Quote:
Originally Posted by IncontRHOllable
Ok. In the aftermath of the whole Don Imus scandal, I am left with a few questions. The question that has been weighing heavily on my mind is why is the term nappy headed considered so derogatory amongst blacks? I understand why the term is considered a racial slur because by definition racial encompasses anything that is characteristic of a race or ethnic group.
However, it still leaves me wondering why we take offense to the term? Back in the day, if someone were to call me nappy or say my hair is nappy, I would have been ready to fight, but why is that? The term nappy only means hair that is tightly coiled/curled. For the overwhelming majority of black people, that is how our hair is BEFORE the press/relaxers. I encountered this dilemma years ago and did some soul searching of why I felt the term nappy was bad. In my soul searching I always turn to God, so I opened the Word and realized that I am created in his image, and that includes my NAPPY hair, not to mention that my Savior, the one in whom I believe and worship, had nappy hair (description hair like wool is used to describe Jesus' hair). My conclusion was that if nappy hair was good enough for Jesus why isn't it good enough for me?
In the end, I began to realize that maybe the reason of why most black people do not like the term nappy used in describing their hair, is because we have allowed white society to capture it in a negative way, hence the good hair/ bad hair distinction. I take offense when some black people tell me that "oh you can wear your hair natural b.cuz you got good hair". What is good hair? There is no such thing. Could it be that through the years we have allowed white society and their standard of beauty to define us instead of seeing ourselves and our nappy hair for what they are, and that is beautiful? Of course, after soul searching, I embraced my nappy hair and wear it in all of its natural glory. Ok soRHOrs, sorry so long, but are there any thoughts out there?
|
ok without rehashing all that has been said on GC re: this topic...
while "we" (and i mean those who are conscious to nappy hair being a positive thing) understand being "nappyheaded" to be OK, clearly Imus (and anyone else who uses this or a similar phrase) used the phrase in a derogatory context. the issue it seems, is that HE doesnt realize that it is offensive to a wide majority and furthermore doesn't see the history in WHY it would be.
of course no one wants to talk about how hair is one (of the many) things used to separate and elevate races amongst women. similarly, topics of sexuality and the body have similar effect. so... to throw the phrase "nappy headed hos" at black women, youre making a lot more connotations on that group than what is said. there are implications of their sexuality, their beauty and inherently, their identity as women.
to make a bold claim, Imus calling the Rutgers team "nappy headed hos" (especially in comparision to the opposing, white team) is as equivalent as saying they arent women/womanly. which, no surprise, is what the white man has declared from the beginning - that black women are something other than a woman because their attributes do not reflect that of white women.