Hair controversy, here we come. If you have been following this site since the beginning, you know that I have used the hair typing system to describe my hair and have even referred readers to links that describe the system in more detail. On the other hand, I have also questioned the efficacy of the hair typing system. Some take it too far, even I have in the past. We can get so caught up in the numerical system of hair typing that we may do any of the following:
- Refuse hair advice from long time naturals just because they don't have our hair type. For example, a type 4 coily feeling that those with type 3 hair can't really tell her anything about natural hair because curls are much too different from coils/kinks.
- Recommending products specifically for a hair type, when in reality strand thickness and porosity level are probably more indicative of what products/methods will work rather than how much your hair curls.
- Making more confusion out of this natural hair journey/lifestyle than need be. I am convinced that would be naturals might be turned away from all the confusion that seems to come, including when it comes to hair typing.
You can decide for yourself how you feel about Mr. Walker's comments. If I shared any more thoughts, I run the risk of this blog post becoming very long indeed. But in the end, Andre Walker and his hair typing system can both go to the left, and from here on out I will be only using descriptive words to describe textures, such as kinky, coily, springy, high density strands, fine strands, coarse, et cetera. After all, the main way I learned about my hair and what works was not through this typing system, but from good old trial and error. Until next time...