It’s a bird. It’s a plane! It’s… an Afro? Strangely enough, it seems that natural black hair is triggering enough to make news these days.
What started off as a mere aggregation of keratin and dead skin cells has been transformed into a sociopolitical debacle. Contrary to India Arie’s beliefs, we ARE our hair—and apparently, it’s distracting.
That was the defense of the frustrated Milwaukee teacher who called seven-year-old Lamya Cammon to the front of the classroom and cut off one of her braids. Her retribution? A $175 fine for disorderly conduct. She was permitted to continue teaching while Cammon was shuffled to another classroom.
That incident occurred in 2009. At the time, it was sufficient — mollifying even — to dismiss it as an isolated event, an arbitrary chasm on the post-racial cultural landscape.
But then Horizon Science Academy happened, and black girls were reminded that our humanity is still precariously located along active fault lines, subject to earthquake when we deviate from the default standards of beauty.
When we dare to style our crowns in “Afro-puffs and small twisted braids,” schools like the Lorian, Ohio charter propose bans.
When we endeavor to lock our hair, we are given the Tiana Parker treatment: taunted and told that our hair is unprofessional.
For her part, Vanessa VanDyke’s hair became the nexus of controversy when she was told that her hair violated school dress codes and was given one week to decide if she wanted to cut her hair. She was told she would have to leave the school if she chose not to do so.
While VanDyke was not expelled, the fact that administration felt her hair needed to be tamed remains problematic. It censures those of us who are unafraid of our roots — literally and figuratively. It implies that the way our hair grows naturally is wild, undesirable, and improper. It teaches self-hate and perpetuates the idea that only certain grades of hair are valued.
This policing is trickling into other institutions as well.
As reported by TIME, the Army recently issued new appearance standards, which included bans on most twists, dreadlocks and cornrows larger than one-quarter inch, all styles used predominantly by African-American women with natural hair. More than 11,000 people have petitioned President Barack Obama to have the military reevaluate the regulations to allow for “neat and maintained natural hairstyles.”
Army Sgt. Maj. Raymond F. Chandler III upheld the new ruling on the Army’s website, stating:
“The Army is a profession, and one of the ways our leaders and the American public measure our professionalism is by our appearance.”
I present this counter-question: What determines the professionalism of a style? What does it say when Kendall Jenner rocks cornrows and is lauded by Marie Claire as “bold” and “epic”? What does it communicate when Miley Cyrus wears Bantu knots and is touted as fresh and quirky while little black girls are disparaged for the same style? What does it intimate when natural black hair is seen as only petting-zoo worthy while straight hair is normalized?
To condemn natural hair is to condemn personal choice and a facet of our identity. Yes, our hair is different, but ‘different’ is not inherently distracting.
Honestly, if seeing billowing ‘fros makes you gawk uncontrollably, that sounds like a personal problem. Cue Yoncé hair flip.