Black Stylist Biased Against Natural Hair

[Guest]

It was an interesting article although somewhat "Overreactive"

If they would have tried to fudge her hair, just to get the money she would have been very displeased. At least they were honest, That is not thier speciality. You can't sue somebody beacuse they don't "Specialize" in a certain area.

And the other thing is most people with natuaral hair only went to salons back then for Presses.., Nobody washed an combed your fro. Unless you were rich.

 

[Guest]

[ QUOTE ]
shelli4018 said:
Kind of reminds me of the chicken and the egg....Are we prone to straightening our hair because that's all we're offered? Or is the demand so great that other salon services have fallen away?

I can't imagine a white salon not offering services for plain old hair. Can you imagine 80% of them walking around with perms?

I think we've forgotten our hair.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shelli, have you been to a white salon, most of their services are chemical as well. Color, curly perms, and even straighners for those with natuarl curly hair.

This nothing new with "Our" people we been trying to get our hair straight, for ages. Because let's face it. It's hard to manage.

 

[sassygirl125]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe learning to style natural hair, as well as straight hair should also be a requirement to receive a cosmetology license.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. If you can get your hands on a copy of "Let's Talk Hair", check out page 16. Even all black beauty schools have to follow rules made for white beauty schools. The textbooks are written by white people. It's crazy!

But I'm guessing it's like this because because most black women relax their hair... When they start losing $$$ I'm sure they'll wake up. I read an article about black salons vs. Dominican salons. The black stylists are shaking in their shoes!

 

[nbcgurl22]

Maybe in your book natural hair is hard to manage but to me it isn't. My natural hair is so much easier to manage than my relaxed hair was. I mean what is easier than a wash and go??

I think that natural hair is harder to take care of is a just a negitive stereotype that people place on natural hair.

 

[Guest]

[ QUOTE ]
nbcgurl22 said:
Maybe in your book natural hair is hard to manage but to me it isn't. My natural hair is so much easier to manage than my relaxed hair was. I mean what is easier than a wash and go??

I think that natural hair is harder to take care of is a just a negitive stereotype that people place on natural hair.

[/ QUOTE ]

Our hair is very diversified, Grades (type) very so I guess that would depend on the individual some would be easier than others. In my case, being tenderhead and having down the back thick hair it was a struggle. I always say it was a fight and it beat me everytime.. LOL

There was ABSOLUTELY no way I could "wash and go"...
Pa-lease.

 

[Chimma]

See, Tracy, I think that wearing relaxed hair is a choice of hair style because you do something to your hair to get it to be relaxed, but natural hair is hair the way it naturally grows out of your head - it's not the same thing as a "style." Cornrows, or twists, or pressing are styles done on natural hair, but natural hair is just hair. And I know someone whose parents won't allow her to get a relaxer. She didn't choose to "style it natural".

If a white person with straight hair came to a salon where white women said they could do all types of white hair, do you think they could say- the way your hair is is a style so get a curly perm done before I can treat your hair? I don't think it makes sense for black people either. What if you were just too broke to get it relaxed? You shouldn't have to have your hair "already styled" in order to get someone to look at it.

See, with the black woman who sued the white salon, I don't think it would have mattered if she was natural or relaxed. But I think it is just wrong for a place to refuse to serve you just because you don't have a relaxer. They can say they have less experience with it and they will try, and you walk out cuz you aren't comfortable with that - Fair enough. But to say, until you put a relaxer on your head, we don't provide any services to you - I do think that is discrimination just as much as if you go to a white salon for a cut, and they say "we don't cut black people's hair." Now, I have never gone to white salons, because I have been scared they would have no clue, but I do believe that it would be wrong for them to tell me that because i am black, i am not welcome in the shop. And that is what it seems happened to this lady. She didn't choose to style her hair with a relaxer so she couldn't get any service.

Somewhat off topic:
Why aren't beauty schools training people how to deal with black natural hair along with black permed hair and white natural hair and white permed hair? Every single black child is born into the world with natural hair, and we all have new growth? And honestly, there are a lot of women with type 3c- 4 whatever hair that aren't black that would provide business as well. And why is it that beauticians are the best at using heat on our hair, perming it, and cutting it short? Sometimes, I'm surprised that anyone has hair at all.

 

[Tracy]

It's funny you mention this Sassy. I live uptown - right in the heart of Harlem - and I am FLOORED by the disparity.

There at LEAST 4 or 5 clearly black owned salons in a 2 block radius of my home. Likewise, there are a significant number of Dominican salons. Perhaps even a few more. Basically I can't turn a corner without running into a salon of some kind - either Black owned or Domincan owned (who incidentally are also black - but we won't go there, cuz that ain't what we're talking about, now is it?

) .

So imagine my suprise and shock and disbelief that - after passing all of these salons day to day, week to week, going about my business - I have NEVER ONCE seen a person getting their hair done in ANY of the black salons. Now to be fair, I am IN the Dominican salon on the weekend

and so they may have a customer or two on Saturday (but not Sunday - cuz you know black folks don't work on God's day.

) but other than that - NADA.

Now the Dom. salon - PACKED. Ever. On a Monday or Tuesday MIDDAY there are at least 4 or 5 people. I went to get a perm in the snow on Sunday and there were 10 or so other customers in the salon. Why? Because they get their hair did on Sunday. Snow be damned!

And here's the kicker..ready...THEY ARE HAPPY WITH THE SERVICE.

So feeling badly (as I do - the weight of the world is forever on my shoulders

- but I digress) at the plight of my black sisters trying hard to maintain a black owned business in Harlem - the arguable historical "home" of black folks in NY - I wandered into a black owned salon (or two) to see what their prices were like, what kind of services they provided....etc.

Imagine - yet again - my shock and horror and disbelief - when BOTH salons quoted me $75 for a simple touch up. No I could not bring my perm, and they specialize in WEAVES, which cost $400 and up. "Are you aware" says I (kindly - sweetly) "that there are salons in the area that charge $50, $40, sometimes even $25 dollars for a relaxer just around the corner? Around each corner?"

Her response - "You mean them Spanish girls? They burn your hair out. That's why they dont charge no money! Keep going to them if you want to! You'll see!"

Meanwhile - outside the window, scores of women with long flowing hair (girls in Harlem have some HAIR y'all) pass by.

Day after day I continue to pass by these empty salons. Day after day I see those long flowing heads of hair ducking into and out of one of 8-10 of the Dominican salons in my immediate area...

So my question is, I guess - Are they quaking really? Because they need to be quaking....

They SO need to be quaking.

 

[Tracy]

I hear what you're saying Chimma...

But the woman neither said that they required her to have a relaxer, nor did she say in the article that they said they wouldn't service her hair because she didn't have one. What they said was that her regular stylist was out, and that they could not accomodate her because no one else in the salon could do natural hair.

No discrimination there.

Now if they said "no natural hair gets done without a relaxer here" that's even more wrong - but still not actionable as a discrimination claim. It's just not. And it would be especially hard to prove because here's another kicker - differentiations in hair type etc are uniquely important to black women, and as such are not recognized by the law as an issue upon which you could bring a cognizable claim.

When a white owned salon or white stylist will not do your hair because you are black, that issue turns on the color of the SKIN, not the type of hair, and discrimination based on skincolor IS cognizable under our system of laws as an issue that rises to the level of being punishable under our laws.

Hair type and grade, and natural or not, is not. And rightfully so, IMO. God help us if we took that madness to the legislature. That would be a new level of insanity.

That's my feeling on the legal side.

As to the issue of "natural" being a style or not - you have a valid point. I never thought of it in terms of children. But again I say - if naturals are mad, then naturals should step up to the plate.

 

[sassygirl125]

[ QUOTE ]
They SO need to be quaking.

[/ QUOTE ]

The people in your area have some real nerve making those kinds of comments when as you said, "Day after day I see those long flowing heads of hair ducking into and out of one of 8-10 of the Dominican salons in my immediate area..." They see it, too!

I wish I could find the article. I think I read it in a Yahoo hair group... IIRC, the article told stylists to use scare tactics on their clients. Comments like "They aren't licensed" and "You get what you pay for" were mentioned.

 

[Guest]

[ QUOTE ]
Somewhat off topic:
Why aren't beauty schools training people how to deal with black natural hair along with black permed hair

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm, cause they are "White Owned".
Sad, but true. Dudley (Black Owned) is our only hope right now. Perhaps someone could write them and say that they would like that added to the cirriculm. Only really someone explain to me besides, braids/twists/locs (which there are tons of shops that specialize in that) what would you want the salon to due via of servicing?

I'm serious.

Wash? Condition? Blowdry? It really does'nt take skills or schooling to do that and the majority of people are not gonna pay the $$$ chig a dera when they can do that at home. Chemicals on the other hand are dangerous I assume that is why so much emphasis is placed in the schools in this.

 

[Guest]

[ QUOTE ]
Hair type and grade, and natural or not, is not. And rightfully so, IMO. God help us if we took that madness to the legislature. That would be a new level of insanity.


[/ QUOTE ]

GOOD LORD - AMEN

I could see it now, "Congress Shall Make No Law, perferring a 2b over a 4a"

Madness indeed

 

[Topazz]

That article was excellent. There are a few I would like to share it with.

My hair is natural and it is absolutely not unmanageable. ALL hair has to be managed in some way shape or form and different textures get managed differently nothing more nothing less.

 

[Tracy]

 

[loverofnaps71]

[ QUOTE ]
kasey said:
In my humble opinion, it really doesn't take more labor to do natural hair. When I was regularly going to a salon I would be in and out of the chair in the same time it took to style a relaxed client's hair. Similar tools and procedures are required.

After shampooing and conditioning, relaxed hair is detangled, and either blown dry, hot curled and styled or rollerset and styled.

After shampooing my hair the stylist would blow dry my hair, hot curl and style. For some naturally heads it is truly a fallacy that natural hair is difficult to comb and that you must use a pressing comb. Many stylists don't understand this and they make it much harder than it has to be because of their negative assumptions.

[/ QUOTE ]

I often hear, "I can't go natural because it's harder to control or manage." I really think that that's the oft-given excuse. It's really a fallacy, too! It's not more difficult to manage natural hair...just don't comb while dry! OUCH!!!!!!

 

[loverofnaps71]

[ QUOTE ]
kasey said:
[ QUOTE ]
sassygirl125 said:
All stylists have to know how to cut and style straight hair in order to get a cosmetology license. IMO, it's not that they have forgotten themsleves. They just never learned.

And since 75%-80% (according to the book Brown Skin) of black women relax their hair, it makes sense (money-wise) that salons will reflect that. Which also explains why "natural hair specialists" can get away with charging outrageous fees.

I really need to learn how to cornrow and flat twist...

[/ QUOTE ]

Sassy

There are a few styists that do learn and realize that they need to be versatile. I used to go to training schools to get my hair done and I remember one instructor telling a student that she should learn how to do unrelaxed hair "because there is always going to be someone who comes into your salon wanting a press and curl."

I don't have experience with a lot of salons, but in one that I visited regularly in D.C. that primarily is a perm and weave shop, I was never turned away. I could tell that the stylist I saw hadn't seen a natural head in a long time, but she did a good job on my hair. She took a little extra time checking it out and even complemented me on the softness. (This was all before LHCF.) The last time I saw her she had gone natural. And people in the shop always seemed pretty interested in my hair. While Iisha was doing my hair all eyes (stylists and other clients) would be on me. Another stylist actually asked me if she could do my hair.

Tracy

I agree that litigation is not the answer. I think people should vote with their wallets and not patronize shops that charge extra fees for unrelaxed hair. I hope your mom didn't pay the $150. Before natural heads became cool, I used to get my hair done regularly at Marshall Fields salons and I never got charged a higher price.

[/ QUOTE ]

Kasey:

I'm also in MD and am looking for a natural haircare stylist who could possible do my hair...I'm looking for a different style. Getting board with the curly afro puff and can't do the two-strand twists myself. Thanks!

 

[nbcgurl22]

[ QUOTE ]
Mindymouse said:
[ QUOTE ]
nbcgurl22 said:
Maybe in your book natural hair is hard to manage but to me it isn't. My natural hair is so much easier to manage than my relaxed hair was. I mean what is easier than a wash and go??

I think that natural hair is harder to take care of is a just a negitive stereotype that people place on natural hair.

[/ QUOTE ]

Our hair is very diversified, Grades (type) very so I guess that would depend on the individual some would be easier than others. In my case, being tenderhead and having down the back thick hair it was a struggle. I always say it was a fight and it beat me everytime.. LOL

There was ABSOLUTELY no way I could "wash and go"...
Pa-lease.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pa-lease, every natural can wear a wash and go! And what is this grade of hair stuff??? Are we in the dark ages again - our hair is something akin to milk

 

[Stylepink]

I think this author is a little "overboard". Its that salons right to offer natural services or not. They key word in these businesses is "service". Not all salons offer the same services. If they don't offer the service you need, go to another. But its crazy to start sueing and getting attorneys involved in when people don't offer a service you need. People like her are what makes owning a business a pain in the behind---always complaining about something!

 

[Tracy]

nbcgurl,


Just playing devil's advocate...

What if "every natural" doesn't PREFER a wash and go. Isn't our hair, after all, a testament to our personal sense of style?

 

[Stylepink]

[ QUOTE ]
Tracy said:
nbcgurl,


Just playing devil's advocate...

What if "every natural" doesn't PREFER a wash and go. Isn't our hair, after all, a testament to our personal sense of style?

[/ QUOTE ]


This is a good point!

 

[Nay]

I just wanted to chime in and say that black folks' hair IS manageable.

My hair is THICK. I've made the mistake of washing it and going to sleep and trying to comb it the next day while dry, and it was A MISTAKE. But I've learned from that mistake.

Now I ALWAYS use lots of conditioner and my wide-toothed comb, and my hair is a downright therapeutic joy to comb! Do you hear me?

I used to spend three hours pressing my hair. And then I couldn't workout or do certain things 'cause I didn't want it to 'get nappy.'

NOWADAYS I condition with my Finesse conditioner. Then while it is well-conditioned and still wet, I apply my Black & Sassy creme, braid, and I'm good to go.

The next day I take out my braids and have beautiful wavy hair that I don't have to do much of anything to for the rest of the week. AND I AIN'T SCARED TO WORKOUT. To fog I say, "Come get me." I laugh at rain.

Does that sound like a black sister who is struggling with unmanageable hair? Not me!!

Lastly, who needs a stylist? Ain't nobody gonna care for this head of hair better than me!

 

[Lucia]

Nay, ITA,
Whenever I do go to a salon and it's not often I have to "prepare" myself for the inevitable phrase "you don't have a perm?, don't you want a perm?" my anser is NO, now I shouldn't have to deal with that from a black salon, it's ridiculous, I shouldn't be made to feel like a hair leper just b/c I choose to be natural. I was natural/relaxed/natural again, I may choose to relax, texturize or stay natural but it is my choice not anyone elses.

 

[Chimma]

Tracy, I'm glad you get what I'm saying, but I'm not completely following you.

[ QUOTE ]
Tracy said:
I hear what you're saying Chimma...

But the woman neither said that they required her to have a relaxer, nor did she say in the article that they said they wouldn't service her hair because she didn't have one. What they said was that her regular stylist was out, and that they could not accomodate her because no one else in the salon could do natural hair.


[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure what the difference is between not servicing natural hair and requiring a relaxer. If your hair is natural and you want them to service you, they require that you permanently change your hair from its natural texture. And how do black women permanently change your hair from its natural texture except by being texturized (mildly relaxed), silkened (mildly relaxed), or relaxed? What is the difference between "they won't wash and style your hair because you're natural (what they did to her)" and they "require her to put a relaxer on her hair to do her hair"? I think its different ways of wording the same thing.

[ QUOTE ]

No discrimination there.

Now if they said "no natural hair gets done without a relaxer here" that's even more wrong - but still not actionable as a discrimination claim. It's just not.


[/ QUOTE ]

See, that's where I lose you, and you just write "it's just not." and I don't follow the way you came to that conclusion. Being born with natural black hair is as much a part of being born black as being born with black skin. Most black women in America choose to style their hair with a relaxer, but no one should be forced to "make" that choice in order to get hair service. You can change the texture of your hair or change the shape of your nose or change your skin tone or change the size of your booty or your hips, all things your were born with, but you should not "need to" in order to get service.

[ QUOTE ]

And it would be especially hard to prove because here's another kicker - differentiations in hair type etc are uniquely important to black women, and as such are not recognized by the law as an issue upon which you could bring a cognizable claim.

When a white owned salon or white stylist will not do your hair because you are black, that issue turns on the color of the SKIN, not the type of hair, and discrimination based on skincolor IS cognizable under our system of laws as an issue that rises to the level of being punishable under our laws.

Hair type and grade, and natural or not, is not. And rightfully so, IMO. God help us if we took that madness to the legislature. That would be a new level of insanity.

That's my feeling on the legal side.


[/ QUOTE ]
Some people will not discriminate against south east asian people with darker skin than black people, because they look to other characteristically black things for clues. If you go to brazil, straight hair and black skin will get you a lot less discrimination that black skin and nappy hair. Discrimination based on race is also illegal, and skin color is only one mark of race so this can be a legal issue. Haven't we heard of people who have very light skin but 3c hair or other non skin color indicators?
If I went to a white salon and I had natural hair, and they refused to serve me because I didn't relax my hair, wouldn't I be able to argue in court that I should not be forced to permanently change the natural texture of my hair in order to get service? What if I wanted to go get my makeup done, and they told me I had to get a nose job for them to be able to put on the makeup on because they don't have experience with wide nosed people? Maybe just because I have a wide nose they'll do a worse job, but they shouldn't just tell me that they can't accomodate me at all. You shouldn't be forced to permanently change a part of yourself just to get service.

[ QUOTE ]

As to the issue of "natural" being a style or not - you have a valid point. I never thought of it in terms of children. But again I say - if naturals are mad, then naturals should step up to the plate.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, there are different ways to do that, legal means being one of them. But I do not believe that black women who do not relax their hair should have to hold majority monetary power in order to get service. There are a lot of examples of minorities not being strong enough to control the economic system, but minorities should have rights as well. In some places, this isn't a problem with this at all. Others, it is. But you shouldn't have to have the economic power for the right to walk into a salon that has to follow equal rights standards and expect them not to turn you out. Say you are one black person living in a 99% white town. They don't care about your money, but it doesn't mean its fair that you can't get service from the places in the town.

 

[Chimma]

Hmm, one thing is- I'm going natural, but I do think natural long hair is harder to manage than straight. I'm having to relearn a lot (not like I wasn't relearning when I was relaxed. This board has a wealth of advice for all hair types) But I think natural hair is harder to manage in our society.

Imagine we are in a society that is African and the hair ideal is 4z natural hair and everyone wears locs and braids and puffs, but you were born white with fragile caucasian hair. Then I think straight hair would be hard. Salons wouldn't do your hair for you. It'd be real hard to do a lot of the styles. Your hair would be too oily all the time. Imagine Cameron Diaz trying to get her hair into an afro puff?

 

[nbcgurl22]

[ QUOTE ]
Tracy said:
nbcgurl,


Just playing devil's advocate...

What if "every natural" doesn't PREFER a wash and go. Isn't our hair, after all, a testament to our personal sense of style?

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't say that they HAD to, just that they could.

 

[loverofnaps71]

[ QUOTE ]
Nay said:
I just wanted to chime in and say that black folks' hair IS manageable.

My hair is THICK. I've made the mistake of washing it and going to sleep and trying to comb it the next day while dry, and it was A MISTAKE. But I've learned from that mistake.

Now I ALWAYS use lots of conditioner and my wide-toothed comb, and my hair is a downright therapeutic joy to comb! Do you hear me?

I used to spend three hours pressing my hair. And then I couldn't workout or do certain things 'cause I didn't want it to 'get nappy.'

NOWADAYS I condition with my Finesse conditioner. Then while it is well-conditioned and still wet, I apply my Black & Sassy creme, braid, and I'm good to go.

The next day I take out my braids and have beautiful wavy hair that I don't have to do much of anything to for the rest of the week. AND I AIN'T SCARED TO WORKOUT. To fog I say, "Come get me." I laugh at rain.

Does that sound like a black sister who is struggling with unmanageable hair? Not me!!

Lastly, who needs a stylist? Ain't nobody gonna care for this head of hair better than me!

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Nay! Excellent points! Exactly my sentiment. How many black women refuse to exercise because of hair? How many refuse to swim? Go out in the rain? Now, I RUN out in it! Maybe one day I'll make love in it!

 

[Tracy]

[ QUOTE ]
loverofnaps71 said:
[ QUOTE ]
Nay said:
How many black women refuse to exercise because of hair? How many refuse to swim? Go out in the rain? Now, I RUN out in it! Maybe one day I'll make love in it!

[/ QUOTE ]

I already have...that';s not about hair...that's just about letting yourself freak out a little...

 

[Tracy]

[ QUOTE ]
nbcgurl22 said:
[ QUOTE ]
Tracy said:
nbcgurl,


Just playing devil's advocate...

What if "every natural" doesn't PREFER a wash and go. Isn't our hair, after all, a testament to our personal sense of style?

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't say that they HAD to, just that they could.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough...

 

[Nay]

[ QUOTE ]
loverofnaps71 said:
[ QUOTE ]

Hi Nay! Excellent points! Exactly my sentiment. How many black women refuse to exercise because of hair? How many refuse to swim? Go out in the rain? Now, I RUN out in it! Maybe one day I'll make love in it!

[/ QUOTE ]

LOVEROFNAPS, go on with yo bad self! Girl, now that I ain't scared to sweat, my hair looks good, and my butt is perky from all that jogging

There's going to be a lot of sisters in the casket whose hair is tight, but their heart gave out 'cause they didn't want to exercise and mess up their hair!

 

[Tracy]

[ QUOTE ]
Being born with natural black hair is as much a part of being born black as being born with black skin.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is no such thing as "black hair" in any real sense of that word. That is a fallacy and a fiction. I get your point about natural hair being the hair you have growing out of your head etc...but overall *and certainly based on the comment above I am inclined to lean back in the other direction and say. Hair is just hair. It can be arranged into styles. You wear the styles you want to based on how much (or not) you choose to alter what you were born with. But to say that I, as a 3c, should be able to walk into a salon that does braids and demand a relaxer is not based on any notion of "black hair" - it based on a person feeling that they should be serviced under every circumstance and that is simply not an economic reality. Additionally, it is silly. Why on GOd's green earth anyone would WANT a person to do their hair that is admittedly NOT GOOD AT IT, or doesn't KNOW HOW is beyond me. And to assume that they are biased against you simply because they admit that, with no real basis for that assumption smacks of a foot-stomping, kicking and screaming tantrum. And if they are there are better and more effective ways to deal with that.

[ QUOTE ]
See, that's where I lose you, and you just write "it's just not."

[/ QUOTE ]

No - I didn't, I said the issue turns on skincolor with discrimination, not hair. You are losing me because you think that because you FEEL this should be actionable, that it is. It is not.

[ QUOTE ]
Some people will not discriminate against south east asian people with darker skin than black people, because they look to other characteristically black things for clues. If you go to brazil, straight hair and black skin will get you a lot less discrimination that black skin and nappy hair. Discrimination based on race is also illegal, and skin color is only one mark of race so this can be a legal issue. Haven't we heard of people who have very light skin but 3c hair or other non skin color indicators?

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting - but wholly irrelevant. Skin color is NOT "only one mark of race". It is THE mark of race, from a legal standpoint. The law does not recognize "shades" and "variances" of skincolor in the same sense as they may - in say - South Africa. Under the law you are either black - or not. White or not. You may be able to make out a claim of discrimination as a mixed person based on being a different "color" than someone else. But those notions are well settled from a legal standpoint. It is COLOR that is actionable - not hair. However you might feel about it.

Don't believe me...do some legal research on the subject. I'll do you one better - I'LL do it. But HAIR is definitely NOT. IT IS NOT actionable from a discrimination (which this would not be) nor a REVERSE discrimination (which it kind of would) standpoint. I feel the issue, and I think something should be done about it. But you are ignoring the blatant facts stated in the article above. This woman had her hair serviced at the salon before. It does not appear on the facts that they turned her away because she was natural - it looks much more like they turned her away because they did not have an appropriate stylist to meet her need. Unless you are a natural and you happen to be sensitve to the issue.

If a white woman walked into a white salon and they did not think that they could do her 3C hair (yes - they too can have 3c hair) because they primarily do 1's and 2's because there was no one there would could work with that hairtype there is nothing DISCRIMINATORY about that. It, in fact, happens all the time. I hear scores of curly haired women complain that they can't get a decent haircut. Some are even sent away because no one in the salon has a clue what to do with all those curls.

It called - the breaks. Those are just the breaks.

Now - if a stylist WERE to say "you should get a relaxer" - I agree that's bad. You shuldn't have to deal with it. But is it any different than say a person with type 3 hair , whose hair is resistant to the relaxer and who is told she should get a "super" instead of the "mild" she prefers? And what if they say to her, upon her refusal, that they "won't be able to do anything with that head then". It happens. I'm SURE it happens. Stylists can be dumb.

Not discrimination. The breaks.

[ QUOTE ]
Say you are one black person living in a 99% white town. They don't care about your money, but it doesn't mean its fair that you can't get service from the places in the town.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're back to racial discrimination which brings us back to the beginning. You wouldn't need to take economic steps in this case (although if the point is to make a change it would be wise - and boycott is not the only means to achieve it) because you DO have a legal recourse. But you probaly should. Because racial discrimination, not discrimination of hairtype, is actionable under the law.

It's just not.

 

[Nyambura]

[ QUOTE ]
Mindymouse said:
[ QUOTE ]
Hair type and grade, and natural or not, is not. And rightfully so, IMO. God help us if we took that madness to the legislature. That would be a new level of insanity.


[/ QUOTE ]

GOOD LORD - AMEN

I could see it now, "Congress Shall Make No Law, perferring a 2b over a 4a"

Madness indeed

[/ QUOTE ]