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!

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?

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.)

My hair and sponge rollers simply don’t mix well. I get this frizzy, odd, tortured look. But, I digress.

@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.

@Yme, thanks for hearing me out, and I agree on the themes (except maybe the psychology of masks).

i didn’t understand her need to bring up unmarried black women in this article…what did that have to do with anything?

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?