair underscores the depth of the systemic discrimination faced by those with textured hair. Modern legislation aims to dismantle the very societal expectations that made such conformity a necessity.

Relay

The legislative landscape, a relatively recent development in the enduring story of textured hair, represents a crucial relay in the pursuit of respect and recognition. For centuries, the inherent beauty of Black and mixed-race hair, with its coils and curls, has been a battleground—a site where cultural pride met systemic prejudice. What legislation protects textured hair from discrimination today, and how does this legal journey intersect with generations of ancestral resilience and scholarly understanding? This question reveals a complex interplay of legal evolution, deeply rooted social biases, and the powerful, persistent assertion of identity, all viewed through the enduring lens of heritage.

The CROWN Act A New Chapter in Protection

The most significant legislative effort to combat hair discrimination in recent times is the CROWN Act, an acronym for “Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair”. This law explicitly prohibits discrimination based on hair texture and protective hairstyles associated with race, including styles such as Locs, Cornrows, Twists, Braids, Bantu Knots, and Afros. The CROWN Act directly addresses a loophole in existing anti-discrimination laws.

While the Civil Rights Act of 1964, particularly Title VII, prohibits employment discrimination based on race, federal courts have, at times, narrowly interpreted these protections, allowing for discrimination against natural hair textures or styles to persist. The CROWN Act aims to clarify this, making it unequivocally clear that hair discrimination is a form of racial discrimination.

The movement for the CROWN Act gained momentum from viral news stories and personal accounts of individuals, particularly Black women and children, facing severe consequences—from being sent home from school to losing job offers—simply because of their natural hair. For instance, a 2019 study by Dove found that Black women are 1.5 times more likely to be sent home from the workplace due to their hair, and 80 percent reported feeling they needed to change their hairstyle to conform to “conservative standards” to fit in at work. This data powerfully underscores the pervasive nature of this often-unseen form of discrimination.

State and Federal Efforts for the CROWN Act

The CROWN Act began at the state level. California passed the first CROWN Act into law in July 2019. Since then, the movement has grown significantly, with many states adopting similar legislation. As of July 2024, approximately 25 states and Washington, D.C.

have enacted versions of the CROWN Act. These state-level laws vary in their specific scope, sometimes applying to workplaces, schools, or public accommodations. The state legislative efforts serve as vital protections in the absence of a comprehensive federal law.

At the federal level, the CROWN Act has been introduced in the U.S. Congress multiple times. It passed in the House of Representatives in March 2022 but did not pass the Senate. The bill has been reintroduced in subsequent Congresses, with advocates pushing for nationwide protection.

The continued push for a federal CROWN Act reflects the understanding that hair discrimination is a national issue, impacting Black Americans across all states, including the nearly half of Black women in the U.S. workforce who live in states without CROWN Act protections.

1. California ❉ The pioneering state, passing its CROWN Act in July 2019, extending protections to employment and education.
2. New York ❉ Early adopter, prohibiting discrimination based on natural hair or hairstyles closely associated with racial, ethnic, or cultural identities.
3. Texas ❉ Passed its CROWN Act in 2023, expanding protections for natural hair and styles.
4. Vermont ❉ Became one of the latest states to pass CROWN Act legislation in April 2024.

The legal battle also extends to various localities, with over 40 local governments passing laws prohibiting discrimination based on hairstyle and texture. These localized efforts underscore the widespread recognition of hair discrimination as a civil rights issue.

Legislation becomes a mirror, reflecting society’s ongoing struggle for true equity and the right to embody one’s heritage without constraint.

Historical Context of Legal Challenges

The CROWN Act builds upon a long history of legal challenges against hair discrimination, even before explicit laws existed. Courts often grappled with whether hair policies constituted racial discrimination under existing civil rights statutes. Early cases, such as Jenkins v.

Blue Cross Mutual Hospital Insurance (1976), saw courts uphold the right to wear Afros under Title VII, yet these rulings often stopped short of broad protections for all natural or protective styles. The issue was consistently viewed through a lens of “grooming standards” rather than inherent racial identity, allowing discriminatory practices to persist.

The legal enforcement guidance from entities such as the New York City Commission on Human Rights has been crucial in interpreting existing anti-discrimination laws to include hair-based bias. Such guidance asserts that policies prohibiting natural hair or styles commonly associated with Black people often stem from white standards of appearance and perpetuate racist stereotypes. The historical examples, from the mandated tignon laws in 18th-century Louisiana to the U.S.

Department of Defense’s ban on Afros, twists, cornrows, and braids in 2014 (later reversed), highlight the deep-seated nature of these discriminatory practices. These historical attempts to control Black hair were direct affronts to identity and heritage, forcing conformity as a means of survival.

A powerful example of this historical burden and its eventual legal challenge is the case of Chasity Jones. In 2010, she had a job offer rescinded by an Alabama insurance company when she refused to cut her locs. The case was ultimately denied review by the U.S.

Supreme Court, highlighting the persistent legal void that the CROWN Act seeks to fill. This specific case brought to light the vulnerability Black individuals faced without clear legal protections, emphasizing how deeply personal hair choices intersect with professional opportunities and economic stability.

What is the Connection Between Hair Discrimination and Systemic Racism?

Hair discrimination is not an isolated phenomenon; it is deeply rooted in systemic racism and a mechanism to preserve white spaces and norms. Policies that target natural hairstyles advance white Anglo-Saxon Protestant cultural norms as the default to which everyone must adhere. This policing of hair perpetuates racist stereotypes that Black hairstyles are unprofessional, messy, or unkempt, creating barriers in employment, education, and other public spheres. It forces Black individuals to either conform, often through damaging chemical treatments or time-consuming alterations, or face exclusion and punishment.

This systemic pressure contributes to psychological distress and impacts self-image, particularly for Black children and young people. The very existence of legislation protecting textured hair acknowledges the long history of prejudice and the need for legal redress to affirm the right to cultural expression and identity.

Reflection

As the sun sets on our deep exploration, the question of what legislation protects textured hair from discrimination takes on a new resonance, colored by the echoes of a vibrant heritage. Each coil and curl, each braid and loc, carries not only the story of an individual but also the collective wisdom, struggle, and beauty of generations. The journey from ancient African reverence to contemporary legal battles reveals a persistent truth ❉ textured hair is more than fiber; it is a profound declaration of self, a living link to ancestral narratives, and a source of undeniable power. The legislative efforts, particularly the CROWN Act, stand as a testament to the enduring fight for dignity, aiming to dismantle structures that have historically sought to erase visible expressions of Black and mixed-race identity.

The very need for such laws is a poignant reminder of the enduring biases woven into societal fabric. Yet, their passage, state by state, and the continued push for federal protection, also speak to the unbreakable spirit of those who refuse to compromise their authentic selves. They signal a collective awakening, a deepening understanding that respect for hair is respect for heritage, for history, and for the fundamental right of every individual to exist wholly and without apology. This ongoing evolution in legal understanding, born from relentless advocacy and the lived experiences of many, offers a glimmer of a future where the beauty of every strand, in its natural glory, is celebrated universally, rooted in a collective acknowledgement of its inherent value and its deep connection to a resilient past.