3.8 Article

The Influence of Colorism on the Hair Experiences of African American Female Adolescents

期刊

GENEALOGY
卷 5, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/genealogy5010005

关键词

colorism; skin tone bias; Black girls; African Americans; Black hair

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article explores the prevalence of colorism in the hair care narratives of African American female adolescents, highlighting its impact on their psychosocial and emotional well-being. Participants have a clear understanding of the colorist experiences, perceptions of good hair, and the influence of White beauty standards.
This article addresses the prevalence of colorism among the hair care narratives of African American female adolescents. Eleven interviews were conducted to explore the connection between hair and sense of self and self-esteem. During data collection and analysis, the theme surrounding colorism emerged, as many participants discussed its influence on hair, recalling traumatic hair and colorist experiences. This article focuses on the analysis of these narratives using the colorist-historical trauma framework. Three themes emerged: (1) colorist experiences; (2) perceptions of good hair; and (3) the influence of White beauty standards. These themes reflect how participants conceptualized the implications of colorism and its impact on their psychosocial and emotional well-being. The article highlights how colorism is embedded in their lived experiences and how participants combated the presence of colorism perpetuated by family, peers, and society, to embrace their identities. The article outlines the implications of collective efforts to decolonize hair and promote healing and liberation through actions such as the natural hair movement, legal efforts to protect hairstyle preferences in schools and the workplace, and overall awareness of the perception of Black women in media. It also discusses shifts in attitudes, perspectives, and beliefs regarding hair among younger generations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据