What is weird, is she is saying the right information, but then she's disagreeing with what she herself saying. She seems to be saying that it's not permanent because your hair will grow out eventually.
I believe that she means that a person with chemically treated hair would still have hair grow in it's natural state. So, in a sense she is correct because, a relaxer does not affect hair that has not even grown out of your scalp yet. She is trying to get the point across that a person with chemically treated hair does not have to cut off their relaxed hair in order to have their hair grow in its natural state. The hair will grow naturally regardless of whether or not the hair has been cut. She is not talking about the hair that has already been relaxed. She acknowledged that that portion of the hair remains straight.
... this is just a big misunderstanding. Some of the things she said were a questionable though. (retouches every 2 weeks is excessive)
uI dont think she's stupid in the sense that we usually call ppl stupid....I think she's retarded and probably hard of hearing, which most likely adds to her retardation.
I don't think she's retarded. She makes some valid points in this video here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvLI-Hu9vEI&feature=related
Home girl should just stick to subjects she is better versed on.
I didn't watch the whole video.. it was too tedious. lolShe was challenged on these points and she deleted the comments saying that the previously relaxed hair would become nappy again. Though I get what you are saying and at 1 point I thought that's what she meant also.
The video is just a mess from start to finish.
It was truly painful. Somebody wrote a comment that made perfect sense, to which she replied that is what she was trying to say, so that's that I guess.I didn't watch the whole video.. it was too tedious. lol