Talkin' 'Bout Good And Bad Hair...See If I Care

If you think hair relaxers and weaves will ultimately result in the demise of Black America, you're wrong - and overly dramatic. I would not deny that the majority of African-Americans who permed their hair with lye in the '60s did so out of desire to assimilate. But honey, this is 2009, not 1964.

Today, Black women partake in a buffet of hair options and are celebrated for exercising variety in coifing. A quick assessment of today’s high schools demonstrates relaxers do no more damage to a Black girl's identity than Nickelodeon. Our teenage girls (who frequently have authority over their hair choices) manifest a spectrum of styles. They revel in everything from 2 inch twists to waist-length weaves, and zealously delight in planning their future uncanny hair ventures.



I don’t look at a 16 year-old girl who's had her hair permed, but now chooses plaits, kinky twists, or cornrows, and conclude that a relaxer taught her self-hate, or to hate her own ethnicity.



Nonetheless, the mother who chemically modifies her child's hair at age 4 teaches a potentially more damaging lesson, one that we fail to evaluate in favor of inconsequential discussions concerning aesthetics.

Certainly, this mother realizes the damage she may cause. Still, she's willing to chemically modify her child's hair before it's sufficiently developed, without informed consent, simply to make it "more manageable". As she is willing to risk permanent destruction to her child’s crown for the benefit of not having to “deal with it", this mother inadvertently confirms, "it's ok to be lazy". Surely, there is a subconscious lesson being learned by the child here, but is that lesson primarily about aesthetics, worth, or work ethic? Arguably, the lesson includes elements of each, but which is most substantial?

This begs a greater question: what are the priorities of the Black community in this great hair debate?

Let’s face it, eventually, natural hair will be universally accepted. The reason locs and twists are not readily tolerated in corporate America today is simple - there aren't enough Blacks there to make it acceptable. Ignorance will be abrogated the moment African-Americans possess a proportionate quantity of America's power. The ultimate focus of the Black community should be arriving at that point most expeditiously.

But alas, we preferentially debate who's the “blackest”.

Truthfully, natural hair makes you no more conscious than relaxed hair indicates self-hate. Both populations are contributing to a billion-dollar a year black hair care industry that profits Asian-Americans almost exclusively.

Yet, this we don't discuss. Priorities, people!

How do we build wealth in our communities? How do we impinge upon white America’s stronghold? Is assimilation a necessary component of Black America’s transition to acceptance? These are the questions that need debating – and answering.

Honestly, hair is just hair. Individuals choose to style it in a variety of patterns, for a battery of reasons. Each time we pit naturals against relaxers, we lend credence to the notion that hair is the quintessential component of the Black woman's identity. What lesson are we teaching ourselves with this behavior? What are we proving to those who are watching us? That black people are as superficial and materialistic as they’re deemed? How ‘bout we take the steam off of that argument, and refocus our priorities on what really matters - progress.

So when it comes to good and bad hair, this blogger just doesn't care.

And now, for your viewing pleasure: Spike Lee's Good And Bad Hair. Enjoy!

You sir, are a racist!

Ignorant racists are the most dangerous kind. No, not belligerent racists, but those who are subtly racist and fail to recognize their own prejudice. How can we ever dispose of racism if we don’t first acknowledge it? Accordingly, I composed this list, specifically for the benefit of the ignorant majority. Note (*cough* white folks): If any of these apply to you, YOU ARE WAY MORE RACIST THAN A LITTLE BIT.

• Said “I’m not racist”. Everyone is at least a little racist. Defending any of your actions with this statement is merely an indication of your ignorance.
• Believed “white privilege” doesn’t exist. Minorities are ~35% of the US population. Name 35 minority senators…GO!...What?! No dice? Ok, gimme 5 minority senators…Give up yet?
• Worn an afro as a Halloween costume. Frankly, I’m surprised by the frequency of this behavior.

• Believed Mexicans aren’t minorities. *sigh* Mexicans aren’t the majority. Not in the US. Not in the world.
• Argued that Barack Obama was born in Kenya. *sigh again*. I can’t. I just can’t with this one.
• Said “I have 3 black friends”. Why are we counting? Is there a limit?
• Celebrated “post-racial” America. Don’t make me fall out of my chair laughing.
• Given your car keys to black man in a Prada suit. If the silk tie didn’t indicate that he wasn’t the valet, the Italian leather shoes damn sure should’ve given it away.

Additionally, let me say I don’t buy into the notion that black people can’t be racist simply because as a people they lack power over the establishment. Fooey. There’s institutional racism, and there’s individual racism. Furthermore, there are gradations of racists. If you were raised in the United States of America, a nation founded on the premise that “all men were created equal” (except the skins and the coons – to hell with them), you almost certainly have at least one racist bone in your body. The question is, how racist are you? Realistically, if you don’t realize you’re at least a little racist, you’re probably A LOT.

Relax. ACORN is not a left-wing conspiracy. It's a hot ghetto mess.

The controversy over ACORN has reignited with many on the right outraged following Fox News coverage of a video posted on BigGovernment.com. James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles are being heralded as heroes for conducting a “sting operation” which revealed ACORN personnel on hidden camera advising a “pimp” and a “prostitute” on a mortgage application.


The ACORN staff members caught on tape were subsequently terminated. Sadly, they probably thought they were doing their jobs. Congratulations James and Hannah! You’ve discovered what many have known for years: ACORN is a hot ghetto mess. Are you surprised? I’m not.

I could have told you ACORN is unorganized and completely unreliable after they provided “housing counseling” for me during the purchase of my first home. Following my brief interaction with the organization, I was willing to sum up their service with one word: Ghetto.

So relax right-wing. ACORN is far from an undercover Obama-led conspiracy project. I can assure you, if Barack Obama had ANYTHING to do with ACORN, they’d be ten times more professional. Just ask the campaign headquarters that sprung up one block from my home a few short weeks before Election Day.

Yet James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles have managed to point out one thing: the tremendous disparity between middle America and da ‘hood. Yes, white people, they sell cigarettes out of the package in the hood. And food stamps. And unreleased movies on DVD – 2 for $15. And we “play in the fire hydrant”. And ‘hood people occasionally patronize a host of other “illegal” ventures - it’s usually called a “hook up”. Holla if ya here me.

Pass The Mic!

It’s wonderful that Americans are engaged in a sorely needed discussion about healthcare reform. Yet the voices of reputable professionals have been notably diminutive in this debate. The opinions of physicians, nurses, scientists, public health policy experts, etc., are infrequently solicited, perpetuating the ignorance of the masses to larger, potentially more deleterious issues.

For instance, reasonable individuals identify inefficiencies in our current healthcare system as problematic; still we fail to have proper discussions about the nature of those deficiencies and how to correct them. It’s painfully evident to me as a scientist that there is a glaring inefficiency in the government’s return-on-investment for the $30.5 billion it spends annually on biomedical research. Much of that research is conducted in academia on rare diseases for which there is no available treatment. Often, these are the same diseases for which pharmaceutical companies have little to no financial incentive to investigate. As academicians are seldom concerned with profit, much of the $30.5 billion ends up in publication oblivion. In other words, huge potential for therapeutic discovery is lost between the academic’s thirst for knowledge, and industry’s requisite for profit. This isn’t an unfamiliar phenomenon to biomedical scientists. In fact, we often mock the gap between academia and industry by describing the collaborative effort to communicate ideas between the two as “throwing it over the fence”. This problem is far from beyond repair. Easily, the government could offer enticements that would promote collaboration between academia and industry, thereby encouraging the translation of a larger chunk of that $30.5 billion into tangible therapeutics.

That’s plainly obvious to me, and I’m just a Ph.D. candidate. Imagine what a Nobel Prize winning biologist could add to this discussion.

I don’t hesitate to place blame on healthcare professionals for allowing their voices to be muted. Yet, I also recognize that we as a people effectively silence the commentaries of those which are most desperately needed. We are magnetized to sensationalism, rather than verity. Resultantly, “Joe The Plumber” becomes a household name, while in the midst of a storm of controversy around healthcare reform, few can identify the current Surgeon General.

If we want real solutions, we must engage those who have been most aptly trained to provide them. So the next time somebody wants to discuss Bill Maher and Sarah Palin’s position on some aspect of healthcare reform, you should ask them about Steve Galson and Regina Benjamin’s stance on the same issue...they’re the acting and prospective Surgeon General (I figured you might need to know who they are).

Often, those with the loudest voices are the least worth listening to.

What’s Really Wack About “Basic Bitch”

If you haven’t been privy to the latest phrase in feminine degradation, don’t worry, you will be. Comedian Lil’ Duval has popularized the slang term “basic bitch” as a colorful descriptor for what we’ve commonly referred to as a “hood-rat” – a female of pitiable stature who has failed to recognize or rise above her underprivileged upbringing (see video below). As the comedian Spank pointed out, it’s not the “bitch” part that’s troublesome (women are immune to that one), but it’s that word “basic” which really burns our bums.

It didn’t bother me at first, because the phrase obviously doesn’t apply to me. But then I thought about the subliminal message that’s sent when we attach negative connotation to a term that literally implies simplicity and fundamentalism, and then use it to degrade women.

Our society debases independence and assertiveness in women and celebrates mediocrity. We exalt women for their physical perfection, not their intelligence, ambition, eloquence, leadership, or even education (so what if perfection includes a few nip-tucks here, or augmentations there). We go so far as to tell independent women with standards that they’re “stuck-up bitches”. We even punish them with isolation and ridicule.

Yet when a woman gives you exactly what you requested, you demean her by calling her a “basic bitch”.

Silly me. I thought men appreciated qualities like natural beauty, politeness, and traditionalism in women. I thought being pleasant and easy to please was a feather in a woman’s cap.

The fortunate thing about this term is that women will indubitably rebel against it. They’ll position themselves as such that they can only be described as something other than “basic” - which will unfortunately create more disparities between the sexes in the African-American community where the idiom originated.

Men who throw this expression around really need to check themselves. Real talk fellas, if you degrade women for being simplistic or conventional, you’re probably going to transmogrify them into something you really don’t want to deal with – AGGRESSIVE BITCHES! Just like how y’all turned “suck my d*ck” into a derogatory phrase...and then wonder why black woman have an aversion to oral sex. Gag me with a spoon.

Just sayin’…

What if women as a whole demanded more from men as a whole? What if we refused to spread our legs for anything less than an educated brother, pulling down a comfortable salary, and demonstrating lucid potential for a successful future?

Could you imagine what the world would be like?

This is not an unexplored concept for me. As one of my best friends frequently points out, this strategy is doomed from the start. There will always be some hoe-rat that thinks she can make a man fall in love by breaking the rules, not realizing that the rules are actually orchestrated for her protection.

I commented yesterday that “p*ssy is power”, and you know what was thrown back at me? “All women don’t have to use their p*ssies to get what they want.” *sigh* Clearly this individual has misconstrued the raison d'être for this phrase. The point is, the longer you keep your legs closed, the more you present a challenge (within reason, of course). When you present yourself as a challenge, a man will either rise to meet your expectations, or kick rocks. Ladies, don’t be deceived into thinking you can put something on him that’ll make him love you. Generally, male minds don’t work like that – ours do. I guess what I’m saying is, giving it up too soon is completely counterproductive. For everybody (you’re ruining it for everybody!! (insider) lol). Remember when it brought shame upon a woman, her father, and her family name to engage in sexual intercourse before marriage? Remember that thing called chivalry? Just sayin’…

Why am I not surprised?

You’re probably aware that Pat Buchanan (senior advisor to Nixon, Ford, and Reagan, and former Republican presidential candidate) has been on a tirade this past week, hurling his racist views, and charging that Sonia Sotomayor is unqualified to be a Supreme Court Justice. He claims that she is merely an “affirmative action appointment” - never mind that she graduated summa cum laude from Princeton, attended Yale Law, or that she has more judicial experience than any nominee in the past 100 years. Nope. Not according to old Pat B. There’s no way that any of Sotomayor’s accomplishments were merited in accordance with anything other than her race.

That bothered me, but not as much as the response - NADA. No, Not from liberals - they’ve launched the obligatory counter-attack. But the silence from the G.O.P. leadership, in my eyes, echoes their agreement.

I googled the names of prominent republicans, curious if any of them denounced Pat B.’s comments with the realization that his statements are destructive to party progress. Not surprisingly, my searches didn’t turn up any hits. Not even when I cross checked Pat B.’s name with -- (drum roll please) -- Michael Steele. Was I really expecting something else? **sigh**

Steele has become a symbol of all that’s wrong with the Republican Party. Seriously.

1. He sounds ridiculous. Like most republican leaders of today, his rhetoric rarely makes sense. I hate to break it to you Mr. Steele, but minorities aren’t going to be drawn to the Republican Party by you saying “y’all come”. And you can keep your fried chicken and potato salad. Uncle Barack is barbequing on the white house lawn next week.

2. He looks ridiculous. As John Stewart pointed out, very reminiscent of the Angry Customer from Sesame Street. Lemme think, what else looks ridiculous? How ‘bout that squirrel on Sarah Palin’s head? Or Mitt Romney’s forced smile? Mark Sanford’s alligator tears? Or hell, just plain old Rush Limbaugh...


3. He IS ridiculous. I would call him an “affirmative action appointment” - if I thought he was actually QUALIFIED. This man has no appeal with minorities, whatsoever. Consequently, he has no shot at attracting diverse populations of voters. If this is what Republicans think we want, they are sadly mistaken. They haven’t heard a word we’ve said in the past 50 years. We’re already hip to that game and not interested in being bamboozled. But hey, kudos on their ability to effectively swindle Michael Steele.

I concede that Steele is only symbolic of the party’s issues; he himself is far from the problem. The G.O.P. has been flailing around desperately like a deep sea fish on dry land ever since George Bush endorsed John McCain’s presidential bid with a tap dance (no, really – the President was tap-dancing, literally). The longer the fish remains out of water, the more wildly it thrashes. Until, of course, it dies. One could only hope for as much.