Should Natural Movement Be Blacks Only?

Like Tree43Likes

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7QlYCcKcffc

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BulFjrgC2I4

#TeamNatural is For Black Women… And That’s Okay: Why Exclusivity is NOT Racism | Black Girl with Long Hair

A White BGLH Reader Responds: Why ‘#TeamNatural is for Black Women’ is NOT Reverse Racism | Black Girl with Long Hair

I'm hoping we can take this discussion past the incident that sparked it the larger issue of whether there needs to be black only spaces for women to discuss their hair issues. So maybe if no one makes personal attacks this thread won't get locked.

As far as the subject question, obviously anyone can visit a site but is there a need for natural hair sites where if you are NOT black you won't be profiled or featured? I read where one blog said that's their policy. These are recent vlogs by India of My Natural Sistas. I think she made a lot of good points although I don't agree with everything. I have to admit one of the reasons I started wearing my natural hair out more is so that young black, yes black girls could see a professional black woman confidently rocking natural unstraightened hair. I do think those images are important if we are going to try to spare the next generation the self esteem struggles many of us had from being told we didn't have good hair. I can't say that I think seeing a white woman wearing her hair curly would have the same effect on a little black girl.
"A life without fame can be a good life, but fame without a life is no life at all." - Clive Davis

Last edited by adthomas; 07-15-2014 at 08:01 PM.
Statement from blooger in the comment section to some thread comments:

I came in to write this response because the editor who was moderating comments told me that the CurlyNikki/NaturallyCurly vitriol was getting out of control. And some people might have been reading this piece as a call to forsake multi-racial hair blogs. When CN did the original feature on Sarah, her white curly haired reader, a few people were disgruntled, but all was quiet in the blogosphere and we had no intention of addressing anything. CN has been around for years and we didnít see the feature as remarkable, because we know Nikki has featured white women before. When Ebony ran the feature it sparked a lot of dialogue, then it got picked up by Clutch Magazine and many other outlets. At that point the dialogue had evolved BEYOND the CN feature, and people were expecting and anticipating our response. In crafting this article, Christina and I discussed making it general ó addressing the broader issue without directly referencing the incident that caused it. Honestly, we didnít see the need to. We did reference it on our FB page when linking to the piece, but only to introduce the discussion the feature had caused. And we tagged CN in the post we wrote on FB so her team knew what we were discussing and why.

And no, #teamnatural is not a membership based organization or sorority. We see it as a community of black women who want to celebrate themselves. A few commenters have mentioned other race-based beauty blogs designed to uplift and celebrate a certain heritage or aesthetic. I see black-run natural hair blogs as the same thing. Iím not quite sure why the idea of celebrating ourselves as black women is so controversial, but when Latina or Asian bloggers do it, itís seen as an appropriate response to their American experience.
I came in to write this response because the editor who was moderating comments told me that the CurlyNikki/NaturallyCurly vitriol was getting out of control. And some people might have been reading this piece as a call to forsake multi-racial hair blogs. When CN did the original feature on Sarah, her white curly haired reader, a few people were disgruntled, but all was quiet in the blogosphere and we had no intention of addressing anything. CN has been around for years and we didnít see the feature as remarkable, because we know Nikki has featured white women before. When Ebony ran the feature it sparked a lot of dialogue, then it got picked up by Clutch Magazine and many other outlets. At that point the dialogue had evolved BEYOND the CN feature, and people were expecting and anticipating our response. In crafting this article, Christina and I discussed making it general ó addressing the broader issue without directly referencing the incident that caused it. Honestly, we didnít see the need to. We did reference it on our FB page when linking to the piece, but only to introduce the discussion the feature had caused. And we tagged CN in the post we wrote on FB so her team knew what we were discussing and why.

And no, #teamnatural is not a membership based organization or sorority. We see it as a community of black women who want to celebrate themselves. A few commenters have mentioned other race-based beauty blogs designed to uplift and celebrate a certain heritage or aesthetic. I see black-run natural hair blogs as the same thing. Iím not quite sure why the idea of celebrating ourselves as black women is so controversial, but when Latina or Asian bloggers do it, itís seen as an appropriate response to their American experience.
"A life without fame can be a good life, but fame without a life is no life at all." - Clive Davis
More of blogger responding to comments.

The women weíve featured identify as Afro-Latina, if not publicly in their features, then to us behind the scenes. We make sure to communicate to all our potential style icons that the objective of our website is a celebration of the black aesthetic. We have never allowed features of Afro Latina women who were distancing themselves from their black blood, and trust, weíve had to scrap a few potential features on that basis. If you read the Afro Latina features weíve done, many talk about the struggle of letting go of a Eurocentric ideal, embracing their black heritage and embracing a tighter texture of hair. Also, weíve never featured anyone who was not either full/majority black, or of close/immediate black descent. So, for example, you wonít see any East Indian or South Asian women on this blog. Our primary objective is the black experience.
"A life without fame can be a good life, but fame without a life is no life at all." - Clive Davis
Whether or not it should seems irrelevant, because to my understanding, it just isn't. It has always seemed apparent to me that this whole "embrace your natural texture" movement began outside of the black community. Did it not? I thought the big boom of curl friendly products, which tended to feature looser curls including women of other races mostly was big before this natural movement within the black community became popular. I remember when I stopped relaxing in middle school, and I found the Curly Girl book in a book store with very white looking women on the front.

I don't know the exact timeline, but the "made by us, for us in the black community" boom in popularity of these products seemed to come after the curly girl movement had already begun to take shape and gain popularity. Even Andre Walker, who helped move things along with his hair typing system advised that the kinkiest women consider relaxing instead. Subjective experience and observation is not objective truth, and I don't have all the years and numbers in front of me, but I stopped relaxing pretty young. I didnt notice the same number of naturals around as I do today, but some of those same products for curly hair seemed to be out at the time, encouraging an "embrace your natural curls" movement for women who were mostly not in the black community.

Regardless of the timeline, it seems painfully obvious that the "embrace your curls" movement is not just about black women, not in terms of the people who spearheaded the popular movement, definitions of curl types, and the abundance of products made in response to the movement for looser curls, featuring multiethnic women on their packaging. It doesnt seem, to me, that this has ever been a "blacks only" club. So I don't think you really could just hijack it and make it your own all of a sudden, now that we're on board with what seems, to me, to have already been a eurocentric (or at least not centered on kinky hair) movement in the beginning.

But I do think black women have made something else out of the movement, or our own corner of it. As we tend to do with hair stuff. It seems like there is more of a connected community for black naturals, even though the curly girl movement was popular before the black subset was. Or maybe I'm just not familiar with the other side of the movement, who knows.

Now, I do think "going natural" is a very different experience for black women, obviously. It's on another level psychologically and culturally. White and whoever women need to understand, acknowledge and accept that their experience will mostly likely have been nothing like ours. I think that should be recognized, but that doesn't necessarily mean we have to have separate movements. Separate spaces, okay. But can we also simultaneously have spaces where we come together in general? However, I can somewhat understand what some people are saying about strength in owning the movement and having it representative of black women only...but I also think those people are mistaken if they think there still wont be favortism for certain looks, certain curls. Several bloggers have already noted this. If you look mixed (or even afro-latina) with looser curls, longer hair - you stand a much better chance of being the face of a movement. And I guess that still has some benefits for messages to black girls, because its better than nothing...but it's also a lot of the same thing. Just a side note.

Last edited by Whimsicurl; 07-15-2014 at 05:33 AM.
I'm not sure how I feel about excluding others in response to being excluded in this case. I do think it says a lot to be pissed off simply by a white woman being featured on a blog. And not even the first white woman. (To my understanding, that is what happened, and that is a hot mess to me.)

But I will definitively say that you can't tell other people what to do on their own blogs. The movement is made up of all these different outlets and people. It's ridiculous to tell everyone, everywhere, that they should never feature white women. That's a bit extra. Even if we encourage black women primarily, to give a space because there isnt one, we should also be tolerant and open. You can still dominate one section of a movement, or the movement as a whole, without pushing people away.

It's the difference between

"This is our space, we talk mostly about our issues and this is a haven for our voices. You will mostly see, hear, and breathe us, but you are welcome to join us and have your say sometimes. We're serious about our message but not closed to openly embracing the experiences and beauty of others sometimes"

and

"You may not enter here. If you do, there will be problems. We don't want you here because you couldnt understand us and never will. This isnt a place for you. You can read if you want, but your faces and stories arent welcome here. Bye bye."

I think theres room within the movement for both. No one should be telling everyone to exclude others. If you choose to do that on your channel, good for you. Maybe someone else wont though.

Obviously there should be a priority of "black beauty" in many spaces, but I just dont think that means one little white woman post should send people into an uproar. That's amazing to me.
fihe, BotticelliBrit and aspen like this.
I see a need for both. Or rather, I think both options should be available. Why should some of us object to the privacy requested by people who'd like to share their experiences with those who deal with the exact same issues? OTOH, perhaps there are times when the wider curly community can come together. I don't feel excluded by people who want to share similar experiences I haven't been exposed to, although it's helpful to learn about those issues to avoid contributing to disharmony by accident.

I think of it as being a bit like faith: Catholics worship here; Methodists worship here; etc. And everyone can worship together when and if they want to. I like a mix of people and experiences, but I don't think it should be forced.
fihe likes this.

http://geaugadoggy.wordpress.com
I didn't read Nikki's response but read the article. The issue arose because of where the white type 3 curly was featured, not so much that she wasn't black and / or didn't have type 4 hair.

I do think it's important for black women to have their own space, although I do think that it's unrealistic to think that all nonblack or those who culturally identify as black but genetically are more something else can be kept out. At the same time those outsiders should be respectful of the space they are visiting.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using CurlTalk App
NCNoMore likes this.
3b/c, medium-coarse, low porosity, high density
HG: Jessicurl Too Shea and Kinky Curly Curling Custard
Shampoo: nonsulfate shampoo and Suave Naturals sulfate shampoo when needed
A little off topic but I have found it difficult to find blogs that aren't specifically for barely there waves and curls or kinky natural hair. Every once in a while I find one where the blogger is 3b/c so I usually don't find myself represented.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using CurlTalk App
3b/c, medium-coarse, low porosity, high density
HG: Jessicurl Too Shea and Kinky Curly Curling Custard
Shampoo: nonsulfate shampoo and Suave Naturals sulfate shampoo when needed
I see absolutely nothing wrong with people having spaces to celebrate, gather or discuss. As you said, there are already spaces created for specific heritages or physical features/attributes that no one thinks twice about.

I absolutely agree that images are incredibly important. I do not think seeing a white woman with curls would hit the same spot or give the same impression that seeing a professional black woman with natural hair would. I do think it's good to appreciate each other. I know I have missed seeing natural hair/images of natural hair to the extent that I did when I was a child. *And reflecting on images from the past... There has been a curl drought.

I mentioned before that I saw a huge difference in the "is your hair naturally curly" question, and someone being/going natural. They might share some of the same words, but what is involved varies greatly for many.

Other than that, I would hope people would not want to separate too much. I think we all can help each other out. I know I have gotten a lot of help while reading a multitude of reviews, blogs, watching videos and looking at threads.
NCNoMore likes this.
When I hear terms like "hipster" I think, who told cliques they could leave high school??


Last edited by Fifi.G; 07-15-2014 at 07:30 PM.
Remember for American blacks, I don't know about other countries, this is more like a resurgence of NHM rather than the beginning. Many of my relatives rocked big fros and it was the norm in the days of say it loud, I'm black and I'm proud. Plus I have many male and female friends who went natural a decade ago but the difference is most of them locked which is still natural hair. I definitely see more loose natural hair now and I see Lorraine being in the mix there. So let's just say for the sake of convo that non blacks started current embrace your loose curls. How many of these product lines did you see carried by major retailers BEFORE black women started going natural in droves? black is green in haircare biz.. I think there is a perception among some people that white corporate America didn't give a $#% about how black women felt about their "nappy" hair until they saw a way they could make money off of it. So maybe that's why they see white girl "feeling their pain" as patronizing and perhaps a begining sign of some type of exploitation in what they believe they need to guard what they feel to be their safe space. Not saying it is that but much has been dicussed about the parent company of that site not being black owned. the money really started flowing in nhm because of what we spend on hair. A lot of products marketed to blacks are made by divisions of a larger corporation. These corporations had absolutely no interesting in creating natural hair products or even healthier ingredient products until relaxers sales slumped and smaller companies started making money and going into large retail spaces. Back then they didn't want me. Now I'm hot they're all on me. They all want to get in on the action and say now how wonderful it is we've embraced our curls. It seems disingenuos to some and that's why I know some black women have said they won't use lines like DandL. SM was founded in 1991 but look at what NHM has done. I had never heard of them before a few years ago now they're everywhere.
In the comments on other boards I'm reading I think a lot of the anger outrage I think is based in fear that groups where black women go to for knowledge, support, venting, and sharing with people who can relate to their experiences will become so watered down that it really won't be a place anymore that they feel they can do all those things. Some people have spouses, parents, ect that are totally against their decision. Call them names. berate them. If not for the on line support system there would be no support system for some people. Others may sympathize but maybe sometimes you need to talk to someone who has been there. I think that's the beauty of Camp Bluebird for cancer patients. As for the comments I have read about white people taking over or stealing. Let me go into a little background. My mom quite bitterly talks about Bo Derek and some movie where she wore cornrows I think. My mom said after that movie came out there were a lot of white people raving about the style and calling it the "Bo Derek". Now this style had been worn by black people forever and a day so to see a white woman given credit for coming up with it was to some a slap in the face. The same goes for Rock and Roll. Jerry Lee Lewis and Elvis and the like used to go down to the Mississippi juke joints and hang out with poor black people. learned to play their music and do their dance moves then went on tv and radio ect and all these people acting like this was so "brand new" and the white men became millionares while a lot of poor black people stayed poor. many blues musicians died penniless. Hound Dog is an old blues song btw that Elvis remade. Even now with rap and R and B that some people I know are totally against a white artist and they call it white people getting rich off black music. This even goes back to Eli Whitley and the cotton gin that my 8th grade teacher refused to acknowledge a slave invented. How did this get so long? lol
happyface and NCNoMore like this.
"A life without fame can be a good life, but fame without a life is no life at all." - Clive Davis
That Bo Derek movie is 10.

American history has never been kind to people of African descent. And although other groups, like Native Americans, have suffered as horribly, it does seem that being black is seen being less than any other racial group in the U.S. Whereas other groups could be accepted into white groups, regardless of how dark their skin was, being African made a person inherently less and thus not as smart, attractive or valuable. This thinking shows in American history with the examples AdT gave, as well as the one-drop rule and anything black has to be ghetto.

Although I don't think that many of the white curlies visiting these predominantly bkack sites think this, it makes sense that th his history would cause a lot of type 4 black women to be weary or annoyed.

Also there are white women and other nonblack groups with kinky type 3 and even 4 hair. I wouldn't be surprised if those were the only sites they felt accepted. After all, a white girl with a certain type of hair would be seen as a novelty or have had been the victim of racist experiences.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using CurlTalk App
3b/c, medium-coarse, low porosity, high density
HG: Jessicurl Too Shea and Kinky Curly Curling Custard
Shampoo: nonsulfate shampoo and Suave Naturals sulfate shampoo when needed
I really dont think todays natural hair movement is anything like the old days. There were a lot of political opinions associated with that, aside from it just being in the fashion at the time, while many many naturals today dont want to be associated with "pro-black, black power" sentiments. Keep that in mind. I think this movement for many black women is and should be (imo) about black women especially appreciating and working with their natural beauty that has long been degraded as inferior on multiple levels. It's not about black pride in general for a lot of us. Or at least, for me, it isnt. I don't want my hair to be associated with a fist in the air, which was largely the associated image for the old "natural hair movement" (if you can call it that, which I wouldnt). Black men havent had the same struggle as black women have had when it comes to hair and beauty. So its a specifically black female thing, the difficult road to "going natural." Black men, of course, can be a part of it too, just as white women can, but in this society, gender norms and sex roles don't involve black men in the same psychological conditioning that black women experience.

That, and learning to care for our hair, really take care of black hair and what it means to have healthy hair. But that's everyone. And I also think there are class connotations that are associated with "natural hair" as well.

Some companies did exist, catering to looser curls and non-black women before this new era of natural black hair. And of course its about money for many. They're in business, and black hair is not especially high on the list of beauty priorities in a predominantly white country. Seize an opportunity because you recognize the market for it = good business. Also, it is possible that companies exist without you seeing them. I've known about shea moisture for a while, for example. But if the market of people isnt there to support even the products you want to produce, it's kind of difficult to stay in business or flourish. **** gets expensive.

But I think it all works together. I think the online presence of black women is important and did help build up the black end of this movement. I'm never disputing that.
I don't see the logical connection between "white people in a predominantly white country with a history of black disenfranchisement monopolize on hot black inventions/trends" and being pissed off at a white woman being featured on a website that has already featured white women before. I read that this was one reason why the editors or whoever were not even anticipating this kind of outrage, because they aren't exclusively black at Curly Nikki and never have been. (Definitions of "black" come to mind, first of all. But thats another convo)

The problem really isnt that a white woman was featured or that someone wants to sing whatever you interpret "black music" to be. And I think not understanding the social and political realities of this world lead to this kind of ridiculous smoke screen bullsh*t. of "we own this, you cant have it" and attacking individual people who want to be a part of something. Black people need to wake up. It's not about this white woman being featured on anything. She and her post are as insignificant as dust on the ground, and so is this whole conversation. The reality is that history, politics, legal structures and social stigmas and implicit racist judgments are working against you. The reality is that class. is. everything. And I'm not saying you necessarily have to lean socialist or communist, but understanding the realities of an interest in maintaining a "have nots" group (which is growing these days) in capitalism is a part of the program. And guess what? A large percentage of black people are in that group. The reality is that legal, social, and political bias have actively, often insidiously, worked toward keeping black people on the bottom, and this affects our ability to monopolize on anything. The reality is that the majority of my family that lives in the projects and the slums of my city are not going to be affected by this white woman's post or anything. Not in any real sense. They're still uneducated, lacking high school diplomas, let alone college degrees, often dont possess the knowledge of presentation in employment pursuits, cant articulate themselves well, and are consistently shackled not only by the shame and anger, but also a cyclical state of poverty and messages that tell them "you are nothing, you will never be anything and you can not." Thats the f*cking reality that keeps many of us from seizing business industries and monopolizing on things. There's a lack of ambition and hard work to accomplish what seems out of reach in many cases, and even when those things are present, social and economic class, as well as racism, will have you beating against the current anyway.

I dont want to completely diminish the validity of these sentiments, even if I don't see eye to eye. But I do want to try (in my little insignificant NC post) to knock the issue down a few pegs to where I think it should be, just for a second. Excluding people wouldnt be significant if these other elements werent defeating the black community. People would be educated, articulate, monopolizing on "black business" (whatever), giving a nodd and a chuckle at little white girl post and moving about their business. The root of the problem will always be there, no matter where the smoke screen leads you or whatever bullsh*t distractions are entertained.

Thats just how I feel, take no offense.

Last edited by Whimsicurl; 07-16-2014 at 06:53 AM.
Just "attaching myself" to this thread because I don't have time to reply right now, but I want to think about this. There are some points in this discussion that are very important for me and I'm hoping more join in with their perspectives.

See you later!
Whimsicurl likes this.
3b/c, Coarse, Low Porosity, Desert Climate
CG since August 2011/Modified since 2013
Favorites: KCKT, Curl Keeper, BRHG, Camille Rose Curl Maker,
Jane Carter Nourish & Shine Butter,
Curls Unleashed Second Chance Curl Refresher,
Shea Moisture Hold & Shine Moisture Spray
I was not necessarily giving my personal views but I was given a few examples of why strictly IMO where some this backlash comes from and why IMO some people perceived it the way they did. There is a historically based sentiment among some blacks that when we start something other groups aren't interested until it starts making money and then they take over and then we are not the ones benefiting from all that wealth that is generated. I know a ton of older black people who say integration killed what were thriving black businesses. I am a musician and I don't see music as having a color. However, I don't think Bob Dylan's kids going hungry listening to Darius Rucker sing their daddy's song on the radio like blues's musicians kids did. even Eminem said "He was the first man since Elvis Presley to use black music to make himself wealthy." I don't think too many people who look like me go who go crying at the headstone in Graceland. just saying. Some people still bitter about that stuff.

I personally didn't see white girl in a blog as a big deal but I do see the historical context of some people seeing it as a sign of here we go again. I mentioned Camp Bluebird. Again would you go speak to a group of chemo patients and the time you had the flu and how you got so sick and threw up? To some people I think that's what the she took off her scrunchie story amounted to and is why some people who have been made to feel inferior all their lives felt insulted.
I agree not every black woman goes natural for the same reasons. Some it has nothing to do with wanting to embrace their hair. Some people do it because they have to either they have fried or damaged their hair so badly they have to or for health/medical reasons. I did for the latter. When I bc'ed I have never read a hair blog or forum or watch a single YT video. Never heard of Lorraine or Andre or classification. Still I appreciate what I have learned from ALL women and men on this site. I actually have always used shampoos and conditioners that weren't marketed to black people. All my life I have suffered with skin and severe dandruff issues so I had to do the TRex, H&S, Dentorex stuff that dried the hell out of my hair. But I was moisturizing with stuff like pink oil and other with mineral oil and petrolatum marketed to blacks which I now know as a natural who researches ingredients was keeping my hair scalp in a vicious no win cycle. I was not educated on ingredients and even worse had no resources to get educated other than hair stylists who I would go to about scalp problems only solution I got was to slap relaxer on it and get paid. I hardly ever have dandruff now that to teatree and eliminating mo. with a little knowledge comes power. What I'm saying is yes I realize companies want need to make money but who is out there trying to educate us because they want to see us do better and lift us up because they actually care about us and not only just because they want to pimp the "ghetto". A lot of the places we can go for information and resources we have are homegrown grassroots created. Should we financially support those that don't support us or have our interests at heart? I think that is why some people want somewhere to go that is for us by us of us. Why so people get upset when on Curl Talk when companies and owners come in trying to promote their products? It's because this is our curly space. Yes the exclusion is not race based here yet there are still people who are not supposed to be in the mix.
NCNoMore likes this.
"A life without fame can be a good life, but fame without a life is no life at all." - Clive Davis
I saw a vlog about this topic on YouTube and it was all because of the curlynikki thing. I feel that team natural should not just be for or about blacks. Let's face the facts here... Black women are not the only women that wear weaves and get chemical processes done to their hair, yet there is this huge stigma around our hair. I think if other come forward and join this movement it would be nice that they acknowledge that they were not natural either. To me the natural hair movement is about accepting your hair how God made it. So yea if u relax it's not natural just the same as if you're bleaching it blonde....I think that it should be open to all as long as they respect the movement for what it is!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
curlypearl, chimama and aspen like this.
A lot of products marketed to blacks are made by divisions of a larger corporation. These corporations had absolutely no interesting in creating natural hair products or even healthier ingredient products until relaxers sales slumped and smaller companies started making money and going into large retail spaces. Back then they didn't want me. Now I'm hot they're all on me. They all want to get in on the action and say now how wonderful it is we've embraced our curls.
In the comments on other boards I'm reading I think a lot of the anger outrage I think is based in fear that groups where black women go to for knowledge, support, venting, and sharing with people who can relate to their experiences will become so watered down that it really won't be a place anymore that they feel they can do all those things. long?
Originally Posted by adthomas
I'm not black, and I think it is presumptuous to even insinuate my hair experiences are the same as black women's hair experiences (I'm thinking American culture in the last 150 years or so) because I have curly hair.
It is because of the black Naturals impact on curly hair that I have a level of enjoyment and even pride in my hair that I never dreamed of having.

But "embracing my curls" , to me, doesn't seem to be the the same thing as going "natural", at all. I really don't think that curly caucasian/latina, etc. women are aware of the astounding historical and social impacts of hair culture in the lives of black women. If we are, we should know we cannot claim "natural" in the same way. Our curls might indeed be "natural" but we can wear them as such only because of of what black women have gone through.

I remember a few years ago, Hillary Clinton told some interviewer that she "has Jewish background", because her grandmother's second husband was a Russian born Jew. While that's nice and all, I rolled my eyes, because I didn't believe her "disclosure" was anything more than a political marketing ploy. Hillary Clinton has not had a Jewish life experience, anymore than I know what it's like to shed a lifetime of relaxers, braids, wigs, and hot combs only to be ridiculed by family and friends.

I have things in common with "going natural". I think some of us with "Jewish curly hair" have always strongly identified with "black" hair as something that distinguished us "looking ethnic" from looking traditionally mainstream. But when I stopped wearing my hair short and stopped straightening my hair, nobody really cared (well, my husband complained a little bit, of course, but he got over it. And he complains about change in general).

As women: mothers, friends, daughters, workers, etc. our experiences overlap and, are more often than not, shared. All women have struggles; we desperately need support from each other, and we need to care about one another. That doesn't mean our hair experiences are the same, (but so what? Why should they be?) As a matter of respect I feel that "Going natural" is very different from "embracing curls", and we should not diminish the meaning of "Natural" by watering down that meaning. What was always called "ethnic hair", (and had products that used to be separated into their own special shelves), is simply not integral to the culture that made the distinction in the first place.

I'm adding some thoughts to a discussion, that is all. I'm not saying I'm right or wrong, I'm just providing thoughts.
3b/c, Coarse, Low Porosity, Desert Climate
CG since August 2011/Modified since 2013
Favorites: KCKT, Curl Keeper, BRHG, Camille Rose Curl Maker,
Jane Carter Nourish & Shine Butter,
Curls Unleashed Second Chance Curl Refresher,
Shea Moisture Hold & Shine Moisture Spray

Last edited by gardencurls; 07-16-2014 at 01:33 PM.
Well I guess "going" natural doesn't mean the same thing to me as it does to others. I am from a multicultural family but we identify as being black. None of my immediate family had to use relaxers but the younger generation which includes myself and my 3 female cousins did because our hair was thicker than out mothers and grandmother. I understand that the term natural could be loaded for someone that has suffered years of relaxing and shame over their hair, but being natural doesn't mean the same to thing to every black person just like it doesn't mean the same to every white person...to me at the end of the day natural is natural even though hair types are different


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
BotticelliBrit likes this.
I'm not black, and I think it is presumptuous to even insinuate my hair experiences are the same as black women's hair experiences (I'm thinking American culture in the last 150 years or so) because I have curly hair.
It is because of the black Naturals impact on curly hair that I have a level of enjoyment and even pride in my hair that I never dreamed of having.

As women: mothers, friends, daughters, workers, etc. our experiences overlap and, are more often than not, shared. All women have struggles; we desperately need support from each other, and we need to care about one another. That doesn't mean our hair experiences are the same, (but so what? Why should they be?) As a matter of respect I feel that "Going natural" is very different from "embracing curls", and we should not diminish the meaning of "Natural" by watering down that meaning.
Originally Posted by gardencurls
I don't think it's about competing to see who's suffered more or claiming anyone's experiences are identical to anyone else's.

I can't remember ever specifically saying I'm part of the 'natural movement', but I have used the term 'going natural'.The word 'natural' to some people obviously means something different than it does to other people. And that's okay. But it doesn't mean I have to stop using that word or be afraid that associating myself with it will have me labelled negatively by people who define it differently.

At the end of the day, like you said, we desperately need to support each other (as human beings, not just as women, or people with curls) and the determination of some to limit who can be involved in something which should be about acceptance and positivity, is a little sad to see.
curlypearl likes this.
Allie

Curly type: 3A Botticelli curls. Medium porosity / density.
Pre-poo: Organic Virgin Coconut Oil
Low-poo: Shea Moisture Coconut & Hibiscus Curl & Shine
Conditioner: Faith in Nature Raspberry and Cranberry
D/C: Shea Moisture Raw Shea Butter Restorative, mixed with honey & other goodies
Leave-in: My DNA
Styler: Umberto Giannini Scrunching Jelly / Ouidad Climate Control Heat & Humidity


UK curly. CG since October 2013.
Aiming for WL curls (eventually)
I remember a few years ago, Hillary Clinton told some interviewer that she "has Jewish background", because her grandmother's second husband was a Russian born Jew. While that's nice and all, I rolled my eyes, because I didn't believe her "disclosure" was anything more than a political marketing ploy.
Originally Posted by gardencurls
This is hil-arious!
gardencurls likes this.
"A life without fame can be a good life, but fame without a life is no life at all." - Clive Davis

Trending Topics


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2011 NaturallyCurly.com