paintedlady said:

formallypickles said:

can we stop this madness get to the matter at hand please which is black hair

Now Ace, here is some videos with different natural hair regimens.

Now everyone is different there is no one way to take care of your hair but when i first went natural this videos are VERY VERY helpful..I had no clue how to take care of natural hair..

contrary to popular believe some black women dont know how to take care of their natural hair properly becuase they have relaxed it for so long..so transitioning is hard

[Edited 4/10/11 16:59pm]

Actually, hairdressers in the black community need $$$ so they mislead their clients with snake oil tactics and sell naive customers into trying products and services that is actually bad for their hair.

So with all the bad info being presented as good info the confusion happens.

I know hair dressers that actually have some of their clients believing that black hair can not grow or look full with out a weave. That their natural hair will never look smooth without heavy processes and extremities of heat.

OH!!! Fullness is a quality all women ( regardless of race) want in their head of hair, many black women lack body and fullness once the natural nap of their hair is straightened. Since nappy hair is usually fine in texture, the hair (even if it grows out densly) will wear flat against the head. Especially if it is weighed down by heavy styling products... so these dubious hair stylists sell the idea that these women NEED hair weaves to make more money off of them.

Its a damn shame too, so when women go to natural... the stylist will point them to products that will do NOTHING for their hair, so the client will go back to the expensive weaves/braids and other services.

More salons are "hair care" salons, but this comes at the expense of losing profit because of it. So most salons mislead clients on purpose.

there are many natural hair salons and hair stylist that do natural hair

i go to one its called Too Groovy

http://www.toogroovy.net/

paintedlady said:

lavender1983 said:

^^^ Very true paintedlady......Like I said before my sister is natural and youtube has helped her immensely. The videos are so informative. I wish we had more salons that catered to natural sisters...at least where I live.... to help other women who may want to transition but don't know where to start. It can be very daunting.

But I have to say i'm seeing more and more natural sisters rocking their naps beautifully and its a wonderful thing.

It sure is

I am glad more businesses are accepting black women wearing their hair naturally also. Many women would be turned down for jobs over the way they wore their hair.

Im really not trying to be ignorant, but seriously women have lost jobs over their hair?? How do you know this? That is some INSANE stuff Im not doubting you, im just dumbfounded that something like that has happened? Recently, or back in the day?

Ace said:

2elijah said:

Actually the poster getitng "tired" thinking about women of African descent getting various things done to their hair, actually makes no sense, because when it comes down to it, to be honest, he should feel that way about all women who choose to go outside of their "natural" 'dos, and get various processes done to their hair. That includes everything from wearing their hair natural, to perms, hair coloring, flat-iron, hot-comb pressing, blow drying, wash and set, curly perms, etc. Those processes or haircare techniques, are not isolated among Black women. It's just particularly strange that he singled out women of African descent, when it's women from all race/ethnic groups, that use various techniquest for haircare, and the fact that no two women have the same hair texture.

Hi, 2elijah. Thank you for your thoughtful post.

I spend a lot of time in a neighborhood that has a large African-American population. A lot of the African-American women I see have either a wig, a weave or relaxed hair. African-American friends of mine tell me this is the norm, so I was curious to put the question to a larger group.

I do know that a lot of women (and some men, for that matter), of all races, put a shitload of work into their hair. I guess, for whatever reason, I just saw relaxing and applying/removing lace-fronts (in particular) as being very arduous. Now, of course I know that there are women of other races who wear lace-fronts, but - again - based on my own observation and what I'm told by friends (one of whom is a hairdresser), it seemed like it was just a much more popular thing in the African-American community.

Again, my intention (as it was with my 'Ladies, how the hell can you wear those heels?' thread), was to say, 'Why go through all that?', as well as 'Natural hair is beautiful'. So, what was designed to say, 'You don't have to "suffer" to be beautiful', was misinterpreted by some as a baiting and divisive post.

I am truly sorry that some were upset by this. I'll know in the future to tread more carefully.

In the words of a man who I think asked a question we should all ask more often, "Can we all get along?".

Sincerely,

Ace

Thanks for your response, I appreciate that. I do believe some of the responses you received, that you may have felt was not what you expected, did not come from a bad place. I cannot speak for the women who expressed their honest/true feelings that way, but I can understand why they responded in that manner. Too long to explain, but I guess, because Black women, more than any other group, are constantly put on society's "examining table" where they are constantly questioned from their personalities, skin tones, hair textures, lifestyles, opinions, etc. the list goes on. So I guess it got to a point, where you could have been anyone from a non-black group asking that question, and they would have received a variety of responses.

I'm sure most Black women are aware that in order to learn about various aspects of our culture, you have to ask questions right? So I don't think there's a misunderstanding there. I think some of the reactions here, was due to the many threads that have appeared on this site, where inquiries, disrespectful, negative, and stereotypical questions, comments, mockery, etc., have been made towards Black women in general. You don't really see this happening on this site regarding other women, on the same level.

Funny thing that in P&R many tried to create threads regarding black culture, to educate others here about specific segments of the culture as a whole. What better way to take a chance and do that right? Well, that wasn't always embraced, but often was met with disrespect and dismissiveness, from a few. But that's another topic.

Anyway, as far as the hair techniques Black women use, it is a personal choice, not the same techniques used by every, Black woman, and never be fooled that just because in one community of Black women, who you see wearing weaves, does not mean they don't have hair or they are trying to achieve a "European" look. I think that's where the assumptions come in from others about them. Many Black women wear their natural hair, not every Black woman wears a weave/wig, that's a fallacy. Their choices to wearing a weave/wig, varies, and is an individual choice, not a requirement. That's basically it. Also, as I stated in another post, that the haircare techniques Black women use, are really no different than the process other women go through. Not much different really, they all just have different hair textures.

I hope some of this info has helped with your inquiry.

tinaz said:

paintedlady said:

It sure is

I am glad more businesses are accepting black women wearing their hair naturally also. Many women would be turned down for jobs over the way they wore their hair.

Im really not trying to be ignorant, but seriously women have lost jobs over their hair?? How do you know this? That is some INSANE stuff Im not doubting you, im just dumbfounded that something like that has happened? Recently, or back in the day?

Yes, it's true. Often times, if worn in an Afro/braids, back in the day, they were passed over for jobs, which is why many Black women resulted in straightening their hair for the interview, and once they received the job, many went back to their more ethnically, natural hairdo of choice. Even when some did that, they were fired. Back in the 80s, many sued for being told they couldn't wear their hair braided. Today, though it's a lot more accepted at many places of employment.

formallypickles said:

can we stop this madness get to the matter at hand please which is black hair

Now Ace, here is some videos with different natural hair regimens.

Now everyone is different there is no one way to take care of your hair but when i first went natural this videos are VERY VERY helpful..I had no clue how to take care of natural hair..

contrary to popular believe some black women dont know how to take care of their natural hair properly becuase they have relaxed it for so long..so transitioning is hard

she has more videos, hers help me out alot

[Edited 4/10/11 16:59pm]

Wow, thanks for those vids. I'm going to look into that.

tinaz said:

paintedlady said:

It sure is

I am glad more businesses are accepting black women wearing their hair naturally also. Many women would be turned down for jobs over the way they wore their hair.

Im really not trying to be ignorant, but seriously women have lost jobs over their hair?? How do you know this? That is some INSANE stuff Im not doubting you, im just dumbfounded that something like that has happened? Recently, or back in the day?

Many industries are notorious for just that.

They call it being "polished"

things are getting better of course, but many people were not hiring black women if they wear natural styles. So many women were sorta forced to get into wearing their hair in straighter styles by pressing or chemically relaxing their hair.

Now like I said things are different, things are better, but you will find salons, retail stores, and banks that will not hire a woman unless she looks "polished" and the professional look requires most women to relax their hair if their dreadlocs are all frizzy.

The same thing holds true for extreme looks, but get this... in many places, a natural afro would be considered "extreme", and unprofessional. This is why many women shlep to the salons and dish out the dough.

I also think this is why "afro" hair styles are not the thing to wear now.... especially since the creme relaxers can make a sista's hair so silky.

Heck many women do wear low-cut buzz cuts and afros and look so sleek IMO, but many people consider that extreme also.

I live in the north east... these looks are fashion forward in larger cities like New York City and NJ... but in Boston? we are still too "Puritan" and traditional to let women in who are trying to climb the ladder of sucess rock those looks. They tend to still get resistence or are not taken as seriously as their male caucasian counter parts.

But things are changing for the better, with the bevvy of information on the internet and more salons catering to natural styles. Thank Goodness!

there are many natural hair salons and hair stylist that do natural hair

i go to one its called Too Groovy

http://www.toogroovy.net/

Yes, I know... but this is a relatively new trend in salons in comparison to the fry-n-dye salons that have become a staple in the black community.

I think also the wave of South African immigrants with wonderful business mottos helped to propel this much needed trend in business.

paintedlady said:

tinaz said:

Im really not trying to be ignorant, but seriously women have lost jobs over their hair?? How do you know this? That is some INSANE stuff Im not doubting you, im just dumbfounded that something like that has happened? Recently, or back in the day?

Many industries are notorious for just that.

They call it being "polished"

things are getting better of course, but many people were not hiring black women if they wear natural styles. So many women were sorta forced to get into wearing their hair in straighter styles by pressing or chemically relaxing their hair.

Now like I said things are different, things are better, but you will find salons, retail stores, and banks that will not hire a woman unless she looks "polished" and the professional look requires most women to relax their hair if their dreadlocs are all frizzy.

The same thing holds true for extreme looks, but get this... in many places, a natural afro would be considered "extreme", and unprofessional. This is why many women shlep to the salons and dish out the dough.

I also think this is why "afro" hair styles are not the thing to wear now.... especially since the creme relaxers can make a sista's hair so silky.

Heck many women do wear low-cut buzz cuts and afros and look so sleek IMO, but many people consider that extreme also.

I live in the north east... these looks are fashion forward in larger cities like New York City and NJ... but in Boston? we are still too "Puritan" and traditional to let women in who are trying to climb the ladder of sucess rock those looks. They tend to still get resistence or are not taken as seriously as their male caucasian counter parts.

But things are changing for the better, with the bevvy of information on the internet and more salons catering to natural styles. Thank Goodness!

I get the whole 'polished' thing, as in being presentable and neat. It suggests a person has their shit together. It suggests a whole bunch of things, I guess, which are all positive. It's the definition of what's presentable and neat though. We're not talking about coming to an interview with dirty, creased clothes and smelly hair, but something that makes people uncomfortable for some reason or has a negative connotation to it that's basically groundless.

I got a teaching job and my boss (not the principal of the school, but of the company I worked for who arranged my working there) took me on a tour of the school. He told me that, of course, I'd need to shave my beard. On one level I thought it was absurd. If I wanted to have a beard I could have a beard. On another level, this was a school for rich, spoiled kids, and this was basically the service industry. My boss was simply echoing the feelings shared no doubt by many of the kids' parents, that beards were scruffy and not professional looking. That's a common view here in Thailand, and those parents were paying hefty sums to the school, so for him it was important to give the customers what they want, plain and simple.

I kept my beard though.

Fauxie said:

I get the whole 'polished' thing, as in being presentable and neat. It suggests a person has their shit together. It suggests a whole bunch of things, I guess, which are all positive. It's the definition of what's presentable and neat though. We're not talking about coming to an interview with dirty, creased clothes and smelly hair, but something that makes people uncomfortable for some reason or has a negative connotation to it that's basically groundless.

I got a teaching job and my boss (not the principal of the school, but of the company I worked for who arranged my working there) took me on a tour of the school. He told me that, of course, I'd need to shave my beard. On one level I thought it was absurd. If I wanted to have a beard I could have a beard. On another level, this was a school for rich, spoiled kids, and this was basically the service industry. My boss was simply echoing the feelings shared no doubt by many of the kids' parents, that beards were scruffy and not professional looking. That's a common view here in Thailand, and those parents were paying hefty sums to the school, so for him it was important to give the customers what they want, plain and simple.

I kept my beard though.

Your beard situation is not the same though...

if you didn't get hired because you were balding and were asked if you could get hairplugs to be considered for the job because your thinning hairline looked "unpolished" is a more accurate comparison.

You can't help your thinning hair line, its natural its how your hair grows out...

you washed it... combed it, trimmed it... but you are still bald

and "bald" is not professional, you can even wear a custom made super 140's cashmere blend wool suit paired with a beautiful silk woven tie, Italian twill Sea-island cotton shirt, gold cufflinks and polished oiled shoes and still be not be "polished" because of your hairline.

This is what businesses do to many women who wear their hair in its natural state. Many black women already knew how to look polished, but the nappy hair was simply not acceptable because they do not want a nappy-headed woman representing their company.

This doesn't happen much now because of organizations like the NAACP who fought for laws to protect women from this sort of discrimination, but it still happens here and there.

Hold Up Wait A Minute....

What I find interesting about this thread is this:

This thread began on the same date another thread entitled "Bully" appeard in Prince.Org Site Discussion nearly two hours earlier. (Its still there.)

The "Bully" thread initiated by a female orger charged Sags..(imago, WTF?) with constantly posting harassing comments on threads initiated by women, essentially stalking women's threads. (Later I post similar, specifically noting his tendancy to mock african american people, women in particular.) Also in the "Bully" thread the original poster, myself and one other orger request that moderators eliminate Sags' multiple alternate screen names.

"Coincidentially" Ace shows up on the "Bully" thread to show his unwavering support to Sags. And goes so far as to dismiss any possible racist or discriminatory behavior shown by Sags.

Also, "coincidentally," Ace's new thread mocks african american women (It seems like so much work! I get tired just thinking about it) and makes assumptions about us and our hair, under the guise of being "curious".

Could Sags also be Ace? If not, they certainly have an alliance as was exhibited in the "Bully" thread.

Could this thread be retribution for identifying Sags as sexist and racist and demanding moderators eliminate the numerous alternate accounts he has?

Also interesting is the "black women" who show up on these threads always defending the offenders with "no clue" ~ I certainly question if in fact they are "black women".

Think about it, if you had multiple accounts, each account could be a different "character" ~ just because someone posts a picture on their profile doesn't mean that is who they actually are?

Now I know some women posted sincerely, most likely unaware of the game being played by Sags/Ace/WTF.

If I was inclined to have multiple accounts I could be a gay person, a straight person, a white person, a black person, an asian person, an african person, and on and on - none of you would know. However we do know that Sags has multiple accounts, why?

It is conceivable that someone (Sags...WTF), who has openly acknowledged, has "many" accounts, could and would initiate a thread and then "load" the thread with support, opposition, controversy, snarkyness, etc. I mean why else would someone have multiple accounts?

Now I know this sounds bizzare, but not really when you think about it.

I mean, the org and the world is full of "interesting" people...you might ask yourself what sort of person would do something like that....well.....a very troubled individual would.

For example, it reminds me of a post I read on a site (can't remember which one)--whereby someone posted about moving to another country and stalking children with the intent of having sex with them and then commented about it on the same public website, sick right? But it happens.

My last point is this. I believe this is/was a bait thread. I believe in response to orgers requesting moderators enforce the rules of this site and eliminate the multiple accounts held by one orger.

This thread was initiated to start a sh*t storm and to try to devalue black women as is the orignal poster(s) normal tendancy, under the innocent guise of seeking information.

Wake up! I don't know, maybe not. Just food for thought.

paintedlady said:

Fauxie said:

I get the whole 'polished' thing, as in being presentable and neat. It suggests a person has their shit together. It suggests a whole bunch of things, I guess, which are all positive. It's the definition of what's presentable and neat though. We're not talking about coming to an interview with dirty, creased clothes and smelly hair, but something that makes people uncomfortable for some reason or has a negative connotation to it that's basically groundless.

I got a teaching job and my boss (not the principal of the school, but of the company I worked for who arranged my working there) took me on a tour of the school. He told me that, of course, I'd need to shave my beard. On one level I thought it was absurd. If I wanted to have a beard I could have a beard. On another level, this was a school for rich, spoiled kids, and this was basically the service industry. My boss was simply echoing the feelings shared no doubt by many of the kids' parents, that beards were scruffy and not professional looking. That's a common view here in Thailand, and those parents were paying hefty sums to the school, so for him it was important to give the customers what they want, plain and simple.

I kept my beard though.

Your beard situation is not the same though...

if you didn't get hired because you were balding and were asked if you could get hairplugs to be considered for the job because your thinning hairline looked "unpolished" is a more accurate comparison.

You can't help your thinning hair line, its natural its how your hair grows out...

you washed it... combed it, trimmed it... but you are still bald

and "bald" is not professional, you can even wear a custom made super 140's cashmere blend wool suit paired with a beautiful silk woven tie, Italian twill Sea-island cotton shirt, gold cufflinks and polished oiled shoes and still be not be "polished" because of your hairline.

This is what businesses do to many women who wear their hair in its natural state. Many black women already knew how to look polished, but the nappy hair was simply not acceptable because they do not want a nappy-headed woman representing their company.

This doesn't happen much now because of organizations like the NAACP who fought for laws to protect women from this sort of discrimination, but it still happens here and there.

Yep, I wasn't saying it's exactly a like for like situation, was just talking about ppls' definition of what's professional or polished looking. There's nothing inherently unpolished or unprofessional about either a beard or the hair styles you spoke about, and as you said, you could be what's considered slick as all get out in every other way, and still some people would be put off about you overall.

tinaz said:

paintedlady said:

It sure is

I am glad more businesses are accepting black women wearing their hair naturally also. Many women would be turned down for jobs over the way they wore their hair.

Im really not trying to be ignorant, but seriously women have lost jobs over their hair?? How do you know this? That is some INSANE stuff Im not doubting you, im just dumbfounded that something like that has happened? Recently, or back in the day?

Tina...i work in civil rights law. Sadly the answer to your question is it happened back in the day, and it still happens. It happens so often that cases often no longer get press, because its nothing new and a lot of the cases settle to avoid press. You would be shocked at the shit that goes on in the most prestigious businesses. I recently had a case where the boss had a party at his home and told his one black employee (who was young) that he could come if he would be the lawnjockey. The black employee didn't even know what the hell a lawn jockey was. Another thing his boss told him was that his hair was like a velcro strip. A lot of shit happens even to black men about their hair.

sweething said:

Hold Up Wait A Minute....

What I find interesting about this thread is this:

This thread began on the same date another thread entitled "Bully" appeard in Prince.Org Site Discussion nearly two hours earlier. (Its still there.)

The "Bully" thread initiated by a female orger charged Sags..(imago, WTF?) with constantly posting harassing comments on threads initiated by women, essentially stalking women's threads. (Later I post similar, specifically noting his tendancy to mock african american people, women in particular.) Also in the "Bully" thread the original poster, myself and one other orger request that moderators eliminate Sags' multiple alternate screen names.

"Coincidentially" Ace shows up on the "Bully" thread to show his unwavering support to Sags. And goes so far as to dismiss any possible racist or discriminatory behavior shown by Sags.

Also, "coincidentally," Ace's new thread mocks african american women (It seems like so much work! I get tired just thinking about it) and makes assumptions about us and our hair, under the guise of being "curious".

Could Sags also be Ace? If not, they certainly have an alliance as was exhibited in the "Bully" thread.

Could this thread be retribution for identifying Sags as sexist and racist and demanding moderators eliminate the numerous alternate accounts he has?

Also interesting is the "black women" who show up on these threads always defending the offenders with "no clue" ~ I certainly question if in fact they are "black women".

Think about it, if you had multiple accounts, each account could be a different "character" ~ just because someone posts a picture on their profile doesn't mean that is who they actually are?

Now I know some women posted sincerely, most likely unaware of the game being played by Sags/Ace/WTF.

If I was inclined to have multiple accounts I could be a gay person, a straight person, a white person, a black person, an asian person, an african person, and on and on - none of you would know. However we do know that Sags has multiple accounts, why?

It is conceivable that someone (Sags...WTF), who has openly acknowledged, has "many" accounts, could and would initiate a thread and then "load" the thread with support, opposition, controversy, snarkyness, etc. I mean why else would someone have multiple accounts?

Now I know this sounds bizzare, but not really when you think about it.

I mean, the org and the world is full of "interesting" people...you might ask yourself what sort of person would do something like that....well.....a very troubled individual would.

For example, it reminds me of a post I read on a site (can't remember which one)--whereby someone posted about moving to another country and stalking children with the intent of having sex with them and then commented about it on the same public website, sick right? But it happens.

My last point is this. I believe this is/was a bait thread. I believe in response to orgers requesting moderators enforce the rules of this site and eliminate the multiple accounts held by one orger.

This thread was initiated to start a sh*t storm and to try to devalue black women as is the orignal poster(s) normal tendancy, under the innocent guise of seeking information.

Wake up! I don't know, maybe not. Just food for thought.

This is sheer lunacy.

sweething said:

Hold Up Wait A Minute....

What I find interesting about this thread is this:

This thread began on the same date another thread entitled "Bully" appeard in Prince.Org Site Discussion nearly two hours earlier. (Its still there.)

The "Bully" thread initiated by a female orger charged Sags..(imago, WTF?) with constantly posting harassing comments on threads initiated by women, essentially stalking women's threads. (Later I post similar, specifically noting his tendancy to mock african american people, women in particular.) Also in the "Bully" thread the original poster, myself and one other orger request that moderators eliminate Sags' multiple alternate screen names.

"Coincidentially" Ace shows up on the "Bully" thread to show his unwavering support to Sags. And goes so far as to dismiss any possible racist or discriminatory behavior shown by Sags.

Also, "coincidentally," Ace's new thread mocks african american women (It seems like so much work! I get tired just thinking about it) and makes assumptions about us and our hair, under the guise of being "curious".

Could Sags also be Ace? If not, they certainly have an alliance as was exhibited in the "Bully" thread.

Could this thread be retribution for identifying Sags as sexist and racist and demanding moderators eliminate the numerous alternate accounts he has?

Also interesting is the "black women" who show up on these threads always defending the offenders with "no clue" ~ I certainly question if in fact they are "black women".

Think about it, if you had multiple accounts, each account could be a different "character" ~ just because someone posts a picture on their profile doesn't mean that is who they actually are?

Now I know some women posted sincerely, most likely unaware of the game being played by Sags/Ace/WTF.

If I was inclined to have multiple accounts I could be a gay person, a straight person, a white person, a black person, an asian person, an african person, and on and on - none of you would know. However we do know that Sags has multiple accounts, why?

It is conceivable that someone (Sags...WTF), who has openly acknowledged, has "many" accounts, could and would initiate a thread and then "load" the thread with support, opposition, controversy, snarkyness, etc. I mean why else would someone have multiple accounts?

Now I know this sounds bizzare, but not really when you think about it.

I mean, the org and the world is full of "interesting" people...you might ask yourself what sort of person would do something like that....well.....a very troubled individual would.

For example, it reminds me of a post I read on a site (can't remember which one)--whereby someone posted about moving to another country and stalking children with the intent of having sex with them and then commented about it on the same public website, sick right? But it happens.

My last point is this. I believe this is/was a bait thread. I believe in response to orgers requesting moderators enforce the rules of this site and eliminate the multiple accounts held by one orger.

This thread was initiated to start a sh*t storm and to try to devalue black women as is the orignal poster(s) normal tendancy, under the innocent guise of seeking information.

Wake up! I don't know, maybe not. Just food for thought.

Dan you got a new name!!

.

[Edited 4/10/11 20:19pm]

paintedlady said:

Fauxie said:

I get the whole 'polished' thing, as in being presentable and neat. It suggests a person has their shit together. It suggests a whole bunch of things, I guess, which are all positive. It's the definition of what's presentable and neat though. We're not talking about coming to an interview with dirty, creased clothes and smelly hair, but something that makes people uncomfortable for some reason or has a negative connotation to it that's basically groundless.

I got a teaching job and my boss (not the principal of the school, but of the company I worked for who arranged my working there) took me on a tour of the school. He told me that, of course, I'd need to shave my beard. On one level I thought it was absurd. If I wanted to have a beard I could have a beard. On another level, this was a school for rich, spoiled kids, and this was basically the service industry. My boss was simply echoing the feelings shared no doubt by many of the kids' parents, that beards were scruffy and not professional looking. That's a common view here in Thailand, and those parents were paying hefty sums to the school, so for him it was important to give the customers what they want, plain and simple.

I kept my beard though.

Your beard situation is not the same though...

if you didn't get hired because you were balding and were asked if you could get hairplugs to be considered for the job because your thinning hairline looked "unpolished" is a more accurate comparison.

You can't help your thinning hair line, its natural its how your hair grows out...

you washed it... combed it, trimmed it... but you are still bald

and "bald" is not professional, you can even wear a custom made super 140's cashmere blend wool suit paired with a beautiful silk woven tie, Italian twill Sea-island cotton shirt, gold cufflinks and polished oiled shoes and still be not be "polished" because of your hairline.

This is what businesses do to many women who wear their hair in its natural state. Many black women already knew how to look polished, but the nappy hair was simply not acceptable because they do not want a nappy-headed woman representing their company.

This doesn't happen much now because of organizations like the NAACP who fought for laws to protect women from this sort of discrimination, but it still happens here and there.

Hon...you are wrong about this. The NAACP doesn't fight much anymore, in my opinion its more like a club unless there is an outrageous race issue that affects a large number of people. Many of the race lawsuits now are brought by brave private persons willing to risk their life savings to fight for basic human rights, and often the ACLU takes on cases of this nature as well. In my humble opinion, at least in the northeast, the NAACP has been virtually useless.

Fauxie said:

paintedlady said:

Many industries are notorious for just that.

They call it being "polished"

things are getting better of course, but many people were not hiring black women if they wear natural styles. So many women were sorta forced to get into wearing their hair in straighter styles by pressing or chemically relaxing their hair.

Now like I said things are different, things are better, but you will find salons, retail stores, and banks that will not hire a woman unless she looks "polished" and the professional look requires most women to relax their hair if their dreadlocs are all frizzy.

The same thing holds true for extreme looks, but get this... in many places, a natural afro would be considered "extreme", and unprofessional. This is why many women shlep to the salons and dish out the dough.

I also think this is why "afro" hair styles are not the thing to wear now.... especially since the creme relaxers can make a sista's hair so silky.

Heck many women do wear low-cut buzz cuts and afros and look so sleek IMO, but many people consider that extreme also.

I live in the north east... these looks are fashion forward in larger cities like New York City and NJ... but in Boston? we are still too "Puritan" and traditional to let women in who are trying to climb the ladder of sucess rock those looks. They tend to still get resistence or are not taken as seriously as their male caucasian counter parts.

But things are changing for the better, with the bevvy of information on the internet and more salons catering to natural styles. Thank Goodness!

I get the whole 'polished' thing, as in being presentable and neat. It suggests a person has their shit together. It suggests a whole bunch of things, I guess, which are all positive. It's the definition of what's presentable and neat though. We're not talking about coming to an interview with dirty, creased clothes and smelly hair, but something that makes people uncomfortable for some reason or has a negative connotation to it that's basically groundless.

I got a teaching job and my boss (not the principal of the school, but of the company I worked for who arranged my working there) took me on a tour of the school. He told me that, of course, I'd need to shave my beard. On one level I thought it was absurd. If I wanted to have a beard I could have a beard. On another level, this was a school for rich, spoiled kids, and this was basically the service industry. My boss was simply echoing the feelings shared no doubt by many of the kids' parents, that beards were scruffy and not professional looking. That's a common view here in Thailand, and those parents were paying hefty sums to the school, so for him it was important to give the customers what they want, plain and simple.

I kept my beard though.

the real issue with black men and the beard is that a LARGE percentage of black men will develop a skin condition known as Pseudofolliculitis Barbae (PFB) Resulting from shaving too often. Its a painful condition that is also not very attractive. Requiring that a black man do something harmful to his face/body is absurd. It makes it so that a black man cannot be considered for a job if a clean shaven face is required. It was a tactic used to eliminate black men from keeping/being considered for desirable jobs.

StillGotIt said:

paintedlady said:

Your beard situation is not the same though...

if you didn't get hired because you were balding and were asked if you could get hairplugs to be considered for the job because your thinning hairline looked "unpolished" is a more accurate comparison.

You can't help your thinning hair line, its natural its how your hair grows out...

you washed it... combed it, trimmed it... but you are still bald

and "bald" is not professional, you can even wear a custom made super 140's cashmere blend wool suit paired with a beautiful silk woven tie, Italian twill Sea-island cotton shirt, gold cufflinks and polished oiled shoes and still be not be "polished" because of your hairline.

This is what businesses do to many women who wear their hair in its natural state. Many black women already knew how to look polished, but the nappy hair was simply not acceptable because they do not want a nappy-headed woman representing their company.

This doesn't happen much now because of organizations like the NAACP who fought for laws to protect women from this sort of discrimination, but it still happens here and there.

Hon...you are wrong about this. The NAACP doesn't fight much anymore, in my opinion its more like a club unless there is an outrageous race issue that affects a large number of people. Many of the race lawsuits now are brought by brave private persons willing to risk their life savings to fight for basic human rights, and often the ACLU takes on cases of this nature as well. In my humble opinion, at least in the northeast, the NAACP has been virtually useless.

damn.

StillGotIt said:

tinaz said:

Im really not trying to be ignorant, but seriously women have lost jobs over their hair?? How do you know this? That is some INSANE stuff Im not doubting you, im just dumbfounded that something like that has happened? Recently, or back in the day?

Tina...i work in civil rights law. Sadly the answer to your question is it happened back in the day, and it still happens. It happens so often that cases often no longer get press, because its nothing new and a lot of the cases settle to avoid press. You would be shocked at the shit that goes on in the most prestigious businesses. I recently had a case where the boss had a party at his home and told his one black employee (who was young) that he could come if he would be the lawnjockey. The black employee didn't even know what the hell a lawn jockey was. Another thing his boss told him was that his hair was like a velcro strip. A lot of shit happens even to black men about their hair.

I agree with this. When I began graduate school last semester I decided to get my hair braided to minimize time spent in the beauty salon so I could focus on my studies. I have never been a braids person so this is new to me. It is easier to manage at the moment but it is not me.

Last Monday I was in class when we were discussing Ethical and Legal Issues. My professor turned to me and told me that I have to be cognizant of the community that I work in because in some communities braids are not acceptable. She was being honest and I respected her for that. She has no idea that it was never my intention to keep the braids after graduating next May.

tinaz said:

sweething said:

Hold Up Wait A Minute....

What I find interesting about this thread is this:

This thread began on the same date another thread entitled "Bully" appeard in Prince.Org Site Discussion nearly two hours earlier. (Its still there.)

The "Bully" thread initiated by a female orger charged Sags..(imago, WTF?) with constantly posting harassing comments on threads initiated by women, essentially stalking women's threads. (Later I post similar, specifically noting his tendancy to mock african american people, women in particular.) Also in the "Bully" thread the original poster, myself and one other orger request that moderators eliminate Sags' multiple alternate screen names.

"Coincidentially" Ace shows up on the "Bully" thread to show his unwavering support to Sags. And goes so far as to dismiss any possible racist or discriminatory behavior shown by Sags.

Also, "coincidentally," Ace's new thread mocks african american women (It seems like so much work! I get tired just thinking about it) and makes assumptions about us and our hair, under the guise of being "curious".

Could Sags also be Ace? If not, they certainly have an alliance as was exhibited in the "Bully" thread.

Could this thread be retribution for identifying Sags as sexist and racist and demanding moderators eliminate the numerous alternate accounts he has?

Also interesting is the "black women" who show up on these threads always defending the offenders with "no clue" ~ I certainly question if in fact they are "black women".

Think about it, if you had multiple accounts, each account could be a different "character" ~ just because someone posts a picture on their profile doesn't mean that is who they actually are?

Now I know some women posted sincerely, most likely unaware of the game being played by Sags/Ace/WTF.

If I was inclined to have multiple accounts I could be a gay person, a straight person, a white person, a black person, an asian person, an african person, and on and on - none of you would know. However we do know that Sags has multiple accounts, why?

It is conceivable that someone (Sags...WTF), who has openly acknowledged, has "many" accounts, could and would initiate a thread and then "load" the thread with support, opposition, controversy, snarkyness, etc. I mean why else would someone have multiple accounts?

Now I know this sounds bizzare, but not really when you think about it.

I mean, the org and the world is full of "interesting" people...you might ask yourself what sort of person would do something like that....well.....a very troubled individual would.

For example, it reminds me of a post I read on a site (can't remember which one)--whereby someone posted about moving to another country and stalking children with the intent of having sex with them and then commented about it on the same public website, sick right? But it happens.

My last point is this. I believe this is/was a bait thread. I believe in response to orgers requesting moderators enforce the rules of this site and eliminate the multiple accounts held by one orger.

This thread was initiated to start a sh*t storm and to try to devalue black women as is the orignal poster(s) normal tendancy, under the innocent guise of seeking information.

Wake up! I don't know, maybe not. Just food for thought.

Dan you got a new name!!

.

[Edited 4/10/11 20:19pm]

Also see "Androgynun/Sags/Ace/WTF" and the Can't Sleep thread in Org Artist community discussion forum.

xspacing.

[Edited 4/10/11 20:41pm]

InspirationalOne said:

StillGotIt said:

Tina...i work in civil rights law. Sadly the answer to your question is it happened back in the day, and it still happens. It happens so often that cases often no longer get press, because its nothing new and a lot of the cases settle to avoid press. You would be shocked at the shit that goes on in the most prestigious businesses. I recently had a case where the boss had a party at his home and told his one black employee (who was young) that he could come if he would be the lawnjockey. The black employee didn't even know what the hell a lawn jockey was. Another thing his boss told him was that his hair was like a velcro strip. A lot of shit happens even to black men about their hair.

I agree with this. When I began graduate school last semester I decided to get my hair braided to minimize time spent in the beauty salon so I could focus on my studies. I have never been a braids person so this is new to me. It is easier to manage at the moment but it is not me.

Last Monday I was in class when we were discussing Ethical and Legal Issues. My professor turned to me and told me that I have to be cognizant of the community that I work in because in some communities braids are not acceptable. She was being honest and I respected her for that. She has no idea that it was never my intention to keep the braids after graduating next May.

I always appreciate when somebody in the majority culture gives a heads up. Thats rare. Many will deny the truth, which actually fosters that intolerant environment.

paintedlady said:

tinaz said:

Im really not trying to be ignorant, but seriously women have lost jobs over their hair?? How do you know this? That is some INSANE stuff Im not doubting you, im just dumbfounded that something like that has happened? Recently, or back in the day?

Many industries are notorious for just that.

They call it being "polished"

things are getting better of course, but many people were not hiring black women if they wear natural styles. So many women were sorta forced to get into wearing their hair in straighter styles by pressing or chemically relaxing their hair.

Now like I said things are different, things are better, but you will find salons, retail stores, and banks that will not hire a woman unless she looks "polished" and the professional look requires most women to relax their hair if their dreadlocs are all frizzy.

The same thing holds true for extreme looks, but get this... in many places, a natural afro would be considered "extreme", and unprofessional. This is why many women shlep to the salons and dish out the dough.

I also think this is why "afro" hair styles are not the thing to wear now.... especially since the creme relaxers can make a sista's hair so silky.

Heck many women do wear low-cut buzz cuts and afros and look so sleek IMO, but many people consider that extreme also.

I live in the north east... these looks are fashion forward in larger cities like New York City and NJ... but in Boston? we are still too "Puritan" and traditional to let women in who are trying to climb the ladder of sucess rock those looks. They tend to still get resistence or are not taken as seriously as their male caucasian counter parts.

But things are changing for the better, with the bevvy of information on the internet and more salons catering to natural styles. Thank Goodness!

Painted just gave a public service announcement here. If you can wean yourself off of the co-dependent relationship with your hairdresser which enables you to look more european, do it. If you cannot, at least learn the proper way to care for your natural hair. Much of the stuff on teh retail shelves being marketed at you are like cigarettes, they are addictive (if you must have that european look) and they are permanently damaging and killing your hair follicles.

StillGotIt said:

Fauxie said:

I get the whole 'polished' thing, as in being presentable and neat. It suggests a person has their shit together. It suggests a whole bunch of things, I guess, which are all positive. It's the definition of what's presentable and neat though. We're not talking about coming to an interview with dirty, creased clothes and smelly hair, but something that makes people uncomfortable for some reason or has a negative connotation to it that's basically groundless.

I got a teaching job and my boss (not the principal of the school, but of the company I worked for who arranged my working there) took me on a tour of the school. He told me that, of course, I'd need to shave my beard. On one level I thought it was absurd. If I wanted to have a beard I could have a beard. On another level, this was a school for rich, spoiled kids, and this was basically the service industry. My boss was simply echoing the feelings shared no doubt by many of the kids' parents, that beards were scruffy and not professional looking. That's a common view here in Thailand, and those parents were paying hefty sums to the school, so for him it was important to give the customers what they want, plain and simple.

I kept my beard though.

the real issue with black men and the beard is that a LARGE percentage of black men will develop a skin condition known as Pseudofolliculitis Barbae (PFB) Resulting from shaving too often. Its a painful condition that is also not very attractive. Requiring that a black man do something harmful to his face/body is absurd. It makes it so that a black man cannot be considered for a job if a clean shaven face is required. It was a tactic used to eliminate black men from keeping/being considered for desirable jobs.

That's one of the reasons I have a beard. Not that I have any condition that I know of (though I may have, wiki-ing it), but as far as not being able to shave without having ridiculously sore, red skin, and it seemingly inviting pimples to have their way with my face, it's a factor in why I have a beard 99% of the time these days. With it I can have better skin and feel comfortable. Without it I get a bit distressed and self-conscious! Would an employer rather have me bearded, with nice, smooth skin, and happy and confident ('polished', no?), or red-faced, pimply and irritable (where ppl would stare and maybe feel uncomfortable)?

<--------is considering sweething's point of view.....

StillGotIt said:

<--------is considering sweething's point of view.....

I'd suggest not considering it too long, unless you want to join her on the crazy train.

sweething said:

tinaz said:

Dan you got a new name!!

.

[Edited 4/10/11 20:19pm]

Also see "Androgynun/Sags/Ace/WTF" and the Can't Sleep thread in Org Artist community discussion forum.

xspacing.

[Edited 4/10/11 20:41pm]

I don't know who WTF is (don't think I've ever seen their posts), but Sags is not Ace, sorry. They may or may not share a distaste for really bad poetry though, I don't know.

Fauxie said:

StillGotIt said:

the real issue with black men and the beard is that a LARGE percentage of black men will develop a skin condition known as Pseudofolliculitis Barbae (PFB) Resulting from shaving too often. Its a painful condition that is also not very attractive. Requiring that a black man do something harmful to his face/body is absurd. It makes it so that a black man cannot be considered for a job if a clean shaven face is required. It was a tactic used to eliminate black men from keeping/being considered for desirable jobs.

That's one of the reasons I have a beard. Not that I have any condition that I know of (though I may have, wiki-ing it), but as far as not being able to shave without having ridiculously sore, red skin, and it seemingly inviting pimples to have their way with my face, it's a factor in why I have a beard 99% of the time these days. With it I can have better skin and feel comfortable. Without it I get a bit distressed and self-conscious! Would an employer rather have me bearded, with nice, smooth skin, and happy and confident ('polished', no?), or red-faced, pimply and irritable (where ppl would stare and maybe feel uncomfortable)?

yea....that term 'polished'....thats one of those messed up ideas. Who the hell determined what is polished when it comes to a person's actual physical being. Is blond more polished than red or black hair? Is straight more polished than curly? Are freckles messy? Ummmm...and then there is the skin tone...fair or dark...what is more polished looking. There have been studies done on that too and the results are distressing....I will stop and keep it at the hair though.

Somebody posted about the family all having locks....and I meant to comment but I cannot find the post....so, I just wanted to say.....locks are often sexy as hell. (I just dont like when balding men have locks...there is something so wrong about it to me......ugh.....)

StillGotIt said:

Fauxie said:

That's one of the reasons I have a beard. Not that I have any condition that I know of (though I may have, wiki-ing it), but as far as not being able to shave without having ridiculously sore, red skin, and it seemingly inviting pimples to have their way with my face, it's a factor in why I have a beard 99% of the time these days. With it I can have better skin and feel comfortable. Without it I get a bit distressed and self-conscious! Would an employer rather have me bearded, with nice, smooth skin, and happy and confident ('polished', no?), or red-faced, pimply and irritable (where ppl would stare and maybe feel uncomfortable)?

yea....that term 'polished'....thats one of those messed up ideas. Who the hell determined what is polished when it comes to a person's actual physical being. Is blond more polished than red or black hair? Is straight more polished than curly? Are freckles messy? Ummmm...and then there is the skin tone...fair or dark...what is more polished looking. There have been studies done on that too and the results are distressing....I will stop and keep it at the hair though.

Yep. Here in Asia it's all those things you mentioned, this all-pervasive, impenetrable mindset that unlike the situation of African Americans in the US has no counter way of thinking of any significance whatsoever. It's a runaway train of wrong.

StillGotIt said:

Somebody posted about the family all having locks....and I meant to comment but I cannot find the post....so, I just wanted to say.....locks are often sexy as hell. (I just dont like when balding men have locks...there is something so wrong about it to me......ugh.....)

These are cornrows, right? Do you think Stevie pulls this off alright, even though his hairline goes way, way back there?

Fauxie said:

As far as on women, I've always thought like this looks hot

More so than with more and thinner rows

This is how I wear my hair when it's natural...it's out of my way, low maintenance and I don't have to sit for hours to get it.