Why do historical laws persist in textured hair bias?

Roots

Consider the coiled strand, each curve a testament to a journey spanning continents and generations, each spring a silent declaration of survival. It is more than mere protein; it is a living archive, bearing the weight of ancestral memory, whispered wisdom, and the sun’s ancient touch. This vital connection, a vibrant heritage expressed through our very crowning glory, has, through the ages, become a target of decree and control, shaping the very understanding of who we are in the wider world.

To truly grasp why past mandates hold sway in perceptions of textured hair, one must journey to the foundations, recognizing the sheer biological wonder that has been historically misunderstood and, worse, maligned. The very structure of textured hair, often seen as a departure from a singular, linear ideal, is instead a masterwork of natural design. Its elliptical cross-section, unlike the rounder form of many other hair types, facilitates its distinctive curl and coil patterns. This inherent architecture, far from being a flaw, grants it an exceptional capacity for volume and protective styling, guarding the scalp and strands from environmental elements.

Research has even shown that across various human populations, curly hair arises from a curved follicle and some form of asymmetry in the mitotic zone around the dermal papilla within the follicle itself (Clinical and anthropological perspectives, 2015). This biological blueprint, deeply tied to the adaptations of ancestral communities across diverse climates, should command reverence.

The perception of hair, particularly its texture and form, shifted dramatically with the advent of colonial expansion and the horrific system of transatlantic enslavement. In many traditional African communities, hair was a profound visual language, communicating tribal identity, marital status, age, wealth, and social rank. Styles were meticulously crafted, often serving as intricate maps for escape routes during times of duress or conveying complex mathematical concepts through braiding patterns. This rich heritage, however, confronted a brutal imposition of new ideals in the so-called New World.

The historical devaluation of textured hair stripped away its ancestral significance, transforming it into a marker of subjugation.

One particularly stark example of this legal imposition arises from the late 18th century. In 1786, the governor of Louisiana issued the Tignon Laws, which mandated that free Black women in New Orleans conceal their elaborate hairstyles with a tignon, a simple headscarf. These women, renowned for their intricate and artful coiffures adorned with jewels and feathers, had, in the eyes of the colonial powers, attained a level of visibility and perceived social standing that challenged the racial hierarchy.

The law served a dual purpose ❉ it visually asserted that free Black women were aligned with enslaved women, rather than with white women, and it aimed to curb their perceived social allure among white men. This early legal decree, though seemingly about appearance, held a deeper, more sinister intent ❉ to strip away cultural identity and maintain a rigid social order through the symbolic degradation of Black hair.

How Did Eurocentric Views Shape Early Hair Classifications?

The imposition of Eurocentric beauty standards, which favored straight or loosely curled hair, began to define what was considered “acceptable” or “good” hair. This constructed ideal, often rooted in pseudoscientific notions, dismissed the inherent qualities of Afro-textured hair as “unruly,” “unprofessional,” or “unkempt”. Such labels were not merely aesthetic judgments; they were tools of systemic racism, designed to justify subjugation and marginalization.

Traditional hair classification systems, even some seemingly neutral ones, have been critiqued for inadvertently perpetuating racial hierarchies. The Irizarry Hair Texture Scale (IHT), for instance, was developed as a more comprehensive framework to address both the physical and socio-cultural aspects of hair texture, challenging earlier systems that often reinforced biased perceptions. It underscores how hair texture has served as a primary identifier in racial and cultural contexts, sometimes even overshadowing skin tone in defining racial differences (Carrington, 2017).

Ancestral Wisdom and Hair’s Elemental Lexicon

Before the imposition of colonial ideals, the language surrounding hair in African societies was rich with specific terms and practices that honored its versatility and significance. This lexicon reflected a holistic understanding of hair care, deeply tied to community, spirituality, and well-being.

• Kinky Hair ❉ A term now reclaimed, historically used pejoratively by oppressors, but descriptive of tightly coiled hair that stands proudly from the scalp.
• Locs ❉ More than a style, these matted coils often hold spiritual and cultural significance, representing a natural progression of hair and a deep connection to ancestry in many traditions.
• Braids ❉ Beyond their aesthetic appeal, historical accounts speak of braids carrying messages, embodying community bonds, and serving as a record of skill passed down through generations.

These terms and the practices they represent form a core part of textured hair heritage, standing in stark contrast to the narratives of disdain later imposed through legal and societal norms. The very act of caring for and styling textured hair, using methods passed down through time, became a quiet act of resistance against laws designed to erase that heritage.

Ritual

The threads of heritage, though strained by punitive laws, found ways to persist, coiled within the very rituals of styling and care. Hair styling for Black and mixed-race individuals has never simply been about aesthetics. It is a profound act of cultural memory, a living art form passed through generations, and a statement of identity in a world that often sought to dictate conformity. This intrinsic link meant that historical biases, codified into legal frameworks, inevitably seeped into the very spaces where styling occurred.

The early 20th century, for instance, witnessed a growing pressure for Black people to alter their hair to conform to Eurocentric standards, a trend solidified by beauty entrepreneurs like Madam C.J. Walker, who popularized products for straightening hair. While Walker’s business acumen made her a millionaire, her legacy also reflects the societal pressures of the time, where straightened hair was often seen as essential for social and economic advancement, particularly in professional settings. The very tools of styling, like the hot comb, became symbols of a coerced assimilation, despite the ingenuity behind their development.

Styling textured hair became a subtle rebellion, a quiet testament to enduring cultural identity in the face of imposed uniformity.

How Did Styling Traditions Become Legal Battlegrounds?

The mid-20th century saw a powerful resurgence of natural hair as a symbol of Black pride and resistance, particularly during the Civil Rights and Black Power movements. Icons like Angela Davis sported afros, transforming natural hair into a powerful symbol of defiance against white American beauty standards. Yet, as natural hairstyles gained prominence, they quickly became a flashpoint for legal conflict.

Courts began to grapple with cases of hair discrimination, often yielding inconsistent results. For instance, in the 1976 case of Jenkins V. Blue Cross Mutual Hospital Insurance, the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit upheld a race discrimination lawsuit against an employer for bias against afros, asserting that such styles were protected under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. This ruling offered a glimmer of legal recognition for natural Black hair.

However, this precedent did not universally extend protection to all natural styles. A contrasting outcome emerged in 1981 when a Black woman sued American Airlines because the company required her to remove her braids. The court sided with the airline, arguing that braids were a “mutable” or changeable characteristic, not an immutable racial trait, and therefore not protected in the same way as an afro. This distinction created a problematic legal loophole, allowing discrimination against cultural hairstyles that were deeply rooted in Black heritage.

Protective Styling as an Encyclopedia of Heritage

The array of protective styles common within Black and mixed-race communities represents a living encyclopedia of ancestral knowledge. These styles were designed not only for beauty but for the health and preservation of the hair, often reflecting specific cultural origins.

• Cornrows ❉ Intricate braided patterns lying flat against the scalp, with roots in ancient African civilizations, used to signify social status and tribal lineage.
• Bantu Knots ❉ Small, coiled buns, tracing their lineage back to the Zulu people of Southern Africa, serving as both a protective style and a cultural marker.
• Twists ❉ A versatile style that involves twisting two sections of hair around each other, originating from various African traditions, safeguarding the hair while allowing for moisture retention.

These protective styles, often misinterpreted or deemed “unprofessional” in dominant white spaces, carry profound heritage. They are tangible links to a past where hair care was a communal practice, a source of aesthetic expression, and a means of preserving identity in hostile environments. The legal battles over these styles underscore the enduring struggle for the recognition of textured hair heritage as an intrinsic aspect of racial identity.

The workplace, in particular, remained a site of significant hair bias. A 2019 study, further supported by the 2023 CROWN Workplace Research Study, revealed that 80% of Black women are more likely than non-Black women to feel they had to alter their hair to conform to workplace standards. The same study found that Black women with natural or braided hairstyles were consistently rated as “less ready” for job performance. This alarming statistic clearly demonstrates the pervasive, ongoing impact of historical biases on economic and professional opportunities.

Relay

The echoes of historical prejudice reverberate in the ongoing struggle for textured hair acceptance, yet the spirit of ancestral wisdom offers a profound framework for resilience and forward motion. The persistence of biased laws, whether explicit or subtly embedded in institutional policies, traces back to the historical policing of Black and Brown bodies, where hair served as a visible marker for control and social stratification. This complex interplay of history, biology, and lived experience forms the bedrock of modern advocacy for hair liberation.

Consider the deep cultural implications of hair as a component of identity. From the 15th century, during the transatlantic slave trade, the shaving of heads was a deliberate act of cultural erasure, intended to strip newly enslaved Africans of their heritage and identity, which was often tied to specific hairstyles and grooming practices. This historical trauma established a lasting association between natural Black hair and perceptions of being “unclean” or “unkempt,” a narrative that stubbornly persists in many spaces even today.

The enduring struggle for hair liberation is a testament to the resilient spirit of heritage against centuries of imposed norms.

How do Systemic Biases Manifest in Contemporary Policies?

Despite the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which sought to prohibit employment discrimination based on race, a legal loophole often permitted bias against hair texture and specific Black hairstyles. Courts historically interpreted Title VII as not covering “mutable” characteristics, thereby excluding certain hairstyles from protection. This interpretation, however, disregards the intrinsic connection between hair, culture, and race, perpetuating a system that forces Black individuals to compromise their identity for social and economic acceptance.

A compelling case demonstrating this systemic issue is that of Chastity Jones. In 2013, Ms. Jones, a Black woman in Alabama, was offered a customer service position, only for the offer to be rescinded when she refused to cut her locs, which the company deemed to violate their grooming policy.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed a lawsuit on her behalf, but the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ultimately sided with the employer, upholding the district court’s ruling that locs were a “mutable” characteristic and therefore not protected under Title VII. This particular ruling underscores the inadequacies of existing anti-discrimination laws and highlights how a lack of understanding regarding afro-textured hair and its cultural significance underpins legal decisions.

This judicial stance, while often citing a supposed neutrality in grooming policies, effectively reinforces white standards of appearance as the default “professional” norm, creating a significant burden on Black individuals. It forces a choice between embracing one’s cultural identity and achieving economic advancement, a choice no person should have to face.

What Role does the CROWN Act Play in Affirming Heritage?

The CROWN Act, standing for “Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair,” represents a modern legislative response to these persistent biases. Initiated in 2019 by California State Senator Holly Mitchell, it aims to explicitly prohibit discrimination based on hair texture and protective hairstyles historically associated with race, such as braids, locs, twists, and knots, in workplaces and public schools. The movement has gained significant momentum, with over half of U.S. states enacting similar legislation as of July 2024.

The significance of the CROWN Act transcends mere legal protection; it is a recognition of textured hair as an intrinsic aspect of racial identity and cultural heritage. By expanding the definition of race to include hair texture and styles, the Act directly addresses the systemic racism that has historically policed Black hair. It offers a critical step towards dismantling the deeply ingrained notion that Black hair in its natural state is “unprofessional” or “unacceptable,” fostering environments where individuals can express their cultural identity without fear of penalty.

Ancestral Wellness and Holistic Care

The pursuit of hair health for textured strands often draws upon ancestral wisdom, long before modern science entered the conversation. This holistic approach views hair as an extension of one’s overall well-being, deeply connected to nutrition, spiritual practices, and environmental harmony.

• Herbal Infusions ❉ Traditional practices across the African diaspora frequently employed natural herbs like aloe vera, fenugreek, and hibiscus to cleanse, strengthen, and moisturize hair, acknowledging the plant world’s bounty.
• Protective Measures ❉ Nighttime rituals involving silk or satin coverings, now codified as “bonnet wisdom,” derive from ancestral practices of protecting delicate strands from friction and moisture loss during sleep, preserving intricate styles and fostering healthy growth.
• Communal Grooming ❉ Historically, hair care was a communal activity, a time for sharing stories, imparting wisdom, and reinforcing social bonds. This collective aspect of care reinforced its significance beyond individual appearance.

The modern natural hair movement, supported by legislation like the CROWN Act, can be seen as a continuation of this ancestral legacy. It encourages individuals to rediscover and celebrate the biological and cultural beauty of their natural hair, creating a new narrative of acceptance and self-affirmation. This renewed emphasis on holistic care and respect for textured hair stands as a powerful counter-narrative to centuries of bias, weaving a path toward a future where heritage is unequivocally honored.

Reflection

The journey through the intricate landscape of textured hair bias reveals a profound truth ❉ the coil, the wave, the loc, the braid—each form carries the weight of a past where its existence was often deemed defiant, and the promise of a future where it stands celebrated. The historical decrees that sought to diminish Black and mixed-race hair were not merely legal codes. They were extensions of a deeper societal discomfort with difference, a persistent attempt to flatten the vibrant spectrum of human expression into a singular, often Eurocentric, ideal. Yet, through every challenge, the soul of a strand, rooted in ancestral soil, has refused to be severed.

Our exploration of Why do historical laws persist in textured hair bias? unfurls a narrative of enduring resilience, a testament to the strength found in tradition and self-definition. From the colonial mandates designed to erase identity to the contemporary battles waged in boardrooms and classrooms, the underlying current remains a struggle for autonomy over one’s own crowning heritage. The textured hair, once a symbol of subjugation, now stands as a powerful beacon of self-acceptance, a living connection to ingenuity, and a vibrant marker of enduring cultural lineage.

It is a reminder that what was once legislated to oppress can, through collective will and renewed understanding, become a catalyst for liberation. The ongoing work involves not only legislative change but a re-education of hearts and minds, allowing each strand to tell its unfettered story, contributing to a truly inclusive tapestry of human beauty and history.