West Virginia, a state steeped in history and tradition, finds itself at a crossroads where cultural heritage, personal expression, and legislative action intersect. The story of hairstyles in West Virginia is not merely about fashion trends or personal preferences; it's a reflection of broader societal issues, struggles for equality, and the ongoing debate over what aspects of the past should be preserved and what needs to be changed.
In recent years, the issue of hair discrimination has gained increasing attention across the United States. The CROWN Act, which stands for "Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair," seeks to prohibit discrimination based on hair texture and hairstyles, particularly those associated with race. Several states have already enacted versions of the CROWN Act, recognizing that hair is an integral part of racial and cultural identity.
In West Virginia, the CROWN Act has faced significant hurdles. Despite a push by Black hair advocates and politicians, the bill has failed to pass, highlighting the challenges in addressing systemic inequalities. Republican lawmakers, like Senator Eric Tarr, have stalled the bill, arguing that potential hair discrimination lawsuits would be too costly for the state. This argument has been refuted by the Human Rights Commission, which contends that the bill simply clarifies existing anti-discrimination laws.
Delegate Danielle Walker, D-Monongalia, a supporter of the CROWN Act, questioned why a bill protecting monuments was prioritized over one addressing the rights of living individuals. "What about living, walking humans right now that we are trying to just protect the right to live, the right to go to school, the right to get an education, the right to the pursuit of happiness?" she asked, highlighting the disconnect between preserving symbols of the past and addressing present-day discrimination.
The defeat of the CROWN Act in West Virginia has been a disappointment for many, including Veronica Bunch, a state advocate for the act. "It was definitely a slap in the face," she said, expressing her frustration with the state's perceived lack of progress on issues of equality. Retiring Democratic senator Mike Caputo, who introduced the bill, also voiced his dismay, stating, "We hear horror stories all the time about how, particularly women of color, are treated differently because of their hairstyle, their natural hairstyle, or their traditional hairstyles."
Read also: Lasting Hair Graft Results
The debate over the CROWN Act is not just about policy; it's about the lived experiences of individuals who have faced discrimination because of their hair. Myya Helm, a 21-year-old college student at West Virginia University, shared her experiences of being treated differently based on how she wears her hair, including whether she braids it or wears it naturally. While she has always been aware of these biases and worked harder because of them, she acknowledges the emotional toll of constantly fighting for acceptance. "From a young age, it kinda seemed like this state doesn’t want me," she said.
Helm's experiences are not unique. Tarsha Bolt's son, for example, faced discrimination related to his dreadlocks. She said last year, kids made memes about him and asked him why he didn’t just cut his hair. "When in reality, his hair is neat," his mother said. "His hair looks good. Dreadlocks are acceptable. Dreadlocks are a cultural hairstyle." Bolt worries that her son's recent exclusion from the basketball team is a form of retaliation for the publicity surrounding his hair.
These personal stories underscore the importance of the CROWN Act and the need for greater awareness and understanding of the cultural significance of different hairstyles.
Amidst the setbacks, there have been attempts to address hair discrimination in West Virginia. Senate Bill 496 (SB 496) aimed to add protections to the state Human Rights Act, prohibiting race-based discrimination for hair textures and protective hairstyles associated with the history and culture of particular races, including styles such as braids, locks, and twists.
State Sen. Mike Caputo, D-Marion, is the lead sponsor of SB 496. The bill creates a three-year phase-in for the new work and employment requirements and increases the age of adults with no dependents in SNAP from 52 to 59, with as many as 8,000 West Virginians potentially affected by the legislation.
Read also: Customizing Your Hair Oil Blend
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Trump, R-Morgan, questioned Tarr about what evidence he had that the bill would have a potential cost to taxpayers. Trump argued that the bill simply clarifies existing law and could reduce the number of legal cases. "It’s already against the law in this state to discriminate on the basis of race. This bill simply clarifies that if you discriminate against someone because of his or her hairstyle associated with his or her race, it qualifies as racial discrimination. … It will reduce the number of cases that have to be litigated because it will resolve that legal issue."
Despite initial progress, SB 496 faced obstacles, including concerns about potential costs to the state. These concerns led to delays and ultimately contributed to the bill's failure to pass.
The debate over hairstyles in West Virginia has been further complicated by discussions surrounding monuments and memorials. On Monday, March 15, lawmakers in the House of Delegates Government Organization Committee passed the “West Virginia Monument and Protection Act of 2021,” sponsored by Delegate Chris Phillips, R-Barbour. House Bill 2174 would prohibit the removal of monuments and memorials unless the West Virginia State Historic Preservation Office grants a waiver.
This decision has been criticized by those who believe that the legislature should prioritize addressing contemporary issues of discrimination over preserving symbols of the past. Delegate Danielle Walker, for example, questioned why the CROWN Act could not have been placed on the agenda instead of a bill focused on "dead people."
The prioritization of monument protection over anti-discrimination measures highlights a broader debate about the values and priorities of the state. For some, preserving historical monuments is essential for understanding and honoring the past. For others, addressing present-day inequalities is a more pressing concern.
Read also: Achieve Voluminous Hair
Myya Helm echoed this sentiment, stating that when lawmakers focus on preserving Confederate monuments over a bill meant to end discrimination based on Black hairstyles, she feels an even stronger push to leave the state.
tags: #west #virginia #hairstyles #history
