On March 31, the U.S. Army released its updated appearance and grooming regulations, AR 670-1. These new updates have caused an explosion amongst African-American women wearing their natural hair texture who valiantly serve their country. The shrapnel remains have left many Natural Hair Troops wounded and left to recover from an unexpected time bomb.
Army Regulations:
The Armed
Forces must create, implement, and enforce regulations to be mission ready and
prepared for war. It is also a
requirement that these same entities govern themselves with the highest
military standards and bearings; thus, showing forth a unified front in a
professional manner.
American people measure our professionalism is by our appearance.
Wearing of the uniform as well as over all military appearance, should
be a matter of personal pride for all soldiers.” ~Sgt. Maj. Ray Chandler III
Natural Hair Care and Maintenance
Education:
themselves on how black people wear their hair, they've
white-washed it all." ~Sgt. Jasmine Jacobs
As a U.S.
Navy Veteran and Natural Hair Advocate, I can understand the feelings of
discrimination experienced by military women who are being told that their
natural hair styles are no longer Army appropriate. Those appearance and grooming
standards are biased against African-American women, in my opinion.
Using
appearance to base one’s judgment on someone’s acumen, aptitude and ability to
get the job done is superficial; however, I understand that dress and
presentation in the eyes of many Americans is what dictates
professionalism. Notwithstanding this
perception, Black natural hair can be worn and presented professionally
displaying a favorable military image.
So, why are braiding
techniques for styling natural Black hair, such as: Flat Twists, Two Strand Twists, Cornrows, Braids and Locks (more
specifically Sisterlocks®/Manicured Locks)
not seen as professional, or that Natural Hair Troops are not exhibiting personal pride in their appearance?
It may not
be the Army’s intention to create such controversy; nevertheless, the regulations
across the board dictate otherwise.
Therefore, this leaves women like Sgt. Jasmine Jacobs no other recourse
but to start a petition to the White House, calling upon the officials to
reconsider changes to AR 670-1.
Personally Interpreted or
Professionally Informed?
“They are designed by
men, they are dictated by men and they do not let the women come to the table
to have a part in this decision that affect their lives.” ~Lt. Col. Patricia Jackson-Kelley (Ret.)
Lt. Col.
Patricia Jackson-Kelley (Ret.) made a very brilliant comment evoking thought
concerning this issue. And like her, I
too along with many others are “trying to identify what they find not within
regulations about these hair styles?”
The lack of
awareness on the convening board’s part as it relates to styling options and
techniques used to maintain Black natural hair is evident. Not being able to distinguish between natural
hair styles being faddish, looking non-professional, or a specific technique used
to achieve a particular style is inexcusable because the board members place themselves
in a position to perpetuate racial biases
towards Black hair that is worn in its natural state.
Go Natural!
I stand, we stand
and many in the Natural Hair Community
stand together with Sgt. Jasmine Jacobs and All the Natural Hair Troops
who serve in the military. This is not a
matter of personal style, a trend, nor individualism, but of personal pride in our hair (being chemically-free),
our health (living holistically), our heritage and proudly serving our country.
With
Dignity, Pride and Self-Realization,
"Yah-Tay" (Signature 4,172)