You may also like...

4 Responses

  1. 3CB says:

    I don’t know whether it intrinsically helps or hinders the feminist cause. I know there’s an assumption that feminists and lesbians wear natural hair as a statement, and so any woman who has natural hair, dreadlocks (or is a single mother) is assumed to be feminist and/or lesbian – among other things.

    In the same vein, feminists, lesbians, and naturalistas are assumed to be outspoken, and so any woman that is clear and confident in her ideas is assumed to fall into those other categories.

    So in this case, I suppose your having natural hair and articulating your ideas in a planned and logical manner led to the assumption that you were one – if not all the above.

    On that basis, having natural hair, reading hairpolitan, OWNING hairpolitan will lead to those assumptions. And if these women end up in the public eye and are embraced as positive influencers, and since they will automatically be assumed to be feminists/lesbians, then by extension, feminism and lesbianism may end up being more acceptable to those that are currently against it. My two cents =)

    • hairpolitan_mag says:

      Awesome insight! I guess we’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t in a sense.

  2. Napspiration says:

    I struggle to understand how wearing my hair the way God created it, the way it naturally grows out of my scalp = feminism.

    Is a woman of Caucasian, Asian or Oriental descent who wears her hair ‘natural’ a feminist?

    Or is this label tagged on women of African descent only?

    If the latter is the case, then what we are talking about here is a lot deeper than feminism.


    • hairpolitan_mag says:

      Thank you for your comment. I think because of the aspect that we tend to “fight” to be “approved” with our hair in its natural state then the fight would be tucked in under feminism or where else would you place the struggle for our acceptance as we are?