Reply to : Opinion: Weave Is Not a Protective Style
http://blackgirllonghair.com/2013/07/opinion-a-weave-is-not-a-protective-style-its-just-a-weave/comment-page-10/#comment-685654
I just read a very interesting article (link posted above) where the author didn't think that weaves count as a protective style. I was truly flabbergasted by the title and read ahead. While I looked for well thought out arguments to state their case, indeed I found NONE.
The author states...
Wow.
In the first paragraph she states excellent reasons for why they are a great protective style while hiding behind the word, "technically". Then the author slips into her bias of hair weaves by stating that because the weave wearer is wearing someone else's hair on their head, "that just ain't natural".
What argument is the author making? That weave isn't natural or that it's not a protective style? I guess she forgot. Somehow she equates a woman choosing to wear weave is "ashamed" and "can't deal with her own texture." Heavy bias instead of reason will win you no argument.
People wear weaves as a protective style because it does just what the author states. The hair is in a dormant state from manipulation. Isn't that the core of what protective styling is? Just because the hair isn't in a "natural" state, it doesn't count as protective styling? What does the author believe protective styling is? A braidout? A twistout? Are those protective styles? Of course not! They are LOW manipulation styles. That's all. In no shape or form are those protective styles.
The author just sticks to her own bias about weaves and it sadly shows in her writing....
Oh please. You haven't made your case. You haven't come up with one good argument as to why you're even stating this opinion. And plenty of women do wear short natural weaves and wigs. Just Google it but you won't because it doesn't fit in with your "argument'.
You end with saying....
I just read a very interesting article (link posted above) where the author didn't think that weaves count as a protective style. I was truly flabbergasted by the title and read ahead. While I looked for well thought out arguments to state their case, indeed I found NONE.
The author states...
Technically, certain wig and weave styles, particularly the sew-in, allow the hair a break from the daily stresses some women do to their hair including processing and perming, tugging and over-styling. And technically certain wigs and weave styles, are a great way to promote growth because your hair is pretty much in a dormant state from such manipulation, thus more free to do what it does uninhibited. But also technically, you have someone else’s hair on your head. And no matter how you try to spin it, that just ain’t natural.
At the core of what bugs me the most about the weave classification as a “protective style” is the distorted, if not counterproductive motives behind it. Honestly natural hair shouldn’t be this high maintenance. And unless there are hair bandits on the loose, hoping to score on the black market with a handful of your natural coils, there is really nothing in our natural environment that we have to protect the hair from. Everything else is truly about accepting and learning how to deal with your own hair as it comes out of your head – whether it comes out extra kinky or extra fine; in the snow, sleet, rain, wind or through hot summers. Acceptance of our hair is supposed to teach us that not every style choice is meant for us but that’s okay because our hair is beautiful anyway. Yet throwing a weave or some braids in your head – while a cute style – teaches you nothing about your hair, especially when you wear it for 11 months out of the year (which many of these womenfolks in TeamNatural are professing to do). All it does is just tucks away the “problem,” some folks refuse to deal with upfront. Of course, the real problem isn’t so much the hair as it is the thinking.
Wow.
In the first paragraph she states excellent reasons for why they are a great protective style while hiding behind the word, "technically". Then the author slips into her bias of hair weaves by stating that because the weave wearer is wearing someone else's hair on their head, "that just ain't natural".
What argument is the author making? That weave isn't natural or that it's not a protective style? I guess she forgot. Somehow she equates a woman choosing to wear weave is "ashamed" and "can't deal with her own texture." Heavy bias instead of reason will win you no argument.
People wear weaves as a protective style because it does just what the author states. The hair is in a dormant state from manipulation. Isn't that the core of what protective styling is? Just because the hair isn't in a "natural" state, it doesn't count as protective styling? What does the author believe protective styling is? A braidout? A twistout? Are those protective styles? Of course not! They are LOW manipulation styles. That's all. In no shape or form are those protective styles.
The author just sticks to her own bias about weaves and it sadly shows in her writing....
It’s true whether or not folks are willing to admit to themselves. And no cutesy, made-up technical term is going to hide the fact that many of these weaved-up naturalists are no different than Shay Shay and her best girlfriend LaQuanita, who trek over to the neighborhood Korean beauty supply store and haggle with them over 18”inches of 100 percent Brazilian. They, like our “protective” stylers, want to wear a weave because they want long hair and their nappy, possibly short, hair won’t enable them to have it. Long hair, don’t care. And think I’m lying or misrepresenting? When was the last time you’ve seen someone with a “protective style” get a short nappy weave? Rest my case counselors.
Oh please. You haven't made your case. You haven't come up with one good argument as to why you're even stating this opinion. And plenty of women do wear short natural weaves and wigs. Just Google it but you won't because it doesn't fit in with your "argument'.
You end with saying....
Seriously, it is truly okay. Just don’t try to con the rest of us into accepting your weave as some sort of amendment to natural hair. Truth is, that weave stopped being natural the day it left the head of its original owner.
Who said anything about weave being natural? What the author fails to understand is that regardless of how many weaves I stick on my head, the hair underneath it is still natural (as long as the wearer hasn't used a perm). This was a great example of black women continuing to impose their hair beliefs on others, instead of just letting people define for themselves what they think works best. No one is trying to convince you that calling a weave is natural but you failed in trying to convince me that weaves are NOT protective styles. Try again.
Comments
Post a Comment