Defining the way hair politics have affected the historical agenda of our nation may seem frivolous to some, but a closer look will reveal the way hair has been politicized. Studying hair in this context reminisces on centuries of political oppression for black women, and a foolish attempt to conglomerate racial groups into one idealistic form of physical appearance. With the oppression and enslavement of Africans throughout history, along came the oppression of black hair. American leaders have traditionally barred minority women in particular from freely expressing their hair and clothing in the same manner as their ancestors. In the 18th century, we witnessed the approval of legislation that literally regulated the way African women were allowed to dress and behave in public. Throughout this project, our exhibits will exemplify the way hair has systematically been used to determine, as well as illustrate who is socially accepted and who is not. We strive to shed light on these historical wrongdoings in order to enact restorative justice and equitable outcomes in the future for the black community.
Although the United States was founded upon multiple racial backgrounds, its dominant groups have always pushed Eurocentric features as the ideal from of beauty. These standards for long, luscious, straight hair fall far out of line with the natural hair for millions of African women. Prior to its colonization, Western and Central African societies styled their hair to depict social and cultural cues like age, religion, wealth, rank, marital status, and even fertility status (Greensword 2022, 2). Because it was the highest point of the body, it was considered to be the nearest physical part of you to the divine and it was given spiritual attributes. In alignment with these cultural expressions, African hairdressers were seen to be priest-like figures in society and held special ceremonies for passing down their trade to younger generations (Byrd and Tharps 2014, 10). Decorated combs and beads had cultural implications and were considered sacred treasures for individuals in these pre-colonized societies. Simultaneously, early European depictions of African women vilified their physical appearances and spread propaganda about their subpar anatomical qualities. This ties in with our earlier discussions in the semester on Eurocentric idealists spreading false anthropology about the African race. These widespread misconceptions, dating back to pre-colonial Africa, are a mirror reflection of the discrimination we saw in the United States two hundred years later.
Touching on the spiritual significance of one’s hair to an African, removing it completely would be considered an unavoidable sin. European poachers made sure to shave every slave’s head immediately, male or female, as a means of stripping them of any cultural or family identity with Africa. European literature claims it was for ‘sanitary reasons’, but an educated individual can make their own assumptions about the true reasoning behind this. To the Europeans' design, all slaves reached the Western coasts with shaved heads, alienated from their families, and viewed as anonymous property or real estate assets (Byrd and Tharps 2014, 10). Unlike their beloved homeland, slaves in the new world had no access to their treasured combs and were forced to use a carding tool to untangle their thick hair. Contagious scalp diseases like ringworm and lice became rampant throughout slave plantations, and obviously the slaves received lackluster healthcare, if any. With scorching heat and thousands of flies hovering the fields, they were forced to use scrap fabrics as kerchiefs to protect their scalps. These bandanas, along with straw hats for males, became the visual staple of slave culture in the new world. In 1796, Louisiana’s governor passed the Tignon laws, which required free women of color to cover their hair with bandanas similar to the ones worn by slaves (Greensword 2022, 4). He was ultimately politicizing hair, for the first time in American history but definitely not the last.
By the time North America had outlawed the Transatlantic slave trade, a distinct Black American culture had formed. There was even a group of lighter-skinned, straight-haired free Blacks who were considered the “mulatto elite”. Those who were still enslaved quickly learned among peers that slaves with more Eurocentric features were assigned housework. These slaves were more expensive and endured half the hardships a typical field slave would. Slaves would use whatever products they could find like bacon grease and butter to groom their hair up into slick braids or a neat bun, far from how they would naturally wear it (Byrd & Tharps 2014, 20). But these features increased their likelihood of catching their master’s eye and working as a house slave. Although it seemingly couldn’t get any worse, slavery itself had embedded discrimination and bias for those who looked more or less white. Conforming to whiteness has challenged the African race since the first slaves reached the Western hemisphere.
Even free, affluent African Americans were adapting to these white standards in order to achieve their goals. Madam CJ Walker, the first female self-made millionaire, made her fortune manufacturing combs and hair products for African American hair. Her company boasted straight hair for woman as the gateway to social and economic success, and marketed her brand around this desire to look ‘more American’. Although we applaud Madam Walker for her great achievements among the Black community, it’s impossible to argue that her rhetoric was not damaging toward the natural image of black beauty. African hair does not naturally grow straight, and Madam Walker’s great success and marketing schemes had the entire Black youth convinced of a new standard for beauty…straight, shining hair. A 1904 advertisement for a hair-straightening product was listed in the newspaper like so, “nothing detracts so much from your appearance as short, matted, un-attractive, curly hair” (Lincoln Chemical Works 1904, 5). These aggressive advertising trends shaped the way Black women, but also the broader public, viewed the standards for black beauty. Conforming to Eurocentric beauty, especially when it comes to hair, became the easiest way to mobilize yourself to a higher rank of society if you weren’t white to begin with.
The Civil Rights movement and the 1960s witnessed a great revolution in the expression of African hair. During this time, Black Americans began to style their hair in large afros as a sign of political awareness and expression. The afro became a trademark hairstyle for the Black community, and even white women were following this trend in the late 70s, early 80s. The historical trends of American society have pushed African Americans to design their hair into every style except their natural one. After serving 8 years as the nation’s first lady, Michelle Obama noted how she intentionally straightened her hair during election terms. However, in the years following their presidency, she can be seen several times in public wearing her natural, curled hair. The general public was astonished to see how beautiful her natural hair was, and why she never wore it that way in office. She felt as though America ‘wasn’t ready’ to see an African American with their natural hair in the White House (Luu 2022). Although she had reached the absolute peak of American society, it still wasn’t enough to earn the approval of white America. Even the president’s wife cannot escape the pressures and systemic discrimination that has haunted the lives of black women in America for centuries. The idea of natural African beauty has been stripped from its original form and muddled with several different Eurocentric ideologies, which ultimately harms future Black generations.
Looking at the modern day implications of this cyclical discrimination, we’ve seen restorative legislation like the Crown Act passed to address these issues. In March of 2022, this act was passed, prohibiting the discrimination of any individual based on hair texture or style. The acronym Crown used in the bill stands for: Creating an Open Workplace for Natural hair. It’s intended that this legislation will rejuvenate the African culture and hair styles that have become lost in American culture, and encourage young women to express themselves naturally. Black women have been conforming to the standards of white America for centuries. Whiteness and Eurocentric superiority had essentially erased African culture among slaves and transformed this new culture of Black Americans. The fact that this bill was drafted proves that as a nation, we’ve recognized generational hair discrimination as a violation of rights. The Crown Act provides optimism for the future of young Black girls, and how they will choose to express themselves.
Credits
Alec Evans, Jayla Irons, Destiny West