Can Your Your Natural Texture/Hair Color Not Suit You?

[Shinka]

I DON'T CARE HOW UNPOPULAR THIS MAY ALL SOUND, BUT ON A PSYCHOLOGICAL NOTE IT IS TRUE, AND I AGREE WITH THIS THEORY. IN MY PSYCH CLASS WE LEARNED ABOUT VISUAL STIMULATION AMONGST INDIVIDUALS AND HOW IT IS PROVEN THAT CERTAIN FACIAL SHAPES AND FEATURE ARE MORE OR LESS FLATTERING THAN OTHERS. SO IF INDEED THIS CAN BE WHAT'S CONSIDERED MORE OR LESS ACCEPTABLE, SURELY ANOTHER ADDED FEATURE SUCH AS HAIR WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS WHAT IS MORE OR LESS ACCEPTABLE AS WELL. MEAN IT IS A GOOD AND VALID POINT.


I STILL DON'T CARE WHAT THE HECK IS ACCEPTABLE OR NOT - I JUST KNOW THAT MY 4A/B/Z HAIR DOES NOT SUIT ME. LOL
AND SOROR, CONQUEROR_AKA, LIKES THE PUFF, BUT LOVE THE STEP TEAM SWANG- YA KNOW WHAT i'M SAYIN?

SKEE WEE

I just want to add, that I too have taken psychology and human sexuality courses. I think you messed an important aspect of the sociological aspects of attraction. You can put, lets say, an African-American women on a stage: biological she may have thick hair, the right hip-waist ratio that signifies fertility, skin is healthy, and her facial features are mathematically aligned. Man A may find her attractive, Man B may not. So who is right?

Also, biologically...one is taught that it's the thickness of hair that signals good mating ability, not the "type or texture" of hair.

Sociological factors, lets call these nurture, often influences nature. Some biological features are more preferred over others depending on the society and what they value. In some African countries and indigenous groups of Asia, overweight women are favored. In America, thinness is highly favored. In America and most european-centered cultures...long straight hair is favored. Contrastingly, the carribbean is probably one of the most diverse sections of the world. There are many different types of women with all types of hair. I doubt those with only the looser textures find mates.

Many times, due to one culture dominating another, the dominant cultures standards prevail. Why do you think we now have women in Africa lightening their skin? The dominating standard isn't necessarily more beautiful, it's made to be more superior, therefore more "sociologically & psychologically" beautiful and desired.

Your individual preference is yours. I don't think anyone is arguing against it. However, I don't think natural hair is unattractive itself. Its the inferiority that has been ascribed to it for many that makes it "unfavorable".

I know I have battled with my family, and myself, as to what makes me look more beautiful. While I like swinging hair and shirley temple curls, I'm more attracted to, and I find men are more attracted to, me being a "natural" women all around. I think natural or relaxed hair suits me.

I think natural hair suits everyone, its all about the style. I find that I ohh and ahhh over nice-looking long permed hair as mush as I ohh and ahh over long natural or locked hair. I think its length thats gets me over texture.

 

[GeauXavi]

I DON'T CARE HOW UNPOPULAR THIS MAY ALL SOUND, BUT ON A PSYCHOLOGICAL NOTE IT IS TRUE, AND I AGREE WITH THIS THEORY. IN MY PSYCH CLASS WE LEARNED ABOUT VISUAL STIMULATION AMONGST INDIVIDUALS AND HOW IT IS PROVEN THAT CERTAIN FACIAL SHAPES AND FEATURE ARE MORE OR LESS FLATTERING THAN OTHERS. SO IF INDEED THIS CAN BE WHAT'S CONSIDERED MORE OR LESS ACCEPTABLE, SURELY ANOTHER ADDED FEATURE SUCH AS HAIR WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS WHAT IS MORE OR LESS ACCEPTABLE AS WELL. MEAN IT IS A GOOD AND VALID POINT.


I STILL DON'T CARE WHAT THE HECK IS ACCEPTABLE OR NOT - I JUST KNOW THAT MY 4A/B/Z HAIR DOES NOT SUIT ME. LOL
AND SOROR, CONQUEROR_AKA, LIKES THE PUFF, BUT LOVE THE STEP TEAM SWANG- YA KNOW WHAT i'M SAYIN?

SKEE WEE

Lol...I got ya Soror

 

[RegaLady]

I just want to add, that I too have taken psychology and human sexuality courses. I think you messed an important aspect of the sociological aspects of attraction. You can put, lets say, an African-American women on a stage: biological she may have thick hair, the right hip-waist ratio that signifies fertility, skin is healthy, and her facial features are mathematically aligned. Man A may find her attractive, Man B may not. So who is right?

Also, biologically...one is taught that it's the thickness of hair that signals good mating ability, not the "type or texture" of hair.

Sociological factors, lets call these nurture, often influences nature. Some biological features are more preferred over others depending on the society and what they value. In some African countries and indigenous groups of Asia, overweight women are favored. In America, thinness is highly favored. In America and most european-centered cultures...long straight hair is favored. Contrastingly, the carribbean is probably one of the most diverse sections of the world. There are many different types of women with all types of hair. I doubt those with only the looser textures find mates.

Many times, due to one culture dominating another, the dominant cultures standards prevail. Why do you think we now have women in Africa lightening their skin? The dominating standard isn't necessarily more beautiful, it's made to be more superior, therefore more "sociologically & psychologically" beautiful and desired.

Your individual preference is yours. I don't think anyone is arguing against it. However, I don't think natural hair is unattractive itself. Its the inferiority that has been ascribed to it for many that makes it "unfavorable".

I know I have battled with my family, and myself, as to what makes me look more beautiful. While I like swinging hair and shirley temple curls, I'm more attracted to, and I find men are more attracted to, me being a "natural" women all around. I think natural or relaxed hair suits me.

I think natural hair suits everyone, its all about the style. I find that I ohh and ahhh over nice-looking long permed hair as mush as I ohh and ahh over long natural or locked hair. I think its length thats gets me over texture.

ITA, my DH loves the heck out of natural hair. Some men don't care for it. In fact. he likes natural over relaxed, straight long hair. He thinks straight long hair is not flattering on me. While he is an AA male, I hve never seen him oggle over a woman who was held as the 'ideal'. Many men, like different things.

I think alot of this is for Europeans to super impose what they deem as attractive, when even their own don't even live up to the standard. So I say do what you want. I see ww with straight, short hair. And if you ask why they cut it, or dye it, or whatever, they reply, "it's just hair,it'll grow back." While I am sitting here, trying to gain the 'standard'.
I don't know why we are sooo caught up in fitting a mold, that 'they' don't even fit.

 

[MonPetite]

okay but once upon a time in Europe, pasty was the thing to be. didn't they rub mercury into their faces to look as ghostly white as possible? that was proof that you were "upper society" because you didn't have to work outside like the common folk, so the sun didn't bake your skin.

of course that changed in more recent times because there were more middle class people working INSIDE, the thing to be is tan now because it proves you DON'T spend all your time working inside... you have time/money to go on vacation (or at least go down the street to the tanning bed )

Remember however, they are still going against the biological preference due to culture. It doesn't change the fact that skin that has a glow be it a faint or strong one is preferable. You can train yourself to be aroused by ANYTHING, it still doesn't change what is better in terms of passing down good genes.

You can like tiny feet, for example all you like, but let the climate change and half the world's civilizations be wiped out and men will be snatching up the available women left and right Size 5 to Size 11.

It all comes back to what many other posters have already probed: nature vs. nurture.

THICK, SIGNIFICANT hair of whatever color or texture is what is biologically preferable because it signals health.

Now wether that "thickness" is straight or curly or "significant" is hair that grows out and up or down and flows in the wind is a matter of definition according to culture.

We all know where those lines lie in our culture. So there's no need to starting beating that horse's carcass anymore than necessary.


Loving these posts! Science, psychology, Black women, and hair -what a wonderful, thrilling, interesting mix!

 

[PerplexingComplex]

I think it's all about perspective. I know that I do not look good with one inch (not because of shrinkage, i'm talking about that long stretched) natural hair; however, with one inch straight hair I look great. Now, when it comes to long straight hair, I hate the way it looks on me but I love how my natural hair looks long on me. Kinda weird, but hey I have a fat face and those styles just bring out my facial features more.

 

[hopeful]

I think it's all about perspective. I know that I do not look good with one inch (not because of shrinkage, i'm talking about that long stretched) natural hair; however, with one inch straight hair I look great. Now, when it comes to long straight hair, I hate the way it looks on me but I love how my natural hair looks long on me. Kinda weird, but hey I have a fat face and those styles just bring out my facial features more.

The bolded is an interesting point. I feel the same way.

 

[Southernbella.]

I just want to add, that I too have taken psychology and human sexuality courses. I think you messed an important aspect of the sociological aspects of attraction. You can put, lets say, an African-American women on a stage: biological she may have thick hair, the right hip-waist ratio that signifies fertility, skin is healthy, and her facial features are mathematically aligned. Man A may find her attractive, Man B may not. So who is right?

Also, biologically...one is taught that it's the thickness of hair that signals good mating ability, not the "type or texture" of hair.

Sociological factors, lets call these nurture, often influences nature. Some biological features are more preferred over others depending on the society and what they value. In some African countries and indigenous groups of Asia, overweight women are favored. In America, thinness is highly favored. In America and most european-centered cultures...long straight hair is favored. Contrastingly, the carribbean is probably one of the most diverse sections of the world. There are many different types of women with all types of hair. I doubt those with only the looser textures find mates.

Many times, due to one culture dominating another, the dominant cultures standards prevail. Why do you think we now have women in Africa lightening their skin? The dominating standard isn't necessarily more beautiful, it's made to be more superior, therefore more "sociologically & psychologically" beautiful and desired.

Your individual preference is yours. I don't think anyone is arguing against it. However, I don't think natural hair is unattractive itself. Its the inferiority that has been ascribed to it for many that makes it "unfavorable".

I know I have battled with my family, and myself, as to what makes me look more beautiful. While I like swinging hair and shirley temple curls, I'm more attracted to, and I find men are more attracted to, me being a "natural" women all around. I think natural or relaxed hair suits me.

I think natural hair suits everyone, its all about the style. I find that I ohh and ahhh over nice-looking long permed hair as mush as I ohh and ahh over long natural or locked hair. I think its length thats gets me over texture.

Great post!!!

 

[RegaLady]

I think it's all about perspective. I know that I do not look good with one inch (not because of shrinkage, i'm talking about that long stretched) natural hair; however, with one inch straight hair I look great. Now, when it comes to long straight hair, I hate the way it looks on me but I love how my natural hair looks long on me. Kinda weird, but hey I have a fat face and those styles just bring out my facial features more.

ITA...with ME!

 

[ghanaian dime]

I agree. I color my hair dark brown or almost black b/c I don't think my naturally light to medium brown color looks good on me. I inherited it from my mother who is light. I am brown, so that color washes me out.

I say yes.

Just because you're born with something doesn't mean it looks the best.

If I was born with a lumpy nose or a mole on my cheek, I'd want to have them fixed. Not that I was UGLY with them, I just look better without them.

Different hair styles suit different people. Not every single person looks good with every style.

Many people either have race issues or don't know the true potential of their fair...

However, it's not fair to assume someone who changes their hair texture or color automatically has deep seated issues or unhealthy hair practices... sometimes a hairstyle is just a hairstyle.

 

[ladylibra]

Remember however, they are still going against the biological preference due to culture. It doesn't change the fact that skin that has a glow be it a faint or strong one is preferable. You can train yourself to be aroused by ANYTHING, it still doesn't change what is better in terms of passing down good genes.

You can like tiny feet, for example all you like, but let the climate change and half the world's civilizations be wiped out and men will be snatching up the available women left and right Size 5 to Size 11.

It all comes back to what many other posters have already probed: nature vs. nurture.

THICK, SIGNIFICANT hair of whatever color or texture is what is biologically preferable because it signals health.

Now wether that "thickness" is straight or curly or "significant" is hair that grows out and up or down and flows in the wind is a matter of definition according to culture.

We all know where those lines lie in our culture. So there's no need to starting beating that horse's carcass anymore than necessary.


Loving these posts! Science, psychology, Black women, and hair -what a wonderful, thrilling, interesting mix!

i thought that's the point i was making... i guess it didn't come across as such. never mind then

 

[MonPetite]

i thought that's the point i was making... i guess it didn't come across as such. never mind then

I still managed to beat a dead horse anyway, then!

 

[shmmr]

i thought that's the point i was making... i guess it didn't come across as such. never mind then

Ladylibra - You're point was well made, and well understood. (LOVE your videos).
mdwezi (sorry if I misspelled that) - I agree and share the same sentiment - even if its unpopular. (great new siggy pic).

I am thoroughly enjoying this thread LGL. Please do what will make you happy. Keep in mind that if you perm, you could always transition again with or without the BC, you could texlax again or stay permed. This decision does not have to be permanent unless you want it to be - regardless - you know how to have healthy hair, which is more important (imho) than whether its straight, curly, long, short, or in between.

Oh, also one previous poster mentioned that sometimes dissatisfaction with natural texture comes from not knowing how to style it, that there is a learning curve...i am completely in this boat. don't know how to get my natural hair to look right and at the moment don't have the time to experiment so I wear it straight because I know how to do that. I don't think LGL is in that place, but it is something for others to consider....

 

[brittanynic16]

I think that a person can look better with a texture they were not born with. I see it all the time on these makeover shows and for the most part the person always looks better. Sometimes they change the texture and sometimes they don't. One that comes to mind is this Asian lady on 10 Years Younger. They gave her a curly perm and she was HOT! She and I thought that it looked better than her naturally straight hair.

I personally think I look better with straight or my natural texture but I prefer the maintaince of my straight hair (not relaxed) for now.