Why do you suppose that there was so little information about our hair.....

[vtoodler]

before the Internet?

 

[Risingsun]

We were not considered the norm and we looked at others to fulfill our haircare needs. The products and commercials were not geared to us. The Internet has allowed for the sharing of ideas across multiple backgrounds without the need of the giant companies that are not geared to us. Information is shared faster over the Internet whereas before it took longer for people to share with total strangers.

 

[EnExitStageLeft]

Simple: Our hair type is rare.

Kinky hair is rare. Super rare so much in fact that researchers are willing to pay biggggggg money just to study it.

We can go from ear length to MBL in one pass of a flat iron.

Our texture is pretty bomb like that .

 

[BostonMaria]

We were not considered the norm and we looked at others to fulfill our haircare needs. The products and commercials were not geared to us. The Internet has allowed for the sharing of ideas across multiple backgrounds without the need of the giant companies that are not geared to us. Information is shared faster over the Internet whereas before it took longer for people to share with total strangers.

And most of these companies knew they could sell us JUNK and we would buy it

 

[vtoodler]

And most of these companies knew they could sell us JUNK and we would buy it

Sad but true.

That's why I'm glad that so many of us are making our own products.

 

[southerncitygirl]

@vtoodler

@Chicoro talks about that subject here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2FuJogBVec


I think it is rare in sense that scientists haven't able to study our hair on a consistent basis but not rare as people make it out to be. Afro textured hair is all over the world on many people as the african diaspora is not a monolith. What makes it more complicated is the variety of textures, curl patterns, density, porosity, etc that make up the umbrella term of afro-textured hair.

Most of you hussies ain't trying to give up no hurr for research purposes nor was your grandmama & 'nem so they had to try as best they can to concoct products based solely off the fact that most times curly/kinky hair tends to be dryer or more fragile. Petrochemicals made that cheap & easy.

 

[koolkittychick]

I totally agree with southerncitygirl. Our hair in its virgin state is VERY hard to get in any significant quantities. Most of us start mauling it with heat and chemicals before we even start school. We start shaving our boys down before they walk. And if someone actually achieves a glorious crown of plentiful, virgin hair, best believe she's not giving that isn up to NOBODY! Plus, the infinite variations of Afro hair make it an extremely daunting task to be able to properly research the full spectrum of type 3 and 4 Afro hair. Maybe as more of us learn to grow it out so that we would be willing to donate, scientists may have more opportunity to have access to our hair, which would only benefit us in the long run.

 

[vtoodler]

southerncitygirl


But couldn't they also get Afro-textured hair from black men?

 

[southerncitygirl]

vtoodler only if they wanted to give it their hair up... it would have to be voluntary.

 

[Texasdymond]

before the Internet?

I think we lost a lot of hair care techniques and info when we were stolen from our homeland.

 

[prettyinpurple]

Why do you think that?

I wouldn't say that at all. Maybe it wasn't widely available to the general public, but I'd never say that there was little information about it. At the least, dermatologists and hair care manufacturers had some knowledge. Even the average barber and cosmetologist did, just from experience. Lots of knowledge was passed down from woman to woman in families. There was no vacuum of knowledge before the Internet became widely accessible to the public.

Ex. - Curly hair causing ingrowns, that's been a known problem for black men with beards for ages. The products to help it are not brand new. Folliculitis is not a new dermatology term either and it applies to a lot of black men.

I agree that the motherland had knowledge about our hair for centuries.

 

[koolkittychick]

Why do you think that?

I wouldn't say that at all. Maybe it wasn't widely available to the general public, but I'd never say that there was little information about it. At the least, dermatologists and hair care manufacturers had some knowledge. Even the average barber and cosmetologist did, just from experience. Lots of knowledge was passed down from woman to woman in families. There was no vacuum of knowledge before the Internet became widely accessible to the public.

Ex. - Curly hair causing ingrowns, that's been a known problem for black men with beards for ages. The products to help it are not brand new. Folliculitis is not a new dermatology term either and it applies to a lot of black men.

I agree that the motherland had knowledge about our hair for centuries.

I'm talking about the kind of scientific information and research needed to create an extensive array of products/best practices specifically tailored towards Afro-textured hair, which we know here is VERY DIFFERENT from that which is recommended/produced for other types of hair. That information that has been sorely lacking in industry until only very recently. And even the information that has been passed down in the Black (American) community has been tainted by centuries of slavery and the self-hate borne from it--in other words, much of what we have been taught is geared not to the best care of Afro hair, but rather how to make it act and look like White hair. It's only in recent years that we have begun to shed that mentality and approach the care of our hair from a more positive and Afro-centric place, and science and industry has only just begun to try to catch up to what we have started, thanks to the internet.

 

[Saludable84]

When I was in college, I learned about black hair in a forensics class. You learned about black, white and Asian hair. It's the same information that you hear about today, but I actually got to see my hair under a microscope.

I saw that my hair wasn't as "oval" as most research stated. My hair looked more Asian and it's funny because Asian products work really great on my hair. The truth I found (that's still correct to this day) from that class was that black hair is prone to be dryer. My hair under the microscope was more round and I couldn't see through it despite the fact that I'm supposed to be missing a medulla. That's how I knew that most of the information about black ppl is sooooo grossly limited but what little is known is churned out for us to believe because no one knows and we as a nationality and ethnicity don't really want people knowing about us.

When people speak about how our hair usually has no medulla and it's oval, I usually roll my eyes because black hair is versatile that it is not entirely true. I do believe our hair is drier, but that's as far as I go. It varies so widely that even when we write books about it, I can't really take much advice because it only applies to some not all. And even for those some, the extent can still only partially apply to them.

 

[prettyinpurple]

I'm talking about the kind of scientific information and research needed to create an extensive array of products/best practices specifically tailored towards Afro-textured hair, which we know here is VERY DIFFERENT from that which is recommended/produced for other types of hair. That information that has been sorely lacking in industry until only very recently. And even the information that has been passed down in the Black (American) community has been tainted by centuries of slavery and the self-hate borne from it--in other words, much of what we have been taught is geared not to the best care of Afro hair, but rather how to make it act and look like White hair. It's only in recent years that we have begun to shed that mentality and approach the care of our hair from a more positive and Afro-centric place, and science and industry has only just begun to try to catch up to what we have started, thanks to the internet.

I'd have to disagree. I'd say the 70s and other decades had black people taking care of their hair from a positive and Afro-centric place. You could argue that the trend is simply cycling around again and has more fervor with information available on the Internet.

The old-school black hair companies were the leaders in research and producing products for our hair. Many people go back to those products now, or favor more natural products. They focused on chemically relaxed black hair, afros, etc.

Everything is more noticeable now with the Internet. But I think y'all are discounting research and information that was happening before the Internet, to the discredit of people who worked on it. Y'all make it sound like we caused a revolution or something, or that a younger generation should take all the credit. Just a little far-fetched IMO. I find it odd.

To answer the OP again: I disagree with the sentiment of the question. There was information, but not widely distributed as now. I would never call it 'so little information'.

ETA: I think your comment is focusing on natural hair. The OP stated hair so that could be natural, relaxed, whatever. Relaxed = "looking like white hair" to you?? Apologies if I misunderstood.

Regardless caring for chemically treated hair is important as well as learning to care for natural hair -- no matter the reason you relaxed. For some people that is the best care of their hair to them.

 

[koolkittychick]

I'd have to disagree. I'd say the 70s and other decades had black people taking care of their hair from a positive and Afro-centric place. You could argue that the trend is simply cycling around again and has more fervor with information available on the Internet.

The old-school black hair companies were the leaders in research and producing products for our hair. Many people go back to those products now, or favor more natural products. They focused on chemically relaxed black hair, afros, etc.

Everything is more noticeable now with the Internet. But I think y'all are discounting research and information that was happening before the Internet, to the discredit of people who worked on it. Y'all make it sound like we caused a revolution or something, or that a younger generation should take all the credit. Just a little far-fetched IMO. I find it odd.

To answer the OP again: I disagree with the sentiment of the question. There was information, but not widely distributed as now. I would never call it 'so little information'.

ETA: I think your comment is focusing on natural hair. The OP stated hair so that could be natural, relaxed, whatever. Relaxed = "looking like white hair" to you?? Apologies if I misunderstood.

Regardless caring for chemically treated hair is important as well as learning to care for natural hair -- no matter the reason you relaxed. For some people that is the best care of their hair to them.

Yes, my comment was primarily talking about natural, unaltered hair. And you're right, caring for chemically treated hair is important as well--I myself am relaxed, so it's important for me to learn about and practice care for both natural and chemically treated hair, since I practice long-term stretching. You have a point that there was a brief "renaissance" of sorts for natural hair care in the 70s, and much of that was rediscovered and built upon during this current natural care trend.

As with all things, knowledge is never static, and it is constantly evolving based on new information as time goes by. Now we know that mineral oil/petrolatum-based products are not the be-all and end-all to Black hair care (though it still has its place for some), we know that the traditional Afro hairstyle, while symbolically reaffirming, is not necessarily the best style for hair growth and retention, and that our fingers are the new Afro pick in terms of the best styling tool for our hair.

The internet has simply made this information much, much more accessible and attainable to more of us, so much so that instead of commerce and the media dictating how and what we use to maintain our hair, the script has flipped and now we are the ones who are dictating what we want to see and buy, and now industry and the media answer to our demands in exchange for our dollars. I think we all owe a small debt of gratitude to the internet and social media for this.

 

[Crackers Phinn]

To answer the OP again: I disagree with the sentiment of the question. There was information, but not widely distributed as now. I would never call it 'so little information'.

I remember seeing ads in the back of Essence and Ebony for both Wanakee's and Cathy Howse Hair growing methods as far back as the 1980's. 90% of what this board promotes comes from those two sources.

As far as products are concerned. Nobody should do more research on black people's needs than black people. I'm always surprised that people think that non minority's should do it for us.

 

[Saludable84]

I remember seeing ads in the back of Essence and Ebony for both Wanakee's and Cathy Howse Hair growing methods as far back as the 1980's. 90% of what this board promotes comes from those two sources. As far as products are concerned. Nobody should do more research on black people's needs than black people. I'm always surprised that people think that non minority's should do it for us.

Your absolutely right. Going back to my previous post, when I looked at my hair under the microscope, I told the teacher my hair doesn't look like the way it was described in my textbook. At point, I figured that the research wasn't correct or just generic and I dismissed it.

When I read science of black hair, it touched on this and I refused to really believe it. Some of the information she provided about black hair was generalized to what I learned long ago. Like I've said, after seeing my hair was round and not necessarily oval, I feel that more in for needs to be put in all types of black hair and not just one hair strand from one person. Only we know out people and we are too diverse to be generalized.

 

[ezina]

Your absolutely right. Going back to my previous post, when I looked at my hair under the microscope, I told the teacher my hair doesn't look like the way it was described in my textbook. At point, I figured that the research wasn't correct or just generic and I dismissed it.

When I read science of black hair, it touched on this and I refused to really believe it. Some of the information she provided about black hair was generalized to what I learned long ago. Like I've said, after seeing my hair was round and not necessarily oval, I feel that more in for needs to be put in all types of black hair and not just one hair strand from one person. Only we know out people and we are too diverse to be generalized.

One person is not a great sample size. It would be like saying that the study on the number of kidneys people are born with is unreliable because a single subject studied had three kidneys. Maybe you're just an anomaly. A cool idea would be taking on a personal research project of which the gist of it would be collecting strands of hair from your black peers and checking their shapes under the microscope to get more statistically powerful results. But of course, even then the results may not be too generalizable, but it's better than results from one person only.

And then there is the issue of race not being remotely scientific but purely social, which will simply complicate the analysis. I wonder if the genes/alleles responsible for kinky hair have been isolated so that we wouldn't have to depend on the murky pseudoscience that is raciology nor rest on skin color to determine blackness. Off to search in academic journals...

 

[ezina]

Double post...

 

[Risingsun]

If your hair was the first hair on the planet was is there to study? We should be studying other people's hair.

 

[Risingsun]

I hear it is the other way around, straight hair has no medulla and is considered hollow like fur. Mmmmm......let's go out of the textbook digging.

 

[CaraWalker]

because there never was any to begin with. looking back through american history, at what point was the hair or beauty needs of african american women a priority? other than figuring out how to make it straight?