...on the word Nappy.
I feel like "to each his own", on this one. When an individial chooses to use the word to describe their own hair then I think it's fine. The problem comes in when it is used as a weapon against someone.
I usually use the word curly to describe our hair, because that's what it is. Whether the curls are super tight, lose or anywhere in between, they're still curls. So, I like that word.
In the past, the only time I used the term 'Nappy' was when I was referring to the unmanageable-ness of my hair or someone else's. When I called someones hair 'Nappy' I was insulting that person. So now I just stay away from it.
In the natural community 'Nappy' is being embraced (by some) and when they use it I get the feeling they are saying to the rest of the world "What you see as ugly, unmanageable and taboo, I see as beautiful and I am not ashamed." I applaud that mentality. Taking that word and applying it to oneself, is the equivalent of taking lemons and making lemonade. Yes, there are plenty of people who think we should all hop on the next thing smoking and make our way to a salon and get our hair 'done', but we have learned how to care for our hair and as a result have been given the gift of freedom. Freedom to walk in the rain, freedom to go swimming, freedom to wash our hair ourselves and not have to wait for a paid professional to do so, and mostly freedom to be ourselves.
If someone were to call my hair nappy now, I would just say 'thank you' and keep it moving. If they meant me harm by it, I feel sorry for them, but I won't let it ruin my day.
*Thank you to all of you who replied when I asked what you thought of the word nappy.
Now on to the texture classification chart.
I just don't see the purpose. My hair is what it is, I have learned how to take care of it from trial and error. I don't think that calling it a 4, or 3Q is going to make a difference. So I just never bothered to find out what number mine was.
When I first heard of the texture classification, I was turned off. I feel like, why do we need a system to separate the textures from each other? Really. Why? And for those of you who have said that the classification system has helped you figure out how to care for your hair; good. As long as you don't now feel like it's your hair number verses the rest of us, then I'm cool. When it's used as a divider, that's when it turns ugly. I remember blog hopping in the past and reading blog after blog of women obsessing over their numbers. It was horrible. They were using the system to differentiate the 'good' and desireable natural hair from the napps. I'm sure you've come across a few of those blogs yourself.
I left the relaxed world to get away from hair typing and praising hair that most closely resembled European hair. I washed my hands of that foolishness when I did my big chop. So I am not interested in anything that separates us. It's just too easily turned into something negative.
And there you have it...my two cents.
~Sunshine
4 comments:
Tightness or looseness of curl pattern/texture/thickness actually does affect how the hair will react to certain products and styling techniques. In that way it's very useful. Hair is individual, yes, but I know I might have better luck following the program or product suggestions of someone with hair that at least appears or sounds most similar to mine. ("Sounds" or "reads" similar as in when there is no photo.)It's only bad when people attach a "value" to the various numbers 2-3-4 and letters a-b-c that things get screwy. It's not the classification that's bad, but the FEELINGS or baggage people have attached to them. And those feelings are so deeply ingrained I doubt they are ever going to go away --even if we did away with the classifications and called it all "curly hair". Denying that there is a difference in curl pattern is sorta like those folks who go around and say they don't notice race or skin color. We all do and I think it's disingenious or phony to say you don't notice at all. Denying the difference is like saying there's something wrong with noting that someone is black,white, brown or yellow. Why? Appearance is a part of who we are like height, weight etc. the size of our feet but not all of who we are. Personality or/the spirit means so much more. So what's wrong with noticing or noting that one curl pattern is looser and tighter? That's like someone wearing a size 7 shoe while another wears a 8. I can borrow the size 7, but the 8 wouldn't work. Is that bad to note someone wears a size 7 or 8 shoe? Pretending there's NOT a difference is not solving anything. We need to work on people's minds. It's about the value or feelings people have placed on those curl differences. Why can't noting curl pattern be similar to noting shoe size? I think the first step is to stop acting as if acknowledging the difference is a dirty word or a bad thing to do.
Classifications become negative when they’re used in discriminatory ways. In my opinion it goes back to the good hair vs. bad hair debate. We should start focusing on healthy hair as “good hair”, with styles that make you happy. Unfortunately main stream media has its ideas of what beauty is. Once we start understanding that beauty is what makes you happy, the texture classification may not seem as bad.
I mostly agree with you on the word nappy. I only use it with those who "get it". For example, my bf will point out the nappies (natural women) he sees on tv, and we use it as a synonym for natural. However, he loves natural hair in general and my hair in particular. I wouldn't use it with my relaxed family or even my natural friend who still subscribes to the "good hair" mentality. If someone says my hair is nappy, I say thank you and keep it moving. If they think that they're insulting me, that's their ignorance is on them.
As for classification, specifically Andre's system, I think its primary purpose is divisive beacuse it's too broad to be useful. The vast majority of naturals I know are either 4a, 4b, or the general 4a/b. Is a classification really helpful when most people fit into two categories? Some of the best advice I've received has been from people with 3-something hair, such as CurlyNikki and Richeau. The categories also so vague that it's hard to figure out what you are. I still don't know if my small, pencil-spring size coils are 4a or 4b (because depending on the website it might be either), but I no longer care.
Curl/coil size is only one variable in determining your hair needs, and arguably the least important variable, and by focusing solely on that, it completely misleads natural newbies who are trying to figure out their hair needs and causes them to focus on something that isn't especially important in the grand scheme of things. After frequenting several different hair boards, I find that the most popular products are popular with a variety of hair types and stuff like porosity, fine vs coarse, thick vs thin and protein sensitivity are the most important variables in what products will work for you, as well as how you wear your hair (protective styles lasting a week or two? daily cowashing and wash and gos? etc). Imo, hair type is more like foot shape. It plays a part in determining whether a pair of shoes will fit, but clearly not as important as shoe size.
The products themselves don't come with the 2-3-4 or a-b-c labels. At least not that I'm aware of, but--the labels do mention dry, flat, thin, coarse hair etc.
Someone might post that their curl type-especially if there's no photo. They might describe their hair using the classification, along with the porosity and note the thickness/or thinness of strands. Mind you, ALL the info on their hair--not just curl circumference. Someone else (who has similar hair) might read that post and want to try products that worked well for that person. Of course, this is far from foolproof because no two heads of hair are identical. Hair that basically looks or feels the same might not always react the same. But I still believe the odds are better that a person with thick, tightly curled hair will do better with a conditioner that works for another person with thick,tightly curled hair than with a runny/watery conditioner that works well for a person with super thin/fine strands and looser curl or straight hair.
I really do not get why it is so hard for some people to grasp (or believe) that hair description or finding someone who appears to be a "hair twin" can be helpful tool when sorting through the massive avalanche of products available out there.
I probably wouldn't experiment with products that work for Alicia Keyes, but I might try products that work for Macy Gray. If I hadn't seen photos of Alicia or Macy I'd really appreciate both of them describing their hair for me before I took their recommendations. It's as simple as that--at least it is for me. Can't speak for the other curl typers or their motives.
Post a Comment
If you haven't subscribed to Natural Hair...Natural Products yet, nows a GREAT time to! After you submit your comment be sure to subscribe! Peace