Is hair type due to race or genetics?
- Thread starter Dani.Nicole
- Start date
AnitaTheLengths
New Member
This thread was a good read. It's all genetics.
LunadeMiel
Well-Known Member
Question: If genetics is what determines how we "look" and how we "look" (bone structure, skin color, hair etc.) determines which racial category we are place in, then how is genetics not related to race?
LunadeMiel
Well-Known Member
Outside of the political, economic, social context, what is wrong with the idea of race
? If certain groups of people are genetically similar what is wrong with grouping them together then identifying them by that said group.
Dani.Nicole
New Member
So I missed the previous discussion about the hair length issue. I'm not sure if I'm reading this right...but are we implying that in some groups Afro hair cannot grow long because of a specific gene that possibly stunts hair growth? I have never heard of that! I know there are problems retaining hair length, but I don't necessarily think we CAN'T grow hair long because it is in our genes. I believe we can only grow our hair to certain lengths. Meaning those who have a shorter anagen phase may never achieve waist length. BUT that does not mean it can't grow long.
Nonie
Well-Known Member
I have to say this has been such a great thread to read. It's got me thinking (an exercise I need to do more often 
) and I've learned a lot.
I was just coming to say that having lived in the UK, Swansea/Birmingham to be exact, I distinctly remember Indians from India being referred to as black. I also found this article along those lines rather interesting
Hi Bella!
I'm from East Africa (Kenya) and don't know of any racial mixing in my family up and I can go up to ten generations back. I also know that for years, my hair didn't grow any longer than 5-6 inches. In fact, I only got to that length when I was young and mom cared for my hair; and then later in my teens and twenties when I had my hair chemically processed. Otherwise, all other times, before my twenties, I had a TWA that was about 3 inches long stretched. I was one of those whose hair doesn't grow long.
Enter 2001 and the start of my education on hair care and my hair grew to 9-11 inches...with trimming and without *REAL* protective styling. Also please note, I achieved that without the "moisture, moisture, moisture" rule we all know that asks you apply something to your hair after washing it to keep it from drying and breaking. I also never sealed. In other words, while my knowledge on hair had improved my ability to retain what was always growing hair and therefore see length, I probably could still have had better retention had I dotted all i's and crossed all t's as those serious about the business of growing hair do.
So I don't think it's nature that is to blame for hair that appears to not grow in Africa. Not when it involves a mass of people not directly related to each other. I think it's more to do with nurture. I'd dare say, show me one of those you claim that doesn't grow long hair and let me take care of it for them for a year and I'ma change your mind.
I think the reason folks say genetics are not related to race is because race is such a vague adjective while genetics are scientific and actually can be proven. Race depends on the eye of the beholder most times. There are umpteen threads on this forum alone where people have been told they aren't black because of X, Y, Z when they themselves believed they were black. So who's right? See how tricky race can be?
) and I've learned a lot. Correct me if im wrong but I thought that is alreayd factored in. I have never seen an Indian told they are black
Ok..fine. However, Indians are not Black and I'm not really interested in talking diseases only hair. LOL...I shoulda left that one alone.
No, IndoPakistani people used to be called Black. Quite frequently it's the same for other dark peoples. Australisn Aboriginals have been and some still refer to themselves as Black. The term isn't merely exclusive to people of African descent...tho maybe it is here in the US
I was just coming to say that having lived in the UK, Swansea/Birmingham to be exact, I distinctly remember Indians from India being referred to as black. I also found this article along those lines rather interesting
Hi Bella!
I'm from East Africa (Kenya) and don't know of any racial mixing in my family up and I can go up to ten generations back. I also know that for years, my hair didn't grow any longer than 5-6 inches. In fact, I only got to that length when I was young and mom cared for my hair; and then later in my teens and twenties when I had my hair chemically processed. Otherwise, all other times, before my twenties, I had a TWA that was about 3 inches long stretched. I was one of those whose hair doesn't grow long.Enter 2001 and the start of my education on hair care and my hair grew to 9-11 inches...with trimming and without *REAL* protective styling. Also please note, I achieved that without the "moisture, moisture, moisture" rule we all know that asks you apply something to your hair after washing it to keep it from drying and breaking. I also never sealed. In other words, while my knowledge on hair had improved my ability to retain what was always growing hair and therefore see length, I probably could still have had better retention had I dotted all i's and crossed all t's as those serious about the business of growing hair do.
So I don't think it's nature that is to blame for hair that appears to not grow in Africa. Not when it involves a mass of people not directly related to each other. I think it's more to do with nurture. I'd dare say, show me one of those you claim that doesn't grow long hair and let me take care of it for them for a year and I'ma change your mind.
I think the reason folks say genetics are not related to race is because race is such a vague adjective while genetics are scientific and actually can be proven. Race depends on the eye of the beholder most times. There are umpteen threads on this forum alone where people have been told they aren't black because of X, Y, Z when they themselves believed they were black. So who's right? See how tricky race can be?
Bella_Atl
Member
No absolutely not! I implied that there could be a possible genetic reason why some people of African descent hair grows slower then the typical 6 inches a year and it could be frustrating. Basically the same thing you just stated. A just simply a slower growth rate. Even if it's 3a hair.
I think some people saw, "backwards bush" and "no-grow" and was just undone by it which I didn't mean any offense at all.
Last edited:
Dani.Nicole
New Member
Oh ok! I was really wondering about that. Thanks for clearing that up.
Dani.Nicole
New Member
Dani my stance is that it's about family genetics at the end of the day. Since "New World" people of African descent by and large have little idea of their direct African line of descent AND the practices of those people, let's make it simple and look at OUR own families. This takes the obscurity out of it.
I think family genetics does make it a lot simpler to view how each individual inherited certain traits. If we started from Adam and Eve, GOOD LORD, we'd never get to the bottom of this question
bedazzled
New Member
Outside of the political, economic, social context, what is wrong with the idea of race
The problem with race is that one is suggesting that their are different "breeds" of people like there are various breeds of dogs and other animals. Unlike humans, there IS a genetic difference between dog breeds unlike dog breeds (races) our phenotype that is determined by genes stems from what is necessary to survive in our environment. 'White' people are just as capable of having 4B hair as black people are capable of having type 1 hair. Black people are no more genetically similar to other blacks, as theyre whites & so on. Which is why some asian people look hispanic..why some native americans look asian..why some blacks look asian.. not one phenotype is SPECIFIC to one race, in which in breeds there are genes specific to that breed if that makes sense.
bedazzled
New Member
What I am saying (cant speak for all) is that all of our genes are equal..everyone is built the same..& thus everyone is capable of growing hair. There is no baldylocks gene for african americans.
Dani.Nicole
New Member
When you say we are equal, do you mean we all have some type of genes that make up our DNA. Or do you mean we all have the exact same type of genes that make up our DNA?
30something
Well-Known Member
Did anyone read the article posted, it says at one point:
...um Ok a Syndrome.. wow really ...I don't know what to think about that one.
...um Ok a Syndrome.. wow really ...I don't know what to think about that one.
bedazzled
New Member
We all have the same type. There are so many genes that make up our phenotype so that is different but if you look at a human are genes are all basically the same. As hundreds & thousands of years go on if i go north & you go south are genes are going to adapt to better suit our environment. Think of it as a long term tan in regards to skin color. Various lighter skinned individuals go out into the sun & they get a tan. That is their bodies way of adapting to the sun while others will burn. The ones that tan are more fit than the ones that burn which eventually will lead to gene adaptation.This is like the concept of sickle cell. Black people aren't known for having sickle cell bc their skin is dark..its because of the high amounts of malaria in africa. Sickle cell is the way our genes adapted in order to prevent us from getting malaria. It doesnt mean all black people will have sickle cell..just the ones that carry that 'protective' gene. It doesn't mean black people are different than white people..its just the way a specific gene mutated from being in a specific environment. Also, white people have been found to carry the sickle cell trait.
Last edited:
LunadeMiel
Well-Known Member
lovenharmony
ET / OT Bonafide Member
Nonie
Well-Known Member
About the word "syndrome", while mostly used to refer to disease, syndrome does have a broader definition of just referring to "a group of things or events that form a recognizable pattern" albeit usually that pattern is "undesirable" if we're talking of syndrome. (Encarta). In fact, Merriam Webster doesn't describe "syndrome" as disease but rather as some "abnormality or condition" which in the case of Woolly Hair Syndrome in white people would indeed seem abnormal, wouldn't it?
I guess the reason why that ^^ didn't bother me one bit is I have never thought of my hair texture (which is nappy, kinky, coily) in a negative way. So it takes me a minute or two to get a derogatory reference even when it is deliberately intended. I guess I'm somewhat a snob and think I'm all that and a bag of chips and everyone else that doesn't think so is just a poor deluded fool. *shrug*
I guess the reason why that ^^ didn't bother me one bit is I have never thought of my hair texture (which is nappy, kinky, coily) in a negative way. So it takes me a minute or two to get a derogatory reference even when it is deliberately intended. I guess I'm somewhat a snob and think I'm all that and a bag of chips and everyone else that doesn't think so is just a poor deluded fool. *shrug*
Dani.Nicole
New Member
When I read that, took it another way. If I was white, and I saw another white person with very coarse Afro-textured hair, I'd be like
I'd call it a syndrome too! lol But I do think that's a little farfetched 
Bella_Atl
Member
You're not a snob..you're secure. It's the kicked dogs that holler, and holler and holler...
Similar threads
