Hair plays a major role in our popular culture. The right hairstyle with the right timing can influence the style of people worldwide. Movie stars like Marlene Dietrich, Rita Hayworth, Jane Russell and Marilyn Monroe had women cutting, coloring, dying and frying their hair in search of beauty. Who can forget Twiggy's pixie, Farrah's flip, Bo Derek's cornrows, and the "Rachel" — propelling Jennifer Aniston, an exceedingly average actress, to superstardom. Not to mention the "conk," a hairstyle that made grown men cry because of the chemicals needed to straighten naturally curly or kinky hair in order to be hip. Historically, hair has communicated status, privilege and style and served as a space where battles over meaning have been contested. Although the discussion of hair at a time of war seems frivolous, the politics of hair is not.
Recently it was reported that an unidentified editor at Glamour magazine gave a presentation on the "Dos and Don'ts of Corporate Fashion" to a major New York law firm. During the presentation the editor highlighted the Afro as a real "no-no," dreadlocks as "truly dreadful" and stated that "political hairstyles have to go." Luckily these statements were met with resistance because the group of lawyers knew that her words were not only inflammatory, but that her way of thinking leads to lawsuits. Unknowingly, this woman had invoked the politics of hair in her statements, while making the opposite claim. She chose to highlight these two hairstyles as "don'ts," re-inscribing dominant standards of beauty onto corporate culture.
Natural hairstyles for black women in America and abroad have moved beyond being simply political statements, to an expression of style. When we wear them, some of us are trying to make a political statement, and some of us are not. The same women that rock dreadlocks or twists for a couple of years, may relax and color their hair on a whim. In the fashion industry, all types of people wear dreadlocks — not just black people. And it is seen as a choice of style or politics, and is acceptable either way. Why is it when black people wear natural hairstyles, it is considered a "no-no" in corporate America? I understand the "when in Rome" thing, but why is so much weight given to this one area? If your hair is clean and neat, what is the problem?
In terms of professionalism, what about two-toned hair? Scraggly ends? Arriving at work with wet hair? And mullets. My God, can we please put a moratorium on the mullet? That horrid style is perceived as a blue-collar hairstyle, presumably making it "inappropriate" for a white-collar setting; however, that doesn't seem to stop the many folks from wearing it to corporate offices throughout the country. But seriously, hair is political as evidenced by the statements that are made by those that are in power. The gatekeepers come in all shapes and sizes. Hampton University, a prestigious, historically black university, recently banned their business majors from wearing "hip-hop" hairstyles. I understand trying to prepare young men and women for success in the business world post-graduation, but if you are not allowed to experiment with your hair in college, then when are you going to do it?
It's the gatekeepers that give Bo Derek credit for "creating" a hairstyle that had existed thousands of years before she existed. It's the gatekeepers that would make ignorant statements about hair "don'ts" during the same month that Queen Latifah is on the cover of Glamour (in a wig no less). Had the Queen still been donning African head wraps, perhaps she wouldn't be on the cover, because she would not be "commercial" or "mainstream" enough.
Part of my doctoral dissertation examined the trajectory of Queen Latifah's success, which correlated to the shedding of her Afrocentric image, speech and hairstyle. As Jennifer Lopez, Eve, Beyoncé, Ashlee Simpson and Jessica Alba get blonder, their star status gets bigger. When athletes and entertainers get into trouble, often the hair is the first thing to go. Such was the case with Michael Vick and Pac-Man Jones when they both shaved off their cornrows before high-profile court appearances, in an effort to sanitize their "image." What about the frenzy surrounding Britney Spears' shaved head? Literally, their hair was here today and gone tomorrow for personal, political and professional reasons.
Hair is clearly political. Just ask Don Imus who watched his career temporarily go down the toilet for uttering the words "nappy-headed hos." Or the recent spike in shampoo sales for Tsubaki, a product owned by Japanese cosmetics company Shiseido. Their simple ad campaign featuring famous Japanese women and the slogan "Japanese women are beautiful" resulted in $155 million dollars in sales, out earning Unilever, Proctor & Gamble and Japanese rival Kao Corp. Historically, Western standards of beauty and white women had been used to hawk Japanese hair products. Now, Japanese women are demanding that their beauty be appreciated and that they are represented in hair and cosmetic advertising to the tune of 43 million bottles sold.
The politics of hair is playing out in the world economy among cosmetic companies and in our everyday lives. What seems simple is often complex as reflected in issues surrounding hair and how it functions in our world.
visit www.hairguard.com
