How about I come out of my post-braid blogcation with a story about hair; Michelle Obama’s hair. Rikyrah, a devoted Michelle Obama Watcher posted this link called The Politics of Michelle Obama’s Hair. It ends up being Patricia J. William’s convoluted superficial critique of Condoleezza Rice, political spouses and UNMARRIED BARREN BLACK WOMEN (oh the horror). So what the heck does hair have to do with it? I mean was it necessary to create an analogy between Black hair and the monsters of Greek mythology? Seriously, comparing our hair to Scylla and Charybdis?
Scylla was a creature who dwelt in a rock, and regularly ate sailors who passed by too closely. Her appearance has varied in classical literature; she was described by Homer in The Odyssey as having six heads perched on long necks along with twelve feet, while in Ovid’s Metamorphoses, she was depicted as having the upper body of a nymph, with her midriff composed of dogs’ heads. Charybdis had a single gaping mouth that sucked in huge quantities of water and belched them out three times a day, creating whirlpools.Source
I think this is one of those cases where this writer wanted to be DEEP and whatnot and went off into left field.
She seems unbothered by hair hang-ups, make-up issues, clothing crises. She always seems minimally but perfectly made up; she isn’t afraid to wear flats; she lends a certain class to the most inexpensive of outfits. And even her hair—usually such a politically fraught subject for women of color! Between the Scylla of Condoleezza Rice’s good-little-girl page-boy, and the Charybdis of Angela Davis’s 1960’s Afro, Michelle Obama’s looser style provides a breezy, refreshing kind of Golden Mean…..
Iconic black female faces in public life are few and far between, and they’re usually not married. They’re widowed, like Coretta Scott King and Betty Shabazz; or they’re single and childless, like Condoleezza Rice. It’s hard to be seen as a trophy wife, or a beauty queen, when you’re simultaneously figured as strong as an ox, epically tragic, and pious enough to curdle the promiscuous streak that supposedly runs hot in the blood of “your kind.” Patricia J. WIlliams, The Politics of Michelle Obama’s Hair
First of all, I am single and childless.A whole LOT of Black women are. So what is this woman trying to say? Just what Black women need.— To have our uteri, ring fingers and ringlets pitted against each other. It’s like six flat-irons of separation. Condoleezza’s and Michelle’s hair have more to do with the hair stylist than the hair styl-ee.
Let’s get one thing straight. No matter how many husbands and children women have, women will be taking care of women. Uteri and ring fingers, notwithstanding. Look around your churches and your neighborhoods. The Black men that stay around tend to die early. In the end when we are all old and scooting around in our walkers, women will be taking care of each other. Kids, no kids. Widowed, divorced, spinsterhood, we all end relying on a family of women in the end. Aunts, nieces, cousins, daughters, mothers. Women will be taking care of women.
Second, honest to goodness, for a whole lot of Black women our hair is serious business, but IT AIN’T THAT DEEP! I tend not to ascribe any political meaning at all to Black women’s hair. I used to, but you can’t tell a great deal about politics based on natural vs. relaxed. It’s hardly a “political” contrast to pit one Black woman with a relaxer against another Black woman with a relaxer. Where is the contrast? Michelle gets and Affirm and Condoleezza get a box perm? Michelle forgoes spritz? Condoleezza likes a roller set? It’s relaxed hair. How it looks is greatly dependent on the one wielding the flat iron. It ain’t that deep.
I want to go natural because chlorine and relaxer are just a bad combination and if given the choice between my heart and my hair, I’m going to lean on the side of reducing stroke risk by sticking with water aerobics. It’s not political. Its convenient.
Third, Condoleezza has plenty to be taken to task for based on her job performance. And yes, on more than one occasion during the “terrible flip” years I wanted to send her a short email to let her know that the students at Dudley’s Beauty College on Rhode Island Avenue do wonderful work, but somehow ascribing Michelle Obama status for being married with kids by comparing her to the and barren Condoleezza Rice seems to undercut your lament that Black women icons in the political realm are few and far between. Are the only Black icons we can have married Black women with relaxed flat-ironed hair?
Of course the author selected Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice because she didn’t expect anyone to take exception to her broadside against single barren Black women by hiding behind the skirt tails of Condoleeza Rice. The author would hope that an aversion to Rice’s politics and policy and horrific job performance as National Security Adviser would make us tap dance with glee at her hair being described as some horrific beast.
Black women love Michelle Obama for many reasons. She ought to be given a lifetime achievement award for putting herself out there and acting as a foil last week on Larry King Live and the Daily Show to undo the damage of the premiere of “Real Housewives of Atlanta” .
Please don’t try to separate the sisterhood based on marital status and flat irons. There are so many other substantive differences between Michelle and Secretary Rice that this superficial analysis sounds like something Vanessa Grigoriadis would write.
49 comments ↓
I read Williams’ entire piece and I didn’t see nagging criticism there. I thought her comments on Michelle Obama were positive and celebratory.
The mythological characters she compares “some of us” to were powerful and respected. They guarded their territories and took no prisoners. Yes, they were sea monsters.
It looks like she’s pointing out differences without denigrating anyone. Having been single and childless for most of my adult life, I never felt a stigma there (because I loved the freedom) and I didn’t find one in her comments.
Oh well…just my take on it.
Don’t get me wrong, I see what she is TRYING to do. However, why bring up Rice’s marital status and childlessness? What’s with the hair comparisons?
As far a Scylla and Charybdis… come on. They were Sea monsters. That’s the way she intended them. I think she had one or two too-many analogies. She would have done better off comparing their shoes. Or Michelle’s penchant for sleeveless colorful dresses vs. Condi’s structured suits.
It’s an interesting commentary. I found this comment odd…
“Like Rice, my credibility has always been dependent on modeling the most amazing departure from a welfare queen that anyone has ever met.”
I don’t know much about Patricia’s credibility, but whether you like Condi Rice or not, her resume is tight. So, I believe she could have kept that comparison between Rice and herself — to herself.
What an awkward admission, though. Patricia doesn’t sound as if she has much confidence in her own resume. That’s unfortunate. At one point, I got the impression that she was talking about how she felt in one mask (Rice) versus the other (M. Obama).
You almost have the urge to call her up and tell her, “Girl, be yourself and feel good at it. Take off the masks, recognize your “credibility” is not in your ability to “model” behavior and be you.
After reading way too far in between the lines, I kind of felt sorry for the author.
I read it again as well, still reads the same. She’s using Condi Rice as some kind of representative of an entire generation of “reserved” Black women. She talks about Black political spouses being invisible, but so are many White political spouses. I can’t tell you what the spouses of my two senator’s look like. Presidents’ and Governors’ wives are about all you see with any regularity. IT’s just a confusing mess and the title of the article probably doomed it for me even though I know she didn’t pick the title.
Again, she lost me at Scylla and Charybdis. But Deborah, that is another way of viewing Scylla and Charybdis. In Greek Mythology, there was always a reason for someone being a monster. They weren’t just killing people willie neelie, they were usually protecting something .
It also may be a generational thing. If she was in law school during the 70s then hair would be much more political than It would be for someone graduating 30 years later.
Again, WIlliams is hiding behind Greek Mythology, Hair, and then she brings out the masks at the end. If you are going to go wading into the mine field of Black women’s hair, she should have stuck to a single analogy. PS aren’t Condi and Michelle in the same generation?
YME said”After reading way too far in between the lines, I kind of felt sorry for the author.”
Me too. The whole mask thing at the end was just odd. WHo does that? No really? who does that?
I’ve read it now three times and I still don’t see it as a slam to unmarried black women. The fact is, most black women who are leaders ARE single or childless. That’s not limited to black women. Most women in power period are typically past child-bearing age. That makes sense as most women spend their younger years raising children. No, I don’t see it as a slam of single or barren black women at all.
I think the whole mask thing is a generational issue as well. For those of you under forty, who didn’t come up under the Reagan administration’s demagoguery against ‘welfare queens’ it probably doesn’t strike a chord. For those of us in our forties and fifties it most assuredly does.
I know black women who bought a second wedding band while pregnant because their original bands got too small from swelling and they didn’t want to look like unwed mothers.
I certainly know plenty of black women who hesitated to go natural because of the political (and possibly even legal) implications. I’ve certainly had at least one supervisor question my hair and the professionalness of it.
So yes, your generation has the freedom to ‘be yourself.’ Try not to be so dismissive of the concerns of those of us who did not.
I don’t know what to make of William’s essay. I thought the most interesting I got from the piece was that Michelle’s hair was “post assimilationist” and Condi’s hair was the epitome of black assimilation.
What?
To me, there isn’t any difference in the two women’s hair. I say this as a woman with a afro, I don’t either one of them would be considered the style icons my the mainstream media (all media for that matter), if either one rocked a twist-out, a braid-out or ,heavens be, a set of cornrows. Not only would white media have a field day, but bougie black folk would too.
We all would like to think that the state of black woman’s hair isn’t political. In reality, that’s not the case. If white people thought that tall, muscular and fit, brown-skin Michelle was an angry black woman with a chip on her shoulder with that flip, can you imagine what they would think if she didn’t have straightened hair?
Oh typo:….”I don’t think either one of them would be considered the style icons”
Roslyn said “So yes, your generation has the freedom to ‘be yourself.’ Try not to be so dismissive of the concerns of those of us who did not.”
OF course depending on where you are and what you do, your hair is an issue, but this essay attempts to SHOVE the hair issue into some kind of comparison between two women who BOTH have relaxed hair. Which leads me to believe that she was looking for a HOOK and chose the hair.
Second, why does COndi have to be the iconic single Black barren woman and she threw Condi in there with Corretta Scott King and Betty Shabazz. They were widows.
If we are going to have a debate about the political import of HAIR lets have a clean discussion about HAIR. Not Hair, Greek Mythology, Single-ness and Halloween masks.
I am dismissive because there are about ten different articles jammed in there together.
@Monica, Both Michelle and Condoleeza are style icons. Michelle can sell out a dress in a heartbeat and although WE in this country don’t necessarily appreciate COndoleezza’s “style” they went gaga over here high heeled leather boots when she first became Secretary of State.
Again, behind all the hair and the foolishness about marital status is a difference in public persona. Now THAT would have been a great article. comparing the public persona of Condoleezza with Michelle Obama.
Funny, I can’t even tell you how many kids Madeline Albright, Jim Baker, Warren Christopher, or Henry Kissinger have. THe only reason I know about Colin Powell’s son is because he was head of the FCC.
I hear you Gina. I was just saying they would not be considered style icons if they had natural hair.
I was just saying they would not be considered style icons if they had natural hair.
I don’t agree. Depends on the style. I have seen a BUNCH of older Black women wearing closely cropped natural hair like Robin Roberts, post-breast cancer. They look “corporate.” I think Michelle could pull off a fade. Condi, not so much.
Widowed, divorced or whathaveyou, they were all still SINGLE women. Certainly both Shabazz and King were widows far longer than they were married. Thus, they were single women.
I agree the article was a mishmash, but I still fail to see the slam against childless or single black women. And the term barren? Not so much.
That article was wack. And I love Robin Roberts with her natural hair. I think it really compliments her and brings out the delicacy of her features.
agree the article was a mishmash, but I still fail to see the slam against childless or single black women. And the term barren? Not so much.
Okay, Roslyn, you know I like dragging out words from the dark ages. It was a touch of Hyperbole, but the anti-single sentiment is one of my pet peeves so I point it out wherever I think I see it and she definitely is using singleness in the pejorative.
I read the article and I have no idea what she’s talking about. She mentions several things all at once with no apparent correlation to each other.
I read the article and I have no idea what she’s talking about. She mentions several things all at once with no apparent correlation to each other.
@La Belle in other words, it is a convoluted mess with some Black hair geopolitics thrown in for good measure. I think she is just hiding behind saying what she really wants to say.
She lost me at Scylla and Charybdis. I think I blanked out after that.
I hope this doesn’t come off as too contentious, but this post is completely off base. The article is not in anyway attacking single black women. You’ve taken the quote about “iconic black female faces in public life” completely out of context. She’s lamenting that political wives are often limited to sitting there and smiling mutely, and that often with black politicians, we don’t see their wives at all. This is when the quote comes in about iconic black faces often being single and widowed. She’s not saying there’s anything wrong with black women being single and widowed, she’s saying that there is something wrong with women not being able to stand next to their husbands as equals.
As for the part about the women’s various hairstyles, I think it is a really effective way of illustrating how Angela Davis, Condoleezza Rice, and Michelle Obama come from different eras. As she says herself, the piece isn’t literally about hair and style, it’s about the roles these women occupy and the burdens they bear. It’s about the hoops a black woman must jump through to avoid being viewed as threatening or angry, as oversexed (welfare queens) or undersexed, and on and on.
The difference she’s highlighting between Condolezza and Michelle isn’t about marriage, it’s more akin to a generational difference. Furthermore, she manages to talk about why she finds Michelle liberating, without resorting to the post-race, post-gender crap.
I really think you should give the article another chance
____________________________________________
I also have to add a few (ok many) words in defense of Patricia Williams. This woman is flat out AMAZING. We had to read some of her work for our courses in legal theory and she does great work related to race and gender. If anyone is interested, I can try to dig up some of them. She’s a law professor (I think at Columbia), she’s a MacArthur genius grant recipient, and she’s written extensively about her experiences adopting a child as a single woman.
But Gina, the question is, how is *your* hair doing? Tell us you massaged your hairline with rosemary oil and there has been no Susan Taylor-like damage.
Precisely foreverloyal. GEM, you must, you must, you must abstain from the braids. Rosemary is the truth. Brought my hairline back after I lost nearly all of it after the birth of my son.
@J I completely stand by the singlehood thing. Its pejorative. Sorry folks. Its meant in a pejorative manner. Williams may be amazing. I don’t dispute that, but on this one, she threw too many spices in the soup and its a mess. I am going to maintain my stance on being anti-anti-single Black women.
@everyone worried about the hairline. Of course I got thoes hideous little bumps at the nape of my neck. I don’t have a problem doing the big chop. I chopped it all off in 2002 with even less “new growth” I just had my heart set on this really cute afro style that I wanted to debut with, but after this episode, I think this is the last set of corn rows. Part of it is the ridiculously hard search for a new stylist in this town. Its like the search for the Golden Fleece ( ha Greek Mythology!) I mean you find yourself going up to complete and total strangers asking them where they got their hair done. Stalking them in parking lots. The stylists are like “exclusive” and act that way. You better sign up for every two weeks at minimum or you lose your position in the rotation. I have to get my hair done on Monday and Tuesday mornings thats how low on the totem pole I am. Honestly, now that I think about it. I don’t want to cut it off because I don’t want to lose my spot by making my current stylist angry. Its such a dysfunctional relationship. But I have NEVER had such a horrible physical reaction to braids. I mean it had my whole body aching and affected everything physiologically and psychologically. I really had no desire to do anything but sleep to get away from the pain. I guess I need to call up my friend who goes to a barber and schedule an appointment. and then cancel that appointment at the end of the month to get some more cornrows.
Y’all just gon’ have to touch and agree that I can find a barber and a new braider.
Now THAT’S the politics of hair!
GEM, aren’t you honored that the president of the Patricia Williams fan club decided to post a response on your blog?
Seriously J, Patricia Williams, may be amazingly accomplished but that doesn’t thing she can’t make stupid statements.
@Monica You know, I made an effort to be as respectful as possible in my comment, so I’m not sure why I’m being insulted. I brought up Patricia Williams’ background because it didn’t seem like anyone knew who she was. Also, knowing that she’s written about adopting a child as a single woman, the idea that she’s taking pot shots at single barren black women made absolutely no sense to me. My arguments about her piece had absolutely nothing to do with her. If I thought that she’d written something stupid, I would simply say, “Wow, I really admire Patricia Williams and it’s a shame that she’s written something so stupid.”
The reason I was so bothered by this post was because I believe the author completely misread the article. I’ve laid out the reasons why, which neither of you bothered to respond to. I like the article, but I think there are some really legitimate criticisms to be made, but not by taking quotes out of context and presenting them a way that is misleading.
J, if GEM misread the article, she wasn’t alone. As a matter of fact I thought she was being generous in her assessment of the piece.
I thought the article was a mish mash of ideas without a coherent theme. In addition to the lack of unifying idea, we have the ill considered analogies to mythological creatures. The result is a hot (intellectual) mess.
That’s just my opinion.
It just goes to show that you can’t hit a homerun every time you come up to the plate. Williams took a swing and she missed.
GEM, I got tired of that hairstylist attitude a long time ago. That’s why I haven’t seen one since 1998. That was the whole point of going natural in the first place, so I wouldn’t need those petty tyrants anymore.
Natural hair is relatively easy to maintain, and I don’t have to deal with the drama.
On the hair front GEM:
Allow me to relate a story. When I decided to go natural, my stylist said that she could do cornrows. Cool. I didn’t want to find another stylist anyway and I didn’t see myself popping into one of those African braid shops you see all over. So she told me what hair to buy, when to show up and how long it would take. I brought the hair and honest to God, with the shampoo and drying, 8 braids took 45 minutes. The heifer charged me $140. When I got home, I looked in the mirror. I looked like I had just had a face lift and the tightness and soreness was unbearable. Before I left she told me to take a couple of aspirin. That night I couldn’t sleep, my head was throbbing.
It occured to me that taking medical advice from a hair stylist was stupid. Also I learned that I had been overcharged and that was girlfriend’s first time doing braids in the salon.
That relationship was over.
I humbled myself and asked one of ad amins at my job if she knew any quality braiders. She did-one of those African braid shops I looked down my nose at.
The braider was Malian, and she did an excellent job. My head wasn’t sore. I could actually turn and not look like I was doing the robot from the neck up. She only charged $60 and provided the hair.
The moral of this long story is, before you give up on braids, try another stylist, it could make all the difference in the world.
Ok before reading the comments I thought I was an idiot, glad I am not the only one who thought Williams article was all over the place and had absolutely no point.
She completely disregards the fact that Condi is in a cabinet postion while Michelle is running for first lady. Which means they do have to carry themselves differently. Do you see female’s running for office hug and kiss their husbands in public-NO. You don’t even see their husbands or kids half the time to have some sexy, motherly feminine icon thing going on.
This woman went to law school in the 70’s, I mean how old do you have to be to say screw it I am dropping these racial/gender hang up. Does she still need a Michelle Obama role model to inspire her. Do I have to wait until I am Cloris Leachmans age to get a grip. Most professional women I see are more Michelle than Condi. Condi is more my grandma’s ultra proper generation.
Am I blind or do Michelle and Condi rock similar styled hair do’s. I mean Michelle’s look is more polished. Michelle’s hair looks like she has a perm were as Condi look like she does press and curl and does not have a perm. It looks like Condi is doing her own hair, b/c please don’t tell me she actually pays someone for that.
But both are very conservative and are styled appropriately to be deemed acceptable by middle America. Let me see Michelle rock a twist out and then I will call her a style revolutionary.
@ Monica try to be nice please. I didn’t think J was head of a fan club and I don’t question William’s brilliance in general, but disagree with this essay in particular. We all have bad days.
@j this is a blog people throw rhetorical spitwads. Try not to take it personally.
@everybody this article ain’t really worth fighting over. I was just sharing my opinion that’s it is a bloated confusing mess. Whatever point williams was trying to make got lost in the mixed metaphors.
@Roslyn
“I think the whole mask thing is a generational issue as well. For those of you under forty, who didn’t come up under the Reagan administration’s demagoguery against ‘welfare queens’ it probably doesn’t strike a chord. For those of us in our forties and fifties it most assuredly does.”
The welfare queen chord just struck me as odd. Here’s the quote again.
“Like Rice, my credibility has always been dependent on modeling the most amazing departure from a welfare queen that anyone has ever met.”
Her credibility has always depended on modeling the most amazing departure from welfare queen…
What the heck? Who has to “model” NOT being a welfare queen? True, I’m not in my 40s, yet…but I’m familiar with the term and the injury it delivers. I just thought it was an odd admission.
For instance, at times perhaps I am going for a certain look or demeanor. Perhaps one day, I’m really feeling the professor image or on another I’m declaring independence (ie, take these pantyhose and shove ‘em), but I’d have to have pretty low self esteem to be thinking, “Okay, my goal for the day…to look as little like a welfare queen as I can.”
I haven’t read the article yet, but I am loving this quote:
“To have our uteri, ring fingers and ringlets pitted against each other. It’s like six flat-irons of separation.”
Now that is creative.
@J
With your added knowledge, I did read the article again. It’s just still an odd read.
Here’s another Williams article, that is actually a good read.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080324/williams
But, hey. Perhaps its an odd read because its clearly a personal article. I think she wrote it more for herself than for us.
In that case, it makes perfectly good sense. It would explain why it seems disconnected with more than its fair share of themes.
Theme #1: The Politics of Hair
Theme #2: The Generational Difference of Black Women
Theme #3: The Marginalization of Women In Politics
Theme #4: The Psychology of Masks
Theme #5: The Long Term Effect of Stereotyping on the Black Woman
Theme #6: [Add Your Own Here]
Okay, GEM, I’ll play nice.
@Naima, I believe neither Michelle nor Condi has a relaxer. Michelle’s stylist probably uses a CHI iron to straighten and bump her hair and she wraps her hair at night for maintenence.
Condi’s stylist might use an old-fashioned hot curling iron (you know with the stove) and she uses sponge rollers at night or stream rollers in the morning for the upkeep.
I prefer to call myself child-free. I’m “less” nothing.
“This woman went to law school in the 70’s, I mean how old do you have to be to say screw it I am dropping these racial/gender hang up. Does she still need a Michelle Obama role model to inspire her.”
This is an interesting discussion.
I was in undergrad from 77-81. As amazing as it may seem, many of us “older ones” are very inspired by what we see younger Black women doing. And although some of us might not admit it, we are learning a lot from those who are younger.
It’s never too late for a good role model; never too late to be inspired.
@Eva
“I prefer to call myself child-free. I’m “less” nothing.”
LOL
“Child-free” Oh I am loving it. I see I am going to have to have you on my new TV show.
Wow, I cannot believe the misogyny directed at those women in Atlanta on Sandra Rose’s site. Wow, just wow. I guess any reason to beat up on a black woman, any woman really. In the entry and in the following comments. Some people just have to find something to feel superior about I guess.
The same about comparing women to Greek monsters. Good gawd!
It’s sad when a woman’s accomplishments is somehow credited to her hair style.
as you stated, Rice ain’t no slouch. Her creds speak for themselves. When I see Rice, I don’t worry about her hair, i wonder about her policies, her approach, and her skills.
I came here from Michelle Obama Watch and want to write briefly in support of “j”. I agree that the phrase “single barren black women” was taken out of context and feel “j” makes an excellent case for Williams’ point of view. Williams’ article was well written, but its rhetorical strategies seem to have been misunderstood. Scylla and Charybdis weren’t being compared to black women — they are a cliché, usually for “between a rock and a hard place.” The problem seems to be as “j” indicates, that the blog’s readers are not familiar with Williams and the genre she writes in. She helped found the field of critical race studies, is a radical black intellectual and one of the most important law professors in the country. Black female intellectuals of her generation often compare themselves to Condoleeza because they are amazed that she stayed away from the struggles they were waging in the 60s and became a conservative. At the same time, they are in awe of the much younger Michelle, who never had to fight those battles, who takes those struggles for granted and can live free. She can straighten their hair just because it’s politically expedient, not because it looks “proper” — if she thinks about it at all. Williams would like to be like Michelle, but she knows that will be difficult, perhaps impossible to achieve. I don’t think the article was saying more than that.
ooops. “can straighten her hair” not “straighten their hair.”
@Alsace, I can completely understand Williams writing for a different audience, HOWEVER, this was on Tina Brown’s blog, the Daily Beast, not some textbook.
I don’t think the rhetorical strategies were misunderstood, I just think it is a horribly written article for such a sensitive subject. If she wanted to take a hit at Rice, she should have been transparent about it instead of hiding behind hair, and masks. Again, you can call it critical race theory or whatever you want to call it, its still a garbled mess. Maybe it is a generational thing.
I am not saying she isn’t smart or brilliant, I am saying that on this particular article she is a) dating herself, b) wielding “child-free” status as some kind of curse, and c)trafficking in far too many rhetorical devices.
Regarding the barren Black women wording, THAT is my rhetorical device to cut through the crap. Condoleezza Rice isn’t single and child free because she is a conservative. If anything I am sure she had access to more than enough potential mates. Her child-free status is likely more a result of her being a child prodigy and having a unique set of social skills.
I guess William’s generation would think that being child free was some type of punishment or curse in exchange professional success and they probably cringe at all of the young women lawyers who leave the workplace to stay at home with the kiddies ( I know LOTS of classmates who have done this, that still doesn’t make that article make any kind of sense. For a woman so smart, why HAIR?
i understand what she is trying to do but she kind of went into left field. I have locks because i think they are beautiful, not necessarily because i want to make a political statement.
i didn’t understand her need to bring up unmarried black women in this article…what did that have to do with anything?
@Alsace, thanks for the words and I agree. Monica, I’m not saying that anyone who disliked the article misread it, I’m saying that the initial poster did. The article is not about being single versus being married, and it’s not literally about hair. Saying that the article is about “single barren black women” isn’t a rhetorical device, it’s a misrepresentation.
@Yme, thanks for hearing me out, and I agree on the themes (except maybe the psychology of masks).
Michelle is a natural. She straightens her hair with heat. Her stylist says he “does not relax” her hair. She appears in her wedding photos with natural hair. So maybe the difference is Condi uses Affirm and Michelle a Chi?
@Jen, I don’t know if Patricia Williams knows MIchelle is a natural. Heck Condi might be rocking a press and curl as well. hence the lunacy of the article
@J I didn’t MISREPRESENT ANYTHING. I am calling Williams on her anti-child-free bias. As if that’s a BAD thing. If anti chid-free bias isn’t YOUR issue, fine, but its one of mine and thus when I see it, I point it out. My blog. My opinion.
@Monica
“she uses sponge rollers at night or stream rollers in the morning for the upkeep.”
My hair and sponge rollers simply don’t mix well. I get this frizzy, odd, tortured look. But, I digress.
I think Patricia Williams’ piece addresses important internal issues we have with ourselves. Like J, I don’t see her adopting an “anti-child-free bias.” My read on it is Williams pointing out the new ground that Michelle has taken in the American imagination relating to black women where we’ve historically been the bitch that no black man wants or the mammy.
Williams is not criticizing the Players (single/widowed sista-icons like Sojorner, Harriet, Coretta, Betty, Barbara Jordan,…) but the Game that insists that there’s not another side to us. I see Williams as acknowledging and celebrating black women in all our diversity while noting Michelle’s place in the continuum.
The hair serves to point out the “rock and the hard place” (Thanks Alsace!) of being locked on either end of the spectrum – tough, proper/asexual helmet hair of Condi or attitudinal (to some folks, not me as I am natural) & threatening Afro of Angela.
Inspired by her hair (which this thread proves is a touchstone), I think Ms. Williams is saying Michelle Obama is showing America a different way to view us…a more multi-dimensional take.
PS (I am single and child free and vigilant about bias against us also. I just didn’t see it here.)
@elle, I didn’t say williams did make some points… its still a garbled mess. I stand by the light in which she placed single childfree women. I see it even if y’all don’t. But that is cool. This is an interesting discussion none the less. Reasonable minds can disagree.
I’m white, and a single mother. Never married.
I have to admit that I haven’t read the article, but wanted to say that I think Michelle Obama will do to the US fashion industry what Princess Diana did to the British one. I also think that with her presence and intelligence, she will do much to transform and elevate the role of first lady.
Did anyone ever write a story about Barbara Bush’s hair? Does anyone care?
hi ladies,
It would be a great help who ever wrote such a article actually meet some black childfree women. As to Michelle and Connnie, great I say. its well over due for black women in the forefront of power. I like michelle. who cares who her hair looks like. I am one of these black childfree women. And we rock too. Yes Mothers don’t get us. But I do I care. everybody wants you to do what they did, and regret it like they did. Or even worse not consider what it means to be parent before becoming one. I respect mothers, I also respect me. What is good for one person, does not mean its good for another. If you want to call women like me barren. Go ahead, but check your own fertily first, because you have not checked mine. I am fertile, i chose not to use it. For the rest of you ladies, enjoy your days. Peace!