"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."
This quote usually sums up these discussions. I value words and I do understand that words can be powerful tools in politics and oppression. However, I think our rejection of certain words, despite their neutral meaning, often reveals that we've internalized the negative attitudes that were projected onto the word's use at one time or another.
IMO, nappy is a neutral descriptor. I take no issue with the fact that my hair shares in common all the traits of a nap, therefore I take no issue with the word. If someone is using the word in a negative way, that is, to imply that those traits are bad, then I would take issue with them, not the word. The retort that I can see myself using in such a situation would be, "You say nappy like it's a bad thing?
"
I started a t
hread on the n-word a while back. I can genuinely appreciate all the different takes on it.
What about all the nappy heads who do indeed have rough hair. I know a few nappy head whose hair is rough and rugged to the touch. Then you have those who hair is soft to the touch like mines and others. How should afro hair be described. I know its not "curly." People want to lay out their own descriptions or adjectives such as woolly, cottony, fluffy etc... but when did these words became adjectives for hair. Is anyone going to argue that black hair is not of cotton or wool. Does anyone ever argue that black hair isn't sheep hair and isn't from sheep? What about all the black people hair that is far different from wool or cotton. Isn't sheep's hair oily and don't black women complain that their hair is dry? If that's the case then I wouldn't equate it with wool's hair. Why all the fuss with the word nappy when applied to afro hair it just gives a description of its appearance. Doesn't wavy, straight, curly gives descriptions. Why can't the word nappy or knotty do the same.
I wanted to point out the bolded a while back. We get so caught up in generalizations that our hair is seen as different and thus, bad, that we boldly [and blindly] deny the differences, instead of challenging the more troublesome, insidious notion that those differences are "bad". There was a thread a while back about a white person who said something along the lines of "black hair is rough". Never mind if that's generally true and whether or not her comment was motivated by ethnocentricism, racism, ignorance or some combo of those items. What got me was that few, if any, of the responses in the thread challenged the value judgement assigned to "rough".
Nouns become adjectives when the things they describe look like the objects they represent. An afro can look bushy but that doesn't mean it's green and looks like a plant. I think y'all taking it way too serious. I've said my hair felt like steel-wool when I used a product that left it dry and rough. If I later said it was steel-woolly, then that'd be a perfect description of how my hair felt: hard and rough almost like it could scrub rust off iron. Might be an exaggeration coz it wasn't as hard as steel, but words are supposed to give us an understanding of what people are talking about, paint a picture that we can almost touch when we aren't close in person to feel things for ourselves. If the word nappy didn't exist (and I'm so glad it has evolved over time to mean "kinky" coz I think it perfectly describes 4B), then we would have to say "an afro looked bushy" or uncombed 4B hair
like this "looks like beads (beady)". Folks get all up in arms about words because they take innocent words and turn them into insults instead of just looking at the neutral meaning of the word and moving on.
I love that language is so expansive. I love that someone can tell me they're going to change a nappy, and I don't sit there wondering, "you mean downy? or do you mean you're going to work in a textile factory? or do you mean you are going to relax hair and change it from kinky?" I can look at the context in which the word is used and guess they are talking about a diaper. I love that words are so rich in meaning, and think we do ourselves a disservice if we limit their meaning to just that one single one that some smart alec told us years back, and disregard all the other things that have grown from that root of the word that make language so beautiful and rich.
ITA!