scr

Chic hairstyles have long been considered those that are flat and straight, until the natural hair community stepped in. Over the past decade, a brigade of women with naturally wavy, curly and coily hairstyles has paved a path all their own and redefined what it means to have "good hair."

Today, women across the board, from those working their 9 to 5 jobs to celebrities we see on the big and small screens, are embracing their natural textures more and more often. We've seen big chops on Viola Davis. We've watched Solange magnificently grow out her hair. We've even been privy to the first curly-haired Disney princess, Merida.

Now, a chic hairstyle doesn't necessarily evoke images of straightened strands. Instead, we've come to embrace the fact that natural curve and texture is beautiful, chic and stylish, too. And unlike hair care of the past, health is of utmost concern.

It is thanks to the natural hair community that silicones and sulfates are being taken out of hair care products and that women across the texture board are opting for a cleansing conditioner over a traditional shampoo. Women with natural hair have taught the hair care world what is most important and when the world wouldn't listen, the natural hair community made their own products to suffice.

And yet, taking a closer look at many natural hair care products on the market, it seems as those not all traditional wavy, curly or coily hair care products and brands really support the natural hair cause.

If the natural hair community's understanding and promotion of natural hair is to embrace your natural texture, then why do companies like Carol's Daughter and Miss Jessie's promote products that loosen your curl? In fact, Miss Jessie's slogan states: "turning kinks into curls."

On the natural hair mission, have we overlooked a portion of our natural community? Are there still strong beliefs in place that say a looser curl pattern is better than a tighter one? After all, these brands came out of our own community, why haven't we stood up to them the way we do to all the others?

Beauty brands make money  by selling people a standard of beauty that they don't believe they already have. For natural hair brands, Clutch Magazine is calling this type of textured segmentation "curlism."

That's right: curlism, the belief that a particular curl pattern is better than another. In this case, it seems that natural hair beauty brands are cashing in on a looser pattern, promoting a stretching affect over an accepting and empowering one.

For beauty brands to sell women items they do not need, that may be harmful to their health or their self-esteem, is absolutely nothing new. But is doing so for the natural hair community hypocritical? Or, perhaps we all just want the chance and opportunity to enjoy textures that aren't our own, and that does not necessarily mean we don't love our natural texture.

What do you think: are these hair care brands targeting women with a tighter pattern, and promoting curlism?

0 Comments
Yes there is a Definite bias! Reading some of the blogs and seeing some of the trends in hair products is disturbing. Most new naturals seem want that Magical curl definition that they think will open up a world of acceptance that makes you look less threatening to the masses. It drives me up the frickin' wall! Why not opt for healthy hair? Why not opt for loving the texture that comes from your scalp! Be greatful for the hair that is growing from your head. Then they get frustrated that their two strand twist didn't come out right or that the curl defining pudding didn't define their hair in that 3c/4a manner! UGH! please stop the madness! And this poor picture of this model! Lord, I know she never thought her sad face would be the calling card for many naturals who tried the other "Creamy Crack" that just didn't wok for them!
Why be mad at MJ for that slogan about loosening curls when one the products they offer is a TEXTURIZER? I heard an interview with one of the founding sisters who said she doesnt have natural hair. So why give them grief about not encouraging people to embrace natural as is. So it is not like they are not being up front. Plus I think including the "racism" in the subject line is a bit over the top inflammatory too much. I think some people just need something to be mad about.

Social