LOS ALAMITOS, Calif. — Hair has always been more than just a physical appearance. Throughout generations, hair has been an outlet for cultural and societal expression. However, social expectations and beauty standards have historically oppressed and controlled the means of hair expression. Beauty standards have shifted from straight blonde hair to perfectly styled and defined curls, yet firm expectations remain. Recently, Social media has provided a sanctuary for individuals to share their favorite hair care tips, products and routines, but with this resurgence came the so-called “Curl Police.”

What are the “Curl Police”?

The term “Curl Police” alludes to people on social media who judge and critique how others care for their natural hair. Although there are many ways they invalidate others’ curly hair, these are the most common: 

1. Hair definition & texture

These users may comment that your hair is simply not “defined enough” or “too frizzy” to be considered curly.

2.  Favoritism

Some favor curl patterns (usually 3a-3c) and only consider those hair types true curly hair, disregarding wavy and coiled textures (by definition, curly hair is hair arranged in curls or curves).

3. Product choices

Accusing curly-haired influencers that the products used in their curl routine are “forcing” their hair texture.

While it may be unintentional, these forms of policing indirectly promote texturism within the natural hair community.

Texturism throughout history

Texturism is a form of discrimination based on the texture of a person’s hair, promoting defined, looser curls over frizzier or tighter curls, creating a faulty illusion that “manageable” curls are unequaled.

This intolerance is deeply rooted in Eurocentric beauty standards. These norms prioritize European qualities, such as straight, silky hair, over textures seen in people typically of African, Latino and Indigenous descent. These standards have continuously pressured those with naturally textured hair to eliminate any sign of texture. In a National Institute of Health study, 89%  of participants reported using permanent straightening and chemically relaxing products.

The fight for inclusivity of hair began during the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s. Figures such as Angela Davis wore their natural hair with pride as an act of defiance toward the stigma of Eurocentric beauty standards placed upon those with naturally curly hair.

So what does Texturism have to do with the Curl Police?

Although The Crown Act, which prohibits discrimination based on an individual’s hair texture or hairstyle, has passed in 27 states, 13 other states still permit this form of discrimination. The fight for natural hair acceptance has spanned across decades, from the Afro as a sign of resistance, to today’s movement of curl inclusivity. While social media has contributed to empowering people to embrace their “unruly” hair, it has also become a place where the “Curl Police” and texturism continue to thrive.

The “Curl Police” resumed enforcing unrealistic expectations of what textured hair should look like, unintentionally preserving the oppressive standards that have been set throughout history. The obsession with perfectly defined curls, product choices, and “acceptable” curl routines reinforces the idea that only certain types of curls are worthy of celebration.

If we really want to establish inclusivity, we need to lose the unfair biases both outside and within the curl community. By challenging these social expectations and recognizing all hair types and textures equally, we continue the work of previous generations. Ensuring that all waves, curls, and coils are valued and appreciated.