Tag Archives: kinky hair

Good Hair Vs Bad Hair

The conversation around “good hair” and “bad hair” has long been a source of tension, pride, and pain within the Black community. The term “good hair” often refers to straighter, silkier textures associated with European standards of beauty, while “bad hair” is used to describe tightly coiled, kinky textures often associated with African heritage. But what does the Bible say about hair, and how can we reclaim a healthy, godly perspective?

The Bible affirms that all hair is good because it is created by God. Matthew 10:30 (KJV) declares, “But the very hairs of your head are all numbered.” This scripture shows the Most High’s care and intentionality regarding hair. There is no biblical basis for labeling one texture as superior to another. Instead, hair is seen as a natural part of God’s design, a symbol of identity, and, in many cases, a spiritual covering (1 Corinthians 11:15, KJV).

All photographs are the property of their respective owners. No copyright infringement intended.

The notion of “bad hair” largely stems from the legacy of slavery and colonialism. During slavery in America, Africans’ natural hair was often ridiculed and seen as “wild” or “unkempt” by European enslavers. This ridicule was strategic—it sought to strip enslaved Africans of pride in their natural appearance, to convince them that European features and styles were superior.

Psychologically, this produced internalized racism. Over time, many Black people began to associate straight hair with beauty, respectability, and even success. This association was reinforced in media, workplaces, and schools that penalized or banned natural hairstyles. Such systemic discrimination can lead to what scholars call “cultural trauma,” where a group learns to devalue aspects of its own identity.

The term “nappy” historically was used as a derogatory word. It mocked the tight coils and kinks of African hair, equating them with roughness or uncleanliness. The phrase “nappy-headed” became a slur that reinforced the idea that natural Black hair was undesirable. This is a psychological residue of enslavement that still impacts Black self-esteem today.

In truth, there is no such thing as “bad hair.” All hair grows according to the genetic blueprint given by God. Psalm 139:14 (KJV) reminds us, “I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.” The texture, thickness, and curl pattern of one’s hair is divinely designed, not a mistake.

The love-hate relationship with hair in the Black community also reveals a longing for acceptance. Many Black people invest heavily in hair products, wigs, and chemical treatments to conform to mainstream standards. This is not just vanity—it is often a survival mechanism in a society that discriminates based on appearance.

Hollywood, advertising, and fashion industries have historically promoted Eurocentric beauty ideals, making straight hair the default standard of attractiveness. This has led to generations of Black children growing up believing that their natural hair was unprofessional or unattractive unless it was altered.

The Bible warns against adopting the world’s standard of beauty. 1 Samuel 16:7 (KJV) says, “For man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart.” God is not concerned with whether hair is curly, straight, or coiled—He is concerned with the condition of our spirit.

Hair is also deeply symbolic in the Bible. Samson’s hair represented his covenant with God (Judges 16:17, KJV). The Nazarites were instructed not to cut their hair as a sign of consecration (Numbers 6:5, KJV). These examples remind us that hair has spiritual meaning, but no texture or style makes one holier than another.

Solutions to the “good hair” vs. “bad hair” divide must begin with education and affirmation. Parents can teach children from an early age to embrace their natural hair textures, using affirmations and showing them examples of beauty that look like them. Representation matters.

The natural hair movement has been one powerful response to centuries of hair-shaming. By wearing afros, locs, braids, and twists proudly, Black people reclaim their heritage and reject the lie that straight hair is superior. This movement echoes Romans 12:2 (KJV): “And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind.”

Workplaces and schools must also be challenged. Laws like the CROWN Act, which bans hair discrimination, are steps toward justice. Discrimination against natural hair is not merely a fashion issue—it is a civil rights issue rooted in systemic racism.

Spiritually, the solution also involves repentance and deliverance from self-hatred. Generational trauma and the colonial mindset must be broken. Believers can pray for a renewed mind and ask God to restore confidence in His design.

Men must also be part of this conversation. In many cases, Black men have been conditioned to prefer straight hair on women, reinforcing Eurocentric standards. Re-educating men about the beauty and versatility of natural hair is part of community healing.

Media creators and influencers have a responsibility to showcase diverse hair textures positively. When children see actresses, news anchors, and professionals wearing natural styles proudly, it normalizes their beauty. This can shift psychological perceptions over time.

The church can play a role by teaching that hair should not be a source of pride, shame, or division. James 2:1-4 (KJV) warns against showing partiality based on outward appearance. The body of Christ should be the first place where people of all textures feel celebrated.

Healing the Next Generation

The conversation around hair identity must address its impact on children, because early experiences with hair-shaming or affirmation often shape a child’s self-image for life. Developmental psychology teaches that children form a sense of self-worth between ages 3 and 7. If a child repeatedly hears that their hair is “nappy,” “ugly,” or “unprofessional,” those words can leave a deep emotional wound that lasts into adulthood.

Hair bullying is a real issue. In many schools, Black children have been suspended or sent home for wearing braids, locs, or afros—styles that are natural and culturally significant. These incidents teach children that who they are is unacceptable unless they conform to Eurocentric beauty standards. This form of discrimination not only harms self-esteem but also creates anxiety and shame.

From a psychological standpoint, children who internalize negative messages about their hair often struggle with identity development. They may wish they looked different, leading to feelings of inadequacy. Erik Erikson’s theory of psychosocial development identifies this as an “identity vs. role confusion” stage—when children are trying to discover who they are, acceptance plays a critical role.

Biblically, this issue is critical because self-hatred contradicts God’s design. Psalm 8:5 (KJV) declares, “For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.” Every child is made in God’s image (Genesis 1:27, KJV) and should be celebrated as such. Teaching children to love their hair is teaching them to love God’s creation.

Parents play the most important role in reversing the harm of “good hair vs. bad hair” conditioning. Affirmations like “Your hair is beautiful just the way God made it” can help children internalize positive messages. Taking time to gently care for and style their hair with love turns grooming into a time of bonding and affirmation.

Representation in books, toys, and media is also crucial. When children see dolls, superheroes, and princesses with afros, braids, and coils, they learn that beauty comes in many forms. Christian parents can incorporate Bible lessons on diversity and God’s intentional creation to reinforce this truth.

People must create spaces where natural beauty is affirmed rather than criticized. Sadly, some church cultures have pressured women and girls to straighten their hair to look “presentable” for service. Instead, churches should teach that modesty and holiness are about the heart (1 Peter 3:3-4, KJV), not about imitating European hairstyles.

Schools need cultural sensitivity training to prevent hair discrimination. The CROWN Act (Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair) is now law in several U.S. states and should be advocated for everywhere. This legislation protects children from unfair discipline or exclusion based on hair.

Psychologists recommend early intervention when children experience hair-based bullying. Parents should validate the child’s feelings, teach coping strategies, and involve teachers if necessary. Healing from these experiences prevents long-term damage to self-esteem.

Mentorship programs can also make a difference. When children see older peers or adults proudly rocking natural hair, they have role models to look up to. This helps normalize natural hair and removes the stigma.

Hair care education is another solution. Many parents and teachers simply do not know how to care for natural hair, which can lead to frustration or neglect. Workshops on proper styling, maintenance, and products empower families to care for their hair healthily.

From a community perspective, celebrating natural hair through events like hair shows, heritage days, or social media campaigns can build pride. These events allow children to see that their hair is not just normal—it is special and worth celebrating.

Men and fathers have a special responsibility to speak life into their daughters. A father who compliments his daughter’s natural hair can shield her from seeking validation from harmful sources. Proverbs 18:21 (KJV) reminds us that “death and life are in the power of the tongue.”

Mental health support is also important. If a child’s self-esteem has been deeply harmed, counseling can help them rebuild a healthy self-image. Christian counseling can integrate biblical truths with therapeutic strategies to restore confidence.

The natural hair conversation should also extend to young boys. Boys with locs or afros have been stereotyped as “unprofessional” or even “criminal.” Parents must teach their sons that their hair is not a marker of delinquency but of heritage, creativity, and pride.

Psychologically, embracing natural hair is part of decolonizing the mind. It is a way of rejecting oppressive beauty standards and embracing cultural authenticity. Romans 12:2 (KJV) calls us to “be transformed by the renewing of your mind.” Renewing the mind means unlearning lies that say Blackness must be hidden or altered to be acceptable.

Education on African history is also a solution. When children learn about ancient African civilizations—Egypt, Kush, Mali—and their rich culture, they develop pride in their heritage. This context reframes hair as part of a royal, powerful legacy rather than something to be ashamed of.

Finally, prayer and community support are vital. Families can pray over their children’s self-esteem and ask God to protect them from the spirit of rejection. James 5:16 (KJV) promises that “the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.” Community support groups can also provide encouragement and resources for families committed to embracing natural beauty.

In conclusion, healing the next generation from the trauma of “good hair vs. bad hair” is not just a beauty issue—it is a spiritual and cultural mission. By affirming children early, reforming schools and churches, and providing mentorship and representation, we can raise a generation that celebrates what God has given them. When we teach children that all hair is good hair, we teach them that they themselves are good—fearfully and wonderfully made.

Ultimately, the conversation about “good hair” vs. “bad hair” is about much more than hair. It is about freedom—freedom from colonial thinking, from internalized racism, and from societal pressure to conform. True freedom comes from knowing who you are in Christ and embracing every part of your God-given identity.

In conclusion, all hair is good hair. It is numbered by God, designed with purpose, and worthy of care and respect. The challenge before us is to uproot the lies of slavery, colonization, and white supremacy that taught generations of Black people to hate what God made. Only then can we walk fully in the truth that we are fearfully and wonderfully made—kinks, curls, coils, and all.

Good Hair? YES


References

  • Banks, I. (2000). Hair Matters: Beauty, Power, and Black Women’s Consciousness. NYU Press.
  • Byrd, A., & Tharps, L. (2014). Hair Story: Untangling the Roots of Black Hair in America. St. Martin’s Griffin.
  • hooks, b. (1992). Black Looks: Race and Representation. South End Press.
  • DeGruy, J. (2005). Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome. Joy DeGruy Publications.

Key KJV Scriptures: Matthew 10:30; 1 Corinthians 11:15; Psalm 139:14; 1 Samuel 16:7; Judges 16:17; Numbers 6:5; Romans 12:2; James 2:1-4.

Hair Politics: Natural vs. Relaxed Hair in Professional Spaces.

This photograph is the property of its respective owner. No copyright infringement intended.

Hair has always carried meaning far beyond aesthetics—it reflects identity, history, politics, and even survival. For Black women, the politics of hair have long been tied to standards of beauty, professionalism, and self-worth. The debate between natural and relaxed hair is not simply cosmetic but deeply rooted in cultural history, racial oppression, and personal empowerment.


The Politics of Professionalism: Why Straight Hair Still Rules Corporate America

Employers in professional spaces often view straight hair as “neat,” “polished,” and “professional,” while Black kinky or coily hair is stereotyped as “unruly,” “unkept,” or “distracting” (Opie & Phillips, 2015). This bias is rooted in Eurocentric beauty standards that equate professionalism with whiteness. Because historically, straight hair aligns with the dominant white cultural norm, it is unconsciously perceived as the standard of acceptability.

Psychologically, this is linked to implicit bias—where people associate straight hair with competence, intelligence, and leadership, while natural Afro-textured hair triggers stereotypes of defiance or lack of refinement (Rosette & Dumas, 2007). Such perceptions are not about actual job performance but about conformity to white workplace culture.

Professionalism is not just about skill, education, or work ethic—it is often policed through appearance. For Black women, the workplace has historically imposed Eurocentric standards of beauty, particularly regarding hair. Employers frequently equate straight hair with professionalism, while natural kinky or coily textures are deemed “unruly,” “distracting,” or even “unprofessional.” This double standard has real consequences for Black women navigating corporate spaces.

The Legacy of Eurocentric Standards

The preference for straight hair in professional environments is rooted in colonial and Eurocentric ideals. Whiteness became the cultural baseline for what is considered polished, disciplined, and professional. Straight hair has long symbolized assimilation into white norms, whereas natural Afro-textured hair is often stigmatized as resistant or defiant. This has less to do with workplace performance and more to do with conformity to dominant cultural values.

Psychology and Bias

Psychological studies reveal how implicit bias shapes perceptions of hair. Research by Opie and Phillips (2015) shows that Black women with Afrocentric hairstyles (such as braids, Afros, or dreadlocks) are more likely to be rated as less professional, less competent, and less dominant compared to women with straightened hair. These evaluations are not objective assessments of skill, but rather cultural biases projected onto appearance. In essence, natural Black hair challenges white-centered notions of professionalism.

A Real-World Example: The Case of Chastity Jones

One of the most well-known workplace discrimination cases involving hair was Chastity Jones v. Catastrophe Management Solutions (2016). Jones, a Black woman, was offered a job at a call center but had her offer rescinded when she refused to cut her dreadlocks. The employer claimed that dreadlocks “tend to get messy,” despite the fact that her hair was neat and well-kept. Jones sued for racial discrimination, but the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the employer, stating that hairstyle is not an “immutable characteristic” like race itself, and therefore not legally protected under Title VII. This case highlights how Black women’s natural hair continues to be penalized in ways straight hair never is.

The Emotional and Professional Toll

This bias creates psychological burdens for Black women who feel pressured to chemically relax, straighten, or otherwise alter their hair to fit workplace expectations. The choice is not simply aesthetic—it becomes a question of employability, respect, and economic survival. Constantly managing one’s hair to avoid discrimination can lead to stress, anxiety, and a diminished sense of authenticity. It also forces many Black women to choose between professional advancement and cultural self-expression.

The Rise of Natural Hair Movements

Despite this discrimination, movements like the Natural Hair Movement and campaigns such as #BlackGirlMagic and #CROWNAct have gained momentum. The CROWN Act (Create a Respectful and Open Workplace for Natural Hair) seeks to legally ban hair-based discrimination, affirming that Black hair in its natural state—braids, locs, twists, Afros—should be respected as professional. States like California, New York, and New Jersey have already passed the CROWN Act, with efforts expanding nationally.

The Science of Hair and Health Risks

Beyond social pressure, many relaxers and chemical straighteners carry health risks. Studies link long-term relaxer use to uterine fibroids, early puberty, and even increased cancer risk (Wise et al., 2012; Rosenberg et al., 2022). Straight hair may align with workplace expectations, but at the cost of Black women’s health. Natural kinky hair, on the other hand, is structurally stronger, better at retaining moisture, and scientifically designed to protect the scalp from the sun. What employers deem “unprofessional” is biologically one of the healthiest hair types.

The History of Hair Relaxers

Chemical hair relaxers first appeared in the early 20th century, pioneered by Madam C.J. Walker and other entrepreneurs who created products marketed to straighten Black hair for easier manageability and social acceptance (Bundles, 2001). By the mid-1900s, relaxers had become normalized, especially during the Civil Rights era when assimilation into white-dominated professional spaces was often tied to straightened hair. However, the rise of the natural hair movement in the 1960s and 1970s reintroduced Afrocentric pride, with natural hair symbolizing resistance and authenticity.

Relaxers use harsh chemicals such as sodium hydroxide, guanidine hydroxide, or ammonium thioglycolate to break down protein bonds in the hair shaft, permanently altering curl patterns (Robinson, 2011). Studies have shown that prolonged relaxer use can lead to scalp burns, hair thinning, breakage, and alopecia (Nkwocha, 2018). More concerning are the potential health risks: research suggests a correlation between chemical relaxer use and higher risks of fibroids, reproductive health issues, and even certain cancers (Wise et al., 2012). This raises the question of whether beauty should come at the expense of health.

The Love for Straight Hair and Its History

Many Black women’s affinity for straight hair is rooted in centuries of Eurocentric beauty ideals imposed during slavery and colonialism. Straight hair was historically associated with whiteness, cleanliness, and professionalism, while kinky or coily textures were stigmatized as “unkempt” or “inferior” (Patton, 2006). Assimilation into mainstream culture often meant altering one’s natural texture to access opportunities and avoid discrimination. Thus, the preference for straight hair is less about beauty alone and more about survival and acceptance in systems of white supremacy.

Why Natural Hair is Better

Natural hair carries cultural, spiritual, and health advantages. It allows the scalp and strands to thrive without chemical damage, preserving thickness and elasticity. It also honors heritage and affirms identity, serving as a visual declaration of authenticity and self-love. From a health perspective, embracing natural hair reduces exposure to toxic chemicals, supporting overall well-being (Byrd & Tharps, 2014).

The Science of Kinky Hair

Kinky and coily hair is structurally different from straight or wavy hair. Research shows that the elliptical shape of the hair follicle creates tight curls, which are more prone to dryness since natural oils have difficulty traveling down the shaft (Tate, 2009). While this fragility requires special care, it also provides unique styling versatility and natural volume unmatched by other hair types. Rather than being seen as “difficult,” kinky hair is scientifically a crown of complexity and resilience.

Biblical Reflections on Hair

The Bible references hair as a symbol of glory, strength, and consecration. “But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering” (1 Corinthians 11:15, KJV). While the Bible does not specify texture, it underscores hair as a natural gift from God. Altering it for societal acceptance raises questions about identity and divine intention. Thus, natural hair can be embraced as a reflection of God’s design rather than something to be suppressed.

The Psychology of Black Hair

Hair is central to self-concept and cultural belonging. For Black women, hair-related stress is well documented, with many experiencing “hair anxiety” in professional settings due to bias (Opie & Phillips, 2015). Psychologically, choosing natural hair often leads to greater self-acceptance and reduced internalized racism, while reliance on relaxers may be tied to conformity and fear of rejection. Hair, then, becomes both a personal and political battlefield, influencing mental health and identity formation.

Conclusion: Hair as Liberation

Ultimately, the debate between natural and relaxed hair is about more than style; it is about health, freedom, and authenticity. Natural hair resists centuries of oppression, honors cultural heritage, and prioritizes well-being. While each woman has the autonomy to choose, the growing embrace of natural textures in professional spaces signals a shift toward liberation. The politics of hair remind us that Black beauty is not something to be corrected—it is something to be celebrated. The real question is not whether natural Black hair is professional—it always has been—but rather why workplaces continue to uphold Eurocentric standards as the benchmark. By associating straight hair with competence, corporate America perpetuates racial inequality under the guise of professionalism. A shift toward inclusivity means challenging these assumptions and affirming that professionalism is about skills, not conformity to white aesthetics.


References

  • Bundles, A. L. (2001). On Her Own Ground: The Life and Times of Madam C.J. Walker. Scribner.
  • Byrd, A., & Tharps, L. (2014). Hair Story: Untangling the Roots of Black Hair in America. St. Martin’s Press.
  • Nkwocha, I. (2018). The harmful effects of hair relaxers: A health review. Journal of Public Health and Epidemiology, 10(3), 99–106.
  • Opie, T., & Phillips, K. W. (2015). Hair penalties: The negative influence of Afrocentric hair on ratings of Black women’s dominance and professionalism. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1311.
  • Patton, T. O. (2006). Hey girl, am I more than my hair? African American women and their struggles with beauty, body image, and hair. NWSA Journal, 18(2), 24–51.
  • Robinson, C. (2011). Hair Loss Disorders in Ethnic Populations. Springer.
  • Tate, S. A. (2009). Black Beauty: Aesthetics, Stylization, Politics. Ashgate.
  • Wise, L. A., Palmer, J. R., Reich, D., & Rosenberg, L. (2012). Hair relaxer use and risk of uterine leiomyomata in African-American women. American Journal of Epidemiology, 175(5), 432–440.

EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 852 F.3d 1018 (11th Cir. 2016).

Opie, T., & Phillips, K. W. (2015). Hair penalties: The negative influence of Afrocentric hair on ratings of Black women’s dominance and professionalism. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1311.

Rosette, A. S., & Dumas, T. L. (2007). The hair dilemma: Conform to mainstream expectations or emphasize racial identity. Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy, 14(1), 407–421.

Hair, Politics, and Respectability: The Crown We Never Asked For

Hair has never been “just hair” for Black people. In societies shaped by colonialism and racism, Black hair—especially its natural textures—has been politicized, stigmatized, and controlled. The title Hair, Politics, and Respectability: The Crown We Never Asked For captures this tension: while hair is a natural inheritance, it has become a symbol of identity, resistance, and discrimination. From biblical reflections to modern psychology, the struggle over Black hair reveals both the resilience of a people and the weight of systemic oppression.


Hair and Politics: Why Texture Became a Battleground

During slavery, Black hair was ridiculed as “woolly,” “unkempt,” or “inferior” compared to European textures. Enslaved women were often forced to cover their hair with scarves, stripping them of cultural expression. In the twentieth century, straightening became associated with “respectability,” as Eurocentric beauty standards were used to determine professionalism, employability, and social acceptance (Byrd & Tharps, 2014). Hair became political because it signified whether one conformed to dominant norms or resisted them.

Even today, workplace and school policies ban natural styles such as locs, afros, and braids, framing them as “unprofessional.” This reveals how deeply Eurocentric aesthetics are embedded in institutional power structures. Black hair is not bad—it is the perception of it, shaped by systemic racism, that weaponizes it against Black people.


Media Examples of Hair Discrimination

  • Gabrielle Union (2019): The actress revealed that she was criticized on America’s Got Talent for her hairstyles being “too Black” for mainstream audiences.
  • Zendaya (2015): At the Oscars, a TV host insulted her locs, suggesting they made her smell like “weed or patchouli oil,” perpetuating stereotypes about natural Black hair.
  • Ayanna Pressley (2020): The U.S. Congresswoman openly discussed the politics of her hair after revealing her alopecia, highlighting the burden Black women face regarding appearance.
  • Students Nationwide: Numerous cases have emerged of Black children suspended or excluded from schools for wearing natural hairstyles—demonstrating how hair policing begins in childhood.

These examples show that hair is treated not as personal expression but as a battleground of social acceptance.


Why Is Black Hair Considered “Bad”?

  1. Colonial Legacies: European colonizers ranked African features as inferior to justify slavery and subjugation. Hair texture became part of this false hierarchy.
  2. Respectability Politics: Within Black communities, straightened hair was sometimes encouraged as a survival strategy, signaling assimilation to reduce discrimination.
  3. Media Reinforcement: Advertisements and entertainment long centered straight hair as the default “beautiful,” erasing the diversity of Black textures.
  4. Psychological Control: By stigmatizing natural hair, systems of power sought to strip Black people of cultural pride and self-love.

Psychological Dimensions of Hair Politics

Hair discrimination carries profound psychological effects. Research shows that Black women who feel pressure to conform to Eurocentric hairstyles report higher stress levels, body image struggles, and identity conflict (Robinson, 2011). Natural hair movements—such as the resurgence of afros in the 1970s and the current embrace of locs, twists, and braids—function as acts of resistance and self-acceptance. For Black children, representation is vital: being punished for natural hair fosters shame and internalized racism, while affirmation builds resilience and pride.


Biblical Reflections on Hair and Identity

The Bible addresses hair as both symbolic and spiritual.

  • Glory and Crown: “But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering” (1 Corinthians 11:15, KJV). Here, Paul acknowledges hair as a natural crown of dignity.
  • Consecration: In Numbers 6:5, Nazirites such as Samson were commanded not to cut their hair as a sign of holiness and covenant with God. This shows that hair was more than appearance—it was identity and consecration.
  • Diversity in Creation: Scripture affirms that humanity is “fearfully and wonderfully made” (Psalm 139:14). Black hair textures, in all their variety, are part of God’s intentional design, not a flaw.

These biblical insights reject the notion that natural hair is “bad.” Instead, hair is a crown—sometimes even a sacred symbol of identity and strength.


Toward Liberation: Reclaiming the Crown

To break free from the burden of hair politics, society must dismantle Eurocentric beauty hierarchies and embrace inclusivity. Policies such as the CROWN Act (Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair) in the U.S. represent legal recognition of this struggle. On a personal and cultural level, embracing natural hair affirms resilience: a refusal to bow to imposed norms. For Black women and men, reclaiming their hair is reclaiming their God-given identity, their psychological well-being, and their cultural pride.


Conclusion

Hair, Politics, and Respectability: The Crown We Never Asked For underscores that Black hair has been politicized against its wearers, weaponized as a marker of inferiority. Yet, both psychology and scripture affirm that Black hair is beautiful, intentional, and sacred. It is not a flaw to be corrected but a crown to be celebrated. In embracing their natural hair, Black people reject imposed shame and walk boldly in resilience, dignity, and divine purpose.


References

  • Byrd, A., & Tharps, L. L. (2014). Hair story: Untangling the roots of Black hair in America. St. Martin’s Press.
  • Robinson, C. (2011). Hair as race: Why “good hair” may be bad for Black females. Howard Journal of Communications, 22(4), 358–376.
  • The Holy Bible, King James Version.