Comments

1. Tamara wrote:

   The ad makes both black women and the “villagers” look stupid by playing up to stereotypes. Nevermind that white women have been using extensions for a long time, but what they’re implying here is that only black women would be dumb enough to get “yak hair” sewn in. Oh, and please don’t get me started on the implied attitudes of the women in the commercial. No one has agency here.

   Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 1:15 pm ¶

2. Fiqah wrote:

   [D]oes a black woman ever gets to be on TV when the topic of discussion is neither weaves, nor nails, ice cream/chocolate or black men?

   Oprah.

   Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 1:17 pm ¶

3. c.n. edaw wrote:

   Wow. I have seen those ads. Now ,I feel likeI have to go back and watch them again. I just thought they were generally stupid not terribly effective ads. I didn’t look any deeper.

   I guess perhaps I am desensitized to two things. 1) attractive busty but not usually smart blondes (or white women in general) being used to sell stuff to horny guys 2) that everyone, including most black women I know, believes all black women wear weave if we have any hair length at all, and would thus see this ad as acknowledging and affirming the obvious. and therefore a true public service to the women who want to know where their hair comes from.

   And yes, my second assertion is grounded in the fact that I am a black woman who has always had long hair, who NOW cannot go anywhere without someone asking who “did my weave” or trying to yank on it to check for tracks. Thanks, BET!

   Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 1:32 pm ¶

4. BSK wrote:

   I think I have to disagree here. I don’t know that the women of color in the “Extensions” commercial come out looking stupid. What exactly is it that makes them look stupid? That they’re getting extensions? That they don’t know what the extensions are made of? Or the response of the woman at the end to ultimately learning what might be going into her hair? Some cursory research indicates that most “natural” extensions are made from human hair, though they are sometimes blended with yak hair to make them cheaper.

   I do agree that the portrayal of the “villagers” is somewhat troublesome, as it is simply playing off stereotypes and poking fun at them. I don’t know if I feel the portrayal of the African-American women is particularly troublesome though. Referring to my earlier questions, I don’t think getting extensions or not knowing what they are made of is a negative portrayal. You could debate the last point, in how the woman responds, but I’m just not sure on this point.

   I do recognize that in both portrayals, stereotypes are being reinforced, though moreso with the villagers and in a more exploitive/insulting way, I’d argue.

   Another view on the women of color is that they actually are successful consumers of the 542542 product. They make a query and, upon learning the answer to their question, immediately are more informed consumers. Thoughts?

   Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 1:35 pm ¶

5. Thea Lim wrote:

   @Fiqah

   Good point. It occurred to me afterwards that I could think of a few examples. I just started watching True Blood and Tara appears to be a pretty cool character – though I’m only on ep 2!

   Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 2:04 pm ¶

6. KJ wrote:

   I think what bothers me is the notion that only black women wear weaves and on top of that, they’re “dumb enough” to get tracks made from dreaded yak hair! First of all, the knee jerk reaction is “oh gross! yak hair!” but is that any different than wearing wool? It’s cleaned, sanitized, processed and dyed, so where’s the problem? And as far as black women only wearing weaves, I can guarantee you that the vast majority of female celebs, regardless of color, wear extensions to either lengthen or thicken their hair.

   Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 2:13 pm ¶

7. Fiqah wrote:

   @Thea: No worries. The whole sassy weave-nails-ice cream thing is a ready-to-wear trope that’s constantly trotted out in media, so your statement was on the money.

   And yes, True Blood is AWESOME.

   Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 2:15 pm ¶

8. shail wrote:

   THANK YOU!

   I saw that ad yesterday and I had the exact same reaction. Incredibly surprised that they went in that direction.

   Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 2:28 pm ¶

9. Secret Sociologist wrote:

   @BSK: I’d agree with some of your points. It’s fine to show black women getting extensions; I think it normalizes something white people seem to find mysterious. Also, the women are shown to be inquisitive and relatively intelligent, asking a legitimate question and using the service to find an answer.

   But then there’s the ending. The whole “You better not be puttin’ yak up in my weave!” was awful and, instead of showing her to be an informed consumer, turned her into a joke. Would it have been so awful for there to be an alternate ending? I mean, maybe she could suggest another type of hair for the stylist to use? Or maybe she could have responded differently?

   How else are black women depicted, than as finger-snapping, neck-rolling, “oh no you didn’t!” stereotypes? Even when we’re presented with intelligent, articulate black women, they must still be put in their place in order to be acceptable.

   I think the real issue there is that no “alternative ending” could have happened. These commercials are meant to be funny and, to many Americans, the black woman “attitude” is a guaranteed punch line.

   Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 2:40 pm ¶

10. daniel cunningham wrote:

    Not to complicate this discussion even further, but the fact that many hair extensions (particularly as target, in my opinion, at black women) actually do come from sources in the ‘third world.’ Indian women are a common source, again, as I’ve given to understand (my GF cutting her hair is a common debate, with me on the side of “Nooooo!” Ehh, what can I say, I like long hair.)

    This ad seems to definitely gloss over that fact. While cutting hair is a pretty “minimal” loss, the idea of that poor people in “other places” are chopping off their hair because it’s financially worth it vs. just about anything else speaks to me, as poverty and quality of life, particularly in non-US countries and regions, is a great concern for me.

    I know it is not the focus here –though I commend the poster and many responses for calling attention to it– but the idea that other people’s bodies, disproportionately the poor, even just their hair, is a commodity… I hope folks find that as deeply uncomfortable as me.

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 3:00 pm ¶

11. Eva wrote:

    I feel the spot was offensive, but that’s only due to my prejudice, I don’t believe in wearing weaves unless you are an model or an entertainer who had to have various looks, or have lost your hair due to illness. I feel if you weren’t born with long hair, then you should learn to embrace the hair you have.

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 3:01 pm ¶

12. BSK wrote:

    Secret Sociologist-

    I absolutely see your point, and the ending was the one area I had questions about. What would you propose as an alternate ending?

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 3:05 pm ¶

13. Phil Deeze wrote:

    Jessica Simpson, Jessica Alba, Britney Spears and MANY other white stars wear extensions in their hair. Cher wore them for DECADES on-stage for effect. Again, the whole hair-weave-as-negative is only ascribed to black women.

    My favorite hair-care moment for the sisters was when Lisa Leslie wore a clip-on pony-tail and got into a scrum for a basketball with Australia’s Lauren Jackson in an Olympic game. The pony-tail popped off and Jackson tried to throw it at Leslie who tossed it back as if to say, “You can keep this, Miss Thang, check the scoreboard–ya’ll are LOSING. I can buy more hair.”

    I’m a guy and all, but I realize that 99% of what I see in a magazine or on TV isn’t real and that goes for black AND white women and all other stripes. The hair’s sometimes not real. There’s make-up to cover up the pores, etc. Nails are all polished up. Be married to any woman without the trappings of the entertainment industry and you’re going to see someone who isn’t at her best every waking moment and looking like a Maxim model.

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 3:09 pm ¶

14. LaurynX wrote:

    First off, why would you use a text service? There’s a free source, it’s called Google.

    Secondly, “natural hair extensions” most times come from India from women who either sell their hair b/c they have little source of income or the hair is stolen from temples (the hair was a sacrifice) by ppl who sell the hair.

    Thirdly, WTF?

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 3:16 pm ¶

15. MizDezigner wrote:

    I am sick of hearing only black women wearing weaves when all ethnicities can choose to add hair extensions to their hair. Jessica Simpson even has a line of hair extensions and I always see those ponytail hair extensions for Caucasian hair in mainstream stores. I even knew a girl who was of Asian decent who had tracks in her hair to make it appear thicker. However, it is different since black women are a) changing their hair texture in addition to b) lengthening it.

    Anyway, back to the ad. I don’t like it because of the stereotypical black chick persona. That “sassy” attitude. It’s just the whole attitude aura around it. Plus, I doubt it would have worked using a different race/ ethnicity. I haven’t seen other ads though so I don’t know what the typical question asker is like. It just seems ignorant because yak hair can be cleaned and serve its purpose (not sure about quality, etc…..) just like wool. I mean you would wear a wool hat in the winter? I think the question is stupid anyway. Most people know natural hair has to come from somewhere….it’s like trying to figure out the process of where your pork chop came from. One doesn’t tend to think about it that all in depth because if you really thought about what a pig goes through….anyway you get the drift.

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 3:19 pm ¶

16. Secret Sociologist wrote:

    @BSK… I don’t know. Maybe she or the stylist, being newly informed, could come up with some other type of hair to use instead. Maybe she & the girls could (gasp!) go and decide to do something other than hair weaves, or go to a different shop. Or maybe the structure of the ad could change so that there could be a funny punchline other than a “black woman attitude” one.

    Honestly, I’m no comedy writer; I’m unfamiliar with the science of comedy. It might take a little work, but surely we can somehow retire this type of joke! (I have the same kind of issue with those Pine-Sol commercials.)

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 3:29 pm ¶

17. N wrote:

    I rather like it. I’m always torn when it comes to things like this, I make advertising. And I know people who like advertising that reflects their reality. I know a lot of women who scoff at commercials with”white women doing white woman things” and would love to see an ad that is a slice of their daily life.

    I suppose that’s why the Barbershop movies did so well.

    So if I were speaking to a certain audience, I may be tempted to use an ad like this.

    I do have a problem with the prevalence of ads with black women being sassy and street. But OTOH, we see “typical” scenes of women in salons all the time and its ok for them to be themselves. Can an ad be “black” without it offending. Can it speak to some black women without being seen as an attempt to represent ALL black women?

    (I HATE the Pine Sol Lady and the Pepto Lady, for example though many black women I know like them both.)

    I don’t think it makes either the salon customer or the yak farmer look bad, but I suppose to some people it does read like an ad would with a woman eating fast food nuggets and then a scene to a farm in China with dogs being slaughtered then the woman barfing.

    IMO the villian in the story is the unseen middle man who sells yak hair as human hair. Neither the farmer nor the salon customer is doing wrong or is being foolish.

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 4:00 pm ¶

18. Ivy wrote:

    What I just realized is that by “natural extensions” they meant hair that mimicked the natural texture of Black women. The other women were also getting weaves that might have been blended with yak hair but theirs were straight. It’s the weave that resembled her natural texture that was linked to yak hair.

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 4:07 pm ¶

19. Thea Lim wrote:

    @N

    Agreed that we could say the scene in the commercial is not unrealistic – lots of black women go to salons, wear weaves, don’t know what’s in them, and might use the phrase “you better not be putting yak hair up in my weave.”

    That’s why I said that I thought it was offensive *in context of our TV culture* – as you say, ads of black women being sassy and telling people off are the norm. So the reason why this ad (to me) becomes problematic is because it trots out what has become a really lazy representation of black women’s lives – one that also reinforces the notion that there’s nothing more to female black life than this, and that this is the only kind of black woman around.

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 4:07 pm ¶

20. cocolamala wrote:

    american people are already alienated from afro-descended hair texture and styling processes. this ad doesn’t help.

    this doesn’t help your hair be less exotic to the woman behind you in line at the grocery store, or to your manager who wants to touch your hair “just to see what it feels like.”

    having an ad agency cash in on the exotic, weird, unfamiliar aspects of black women’s hair feels intrusive and annoying. like an outsider trying to dip into an A and B conversation.

    it’s even more annoying that the purpose of this presentation of black women’s hair is to make a sale of an unrelated product.

    Notice that, the ad production team has no duty to participate in, or learn from the actual conversations between black women in beauty salons. Even though we will bear the burden of dealing with the negative fallout from this ad in the form of misperception and judgment about our beauty choices…more comments, more jokes, more snide remarks…

    Wow, black women’s beauty = yaks.

    yuck.

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 4:42 pm ¶

21. Anonymous wrote:

    The reason why Black women get it so hard about wearing weave extensions, even when other races of women wear it too, is the overall sense of unnatural change involved in the whole process. For the most part MOST black women, not all, completely transform and alter their natural state of hair in able to achieve a style that comes natural to every other woman in the world. Sure! I concede that white woman were Weaves too, the problem with that statement is Like it or not that yak hair is more similar to a white woman’s actual hair texture than it will ever be to a black womans.Really even to this day I don”t understand why woman even wear something that doesn’t come natural, I mean Black woman Your Hair grows long as all hell, It just won’t grow silky smooth and STRAIGHT and the question i must ask Is SO? wear a beautiful curly afro, Grow some absolutely stunning Dreadlocks, rock some bad ass Cornrows, YOU, I repeat YOU, don’t have to conform to a beauty standard that is a false reality for many of you. Black Woman, your hair can be imitated but it can’t be duplicated by any other woman in the World, Do You! ( just one badly written rant, by one young black man, who is tired of the almighty weave)

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 4:58 pm ¶

22. c.n. edaw wrote:

    “I HATE the Pine Sol Lady and the Pepto Lady, for example though many black women I know like them both”

    DITTO.

    Now those are adds I noticed and shook my head at! But then I get beat up on by the black women who say they are glad to see “women who look like them” on t.v. –despite me feeling like we are always portrayed as overweight, sassy, finger wavers and neck rollers purveying household wisdom.

    I see the thread has been hijacked to a degree by the “white women wear weave too” argument. Just want to say that I know this. However, a lot of black women/men are largely responsible for so many people black, white, etc. believing we are the only ones who wear weave.

    Every time a black woman accuses another black woman with long hair –whose hair is naturally hers of wearing weave– you are in turn advancing the notion that most black women can’t grow naturally long hair. Or when a black male stranger on the street asks if that hair is “yours” as a pre-requisite for seeking you out as a viable companion it advances the notion and importance of the weave..positive or negative in black women’s lives.

    My point is/was that this idea has somehow become so firmly rooted in black culture (despite plenty of black women having long hair that is not weave AND the knowledge that white women often get hair extensions) that I think a lot of black people even, would actually see that part of the ad as reflecting a very common reality rather than a stereotype.

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 5:17 pm ¶

23. jetessence wrote:

    #1:

    Black women–by and large–are the only group of women who use hair extensions that do not resemble (even slightly) their own natural hair texture. White actresses do wear weaves, but the hair pieces they use mimic their own hair. So, the relationship between weaves and black women is A LOT deeper than a simple styling choice.

    #2:

    Yak hair is often used in “human” hair extensions to mimic chemically treated afro-textured hair. It’s not just used because it’s cheaper–although it is more cost effective for the consumer. It’s used because it has a bit of kink to it that resembles relaxed afro hair.

    #3:

    I think those who are offended by this commercial miss the more pertinent question. Why are a majority of black women (not superstars, models, or celebrities) so dependant on hair pieces? I have known how to incorporate fake hair into my hair since I was in the third grade.

    We do not have to continue the status quo because of our history. I’m more upset about this than the commercial.

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 5:53 pm ¶

24. bets wrote:

    To the original question, which was an “attempt to come up with a single test that explains just why an ad is problematic”:

    I wonder if imagining the ad with the same dialogue but different characters would work for that test. Make the women white. Is it still “funny”? If not, then this stab at humor might be racist.

    I haven’t thought this completely through, though. Just a thought.

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 6:31 pm ¶

25. Marcy Webb wrote:

    I watched the ad. While I didn’t get into an uproar about it, it does poke fun at Black women in ways which are stereotypical.

    I am rather ambivalent re: hair extensions. As a Black woman, I like the look and feel of my own hair, and maintaining its health, as opposed to maintaining hair which isn’t mine, is my priority.

    There are many reasons why Black women choose hair extensions, and all aren’t linked to a desire to “look White”. In fact, many Black women have severely damaged hair, due to improper care and hair care practices, which forces them to seek out alternatives to replace/cover up the damage. While I advocate repairing the damage, and nurturing healthy hair, hair extensions are an alternative for which many Black women opt.

    Furthermore, extensions are very expensive – the hair itself, as well as the installation and maintenance. I cannot make a determination or judgement re: the socio-economic standing of a Black woman just by looking at her, but, I can say that choosing to buy and maintain extensions, at least for some, is being made in sacrifice to something else.

    Here is a link which may be of interest:

    http://www.hairstylecity.com/HairAccessories/AfricanAmericanHairExtensions.aspx

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 6:39 pm ¶

26. soreal789 wrote:

    I saw this ad a few days ago on TV and it rubbed me the wrong way! I didnt even have time to consider how Eastern Europeans were portrayed in it and was just dumbfounded at how idiotic and “ghetto” they had these black women acting.

    I wonder what the actresses who took these roles were thinking when they chose to take these parts….(besides $$$$)

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 6:55 pm ¶

27. Eunice Reyes wrote:

    Ads that promote NEGATIVE STEREOTYPES of BW need to be ELIMINATED in the media world and more POSITVE, TRUTHFUL images of BW need to REPLACE them.

    Whether BW choose to wear weaves that look like their hair or don’t wear them at all, is NOT the issue but rather the NEGATIVE connotation that is attached to a BW’s choice to wear a weave BY ANTI-BW RACISTS who create these types of ASSININE ads.

    If it’s acceptable for NON-BW to wear weaves, get breast implants, face lifts, butt implants, or artificially alter their bodies in ANY WAY THEY WANT without having their beauty DEFAMED, DEGRADED and DISRESPECTED, it should be acceptable for BW to do the same.

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 7:14 pm ¶

28. Phil Deeze wrote:

    I do find it sort of ironic that non-black women are embracing butt implants and breast implants to get that “coke bottle/apple bottom” figure and when black women look like that: their booty, I mean, body is criminalized, hypersexualized, etc.

    The hair weaves are just a small part of this as well.

    And I did catch that “Pine Sol” woman is sorta big and matronly while the “Mr. Clean” white lady is model-thin and white and perky. And let’s not forget the old black lady in the Ikea commercials with her Tyler Perry/Madea looks and her smoky two-pack-of-Kools-a-day voice.

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 7:32 pm ¶

29. allison wrote:

    i am so thankful for this site! in the last few months, it’s opened my eyes to things i never would’ve paid attention to before. the first and only time i saw that commercial (a couple of weeks ago, i think) i IMMEDIATELY knew it was offensive and stereotyping black women. i didn’t pay attention to villagers, which i will be sure to do the next time i watch it–if i can muster the energy. i was waiting for it to be brought up somewhere and within a day i’ve seen it on 3 sites–although the other two (geared toward black women) “didn’t get it and the responses were”lol it’s supposed to be funny!!!1″, “but it’s true~” and “then why were the actresses in the commercial?” :/

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 7:58 pm ¶

30. Secret Sociologist wrote:

    As far as the issue over the weaves being depicted in a commercial, it depends; where is this commercial airing? Is this the commercial made for a BET/UPN type market, or does it air during “mainstream” programming?

    As a black woman who wore braids for many years, the curiosity from white people was overwhelming. People always wanted to touch my hair and ask questions. Where do you get them done? Does it take a while? Do people really do that? Does it hurt?

    Though the inquiries were annoying, the curiosity seemed genuine. In this case, I don’t mind the commercial showing an aspect of [some] Black women’s lives and normalizing it. The women are just sitting & talking in the beauty shop, like any group of women, of any culture. I just take issue with the ending, as previously noted.

    As far as the IKEA commercials, what upsets me about those is the “magical negro” aesthetic, especially since the lady disappears or is invisible.

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 8:39 pm ¶

31. Phil Deeze wrote:

    @ Secret Sociologist,
    Braided hair touchers? Y’all get that, too, eh. I have “that good hair” and white folks would ask to touch it when I was a child, and my parents (Southerners by birth) said “Absolutely NOT. He is not a good luck charm or a toy.”
    Funny thing about most men and “good hair.” God has a funny way of making sure to thin that hair out or giving you a receeding hairline so you’ve got to cut it off anyway. LOL.
    “Magical negro” = IKEA lady = Michael Clark Duncan from “Green Mile” = “Bagger Vance” and on and one.

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 9:43 pm ¶

32. dejamorgana wrote:

    Yaks are from the Himalayan region, most Tibet and Mongolia. I can’t see the ad, but if the yak farmers in it really are Eastern Europeans it puts an extra degree of weirdness in the mix. I guess there is some yak farming in Europe, because there is a European Yak Farmers’ Association, but that’s definitely not where most yak hair comes from.

    Honestly I can’t see why it would be better to be wearing human hair in your weave than yak hair. We wear wool, leather and goose down all the time, and nobody thinks it’s weird. Just the idea of wearing part of another human’s body skeeves me out. When you consider that the human hair probably came from some really poor person who needed cash so desperately she cut off her hair, and when you think about how long it takes to grow hair long enough to make extensions from, it makes it really sad as well as squicky.

    To those who comment that ” nobody disrespects white women who get body work done” – um, yes, they do. All the time. In fact, I’d say EVERY time an actress of any race shows up in a new movie with larger breasts/lips/butt or freshly Botoxed face, it’s pretty much guaranteed that it will not only be gossiped about all over the world, but will be mentioned in many of the movie’s reviews, and there will be extensive “before and after” coverage in all the tabloids. And the gossip is even nastier when “regular”, non-celebrity, people do it.

    Which, of course, doesn’t stop anybody from doing it.

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 9:45 pm ¶

33. Kaonashi wrote:

    Phil Deeze: the thing I like about the IKEA Advice Lady is that (unlike the Pine Sol Lady and her close cousins) she’s that evil Great Aunt that everyone has that smokes and drinks a lil bit too much, gives everyone the stank-eye and tells it like it is. She’s not there to lend you comfort in your time of need. She’s there to tell you what a mess you’ve made of your life and how you need to get over yourself, lol.

    I ‘ve never seen this awful yak hair commercial and have no desire to. I have, however heard a lot of stories about unscrupulous hair dealers cutting human hair with yak in order to get more bang for the buck. And Marie Claire did an interesting article a year ago about the hair trade…in some cases the women get very little money for their troubles and the bulk of it goes to the village. Buyer, beware.

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 10:25 pm ¶

34. Restructure! wrote:

    In criticising ads, maybe the ultimate test of Good or Bad comes down to this question: who has agency in the ad? Consumerism after all, is about power. I would argue that whoever has agency in an ad comes out ok in the end.

    I think this is very true, but ‘agency in the ad’ is part of the larger issue of ‘gaze’. The perceived Eastern Europeans have little ‘agency in the ad’, but the larger issue is that they are portrayed from an American gaze.

    This is why some National Geographic articles are so racially problematic, why mainstream porn is problematic even if there is nothing wrong with sex itself, etc.

    Posted 27 Jul 2009 at 11:31 pm ¶

35. BSK wrote:

    bets-

    That test does work and doesn’t work. I think if you are exploring ads using humor, then it’s a possible test. Swapping out the black women for white women would make the commercial not work, or “funny” to people who laugh at those liquor store ads talked about here earlier.

    For more serious ads, that might be targeting a certain demographic, that test would fail. For instance, moving away from race, those commercials for “Life Alert” (I’ve fallen and I can’t get up) wouldn’t work if you swapped in young people, because the device is not for young people.

    So, I suppose if we are looking at ads intending to be funny, then determining how much of the humor is “race based” is a good place to start. That’s not to say *all* race-based humor is racist or bad, but most of it is, especially when confined to 30-second TV ads.

    Posted 28 Jul 2009 at 2:44 am ¶

36. Phil Deeze wrote:

    @Kaonoshi,
    The IKEA lady could either be the oracle from “The Matrix” or the ghost of Flip Wilson as Geraldine.
    Actually, she reminds me more of Homer Simpson’s sisters-in-law that sit on his couch, hate on him for being a bum and ruining Marge’s life and the cigarettes in their mouths never move when they talk. It’s like magic!

    Posted 28 Jul 2009 at 8:42 am ¶

37. N wrote:

    The main reason I like the ad is that it does actually speak to me and reminds me of a conversation I had with my sister. We were discussing fake ponytails and she mentioned “yaki” weave, I said something about actual yaks and she said “Idiot, its not actual yak hair” and then I got longwinded and pedantic and told her WHY “yaki” is called “yaki”.
    She was mortified and her reaction was pretty much,”Oh HELL NO”.

    Posted 28 Jul 2009 at 9:58 am ¶

38. johnjihoonchang wrote:

    From my perspective, I feel that this commercial isn’t intrinsically problematic, but in the context of mainstream prolific media, it reinforces stereotypes.

    I’ve known a couple women in my life that are like the black woman featured in the ad, so it’s not unreal for me to see such a woman in that commercial. All the same, when compared across the spectrum of portrayals of black women across media, you don’t find the actual diversity of personalities that exist in real life. That is: while I know a couple women who are like the woman in the advertisement, most of my black female friends/acquaintances are not like that at all and yet because of the preponderance of that image in mainstream media, it creates a false expectation in the minds of ignorant/naive mainstream media consumers that black women will tend to be like the one featured in this advertisement.

    So, in some sense, this advertisement is not necessarily racist in itself, but becomes problematic because it contributes to the systemic racism present in mainstream consciousness.

    Of course, my preferred solution to this is to keep throwing up more contrasting and real representations of underrepresented peoples onto the screens, pages and ultimately, minds, of the mainstream to break the singular images currently present. Or, even better yet, have people develop multiple meaningful relationships with people that are not like themselves (not just “the one friend”). Both ways help the consumers of mainstream media realize that the presented images that have been popularized are at odds with reality and will cause them to reject the stereotyped portrayals.

    That said, excepting the more vocal woman, the rest in the salon don’t seem to be particularly problematic. Unless I’m missing something.

    I almost didn’t even notice the yak farmers, because the picture was so focused on the yak itself. I reserve judgement on that aspect out of ignorance; I know nothing of yak farming.

    Posted 28 Jul 2009 at 1:16 pm ¶

39. c.n. edaw wrote:

    I have been waiting for this ad to come on again (was watching t.v. until 3 am and never saw it) so I could re-examine it. This conversation has become an extension of other convo’s on here about black women, esp. the hypersexuality and our looks; and media portrayal, interestingly enough. Never saw that coming. Really didn’t.

    I guess I can’t get past the “dirty laundry” or comedic double standard element that seems to be at play in regard to the weave ladies. So much of black t.v. and films mock the weave. I know there were numerous weave references/jokes on the “The Game” “Girlfriends” which were visible to a mainstream audience. I have white guy friends who watched that show religiously because they thought the girls were “hot” and then would come to me for some cultural explainers, LOL. I’m not sure I get the outrage or anger over just the weave element.

    Full disclosure:

    I choose not to pass judgement on the weave wearing women in the world in my assesment of the ad. If I had to say I had a problem with black women wearing weaves it would be more of a practical reasoning-

    1) I think when the hair at the ends doesn’t match the hair at the roots , its looks tacky , cheap and I cant believe someone would pay that much $ for an “illusion” that comes off looking fake. Which I suspect, is why white women’s fake hair often goes undetected and thus they get less grief.

    Also there is the mythology that only white women (or non black women) can grow hair, so length is not suspect on them–even when it appears relatively suddenly.

    Case in point. About 3 1/2 months ago I had a shoulder length bob. Now my hair is nearly middle of my back again. My hair grows fast, always has. Grew even faster as a teen.

    No one questions white women’s hair growing that fast, but because I am black , everyone ASSUMES hair extentions or some “miracle gro potion”. Black people more so than white people. It’s asinine and insulting.

    And in general, people with straight hair don’t get curly hair , period. It never ceases to amaze me people who are confounded by the fact that my hair will appear shorter when I wear it curly than it will when blown or flat ironed bone staight. Simple logic, that defies most so they assume some manipulation must be at work.

    2)My one and only experience with hair weave (sewn in over my own very thick and down to my back hair on a girlfriend’s dare in college) was that cornrows hurt my head, gave me migraines, and the fake hair was actually more difficult to style than my own hair, especially when wet. I felt I had wasted 600 dollars because I could only stand the headaches for three weeks before I wanted it out!

    3) Many women who wear weaves damage perfectly good hair to wear them (leaving them in too long, not getting correct maintenance). You have no idea how many women I know who had great heads of hair–perhaps not as long as they wanted–who now have weak, thinning, bald spots ,etc from bad weaves or too tight synthetic braids.

    Done with full disclosure on weaves.

    The Ikea lady creeps me out. I thought it was a man in drag and wondered “why?”

    However, I am reminded of a meeting with a modeling agency. I took a friend of mine with me. A heavy black woman with a very gregarious personality. She had no interest in acting or modeling, just came for the experience. The casting agent LOOOVED her! She hounded me for weeks for this woman’s number. I asked why she wanted my freind so bad and she said,

    ” Well you have a great face. We like you. You have the right body type . You’ll get some catalog work . But your friend,” she gushed.

    “Your friend, people will buy anything from her! Ask her if she knows how much the Pin Sol Lady makes! I can get her more! Women like her a re great for selling products to housewives.”

    True story!

    Posted 28 Jul 2009 at 1:30 pm ¶

40. ashlynn wrote:

    @Fiqah: Nope, not even Oprah is immune- let’s not forget that she had to respond to the debate over whether her hair was natural or not.

    I feel like this ad upsets me partly because the origin of the hair in question just seems like common knowledge for me: Yaki hair- comes from a yak. If you’re going to put something on you/in you, know where it comes from. Then again, humans in general consume millions of products without knowing their origins, so perhaps that’s another discussion.

    This ad clearly panders to stereotypes. Regarding a single test, if you replaced the black women with white women, maintained the same dialogue- not funny. But if the white women texted this service, found out that “natural” extensions came from a yak, replaced the “OH NO YOU DI-INT” punchline with one more along the lines of “ohmigoshOhMyGoshOMG EEEEEEW!!!!”- the ad goes back to being funny.

    This commercial could have been just as funny if the woman said something else…why does she have to be lip smacking, eye bulging cuhraazy black woman to be funny? It’s a- ha ha- crusty stereotype. True, there are black women who act like that, but there are Latinas, White women, etc. who do the same. If you really want to be on par with the pop-cultural zeitgeist, sarcasm and self deprecating humor there would have been on point.

    Posted 28 Jul 2009 at 5:12 pm ¶

41. Phil Deeze wrote:

    @ C.N.,
    What is it about heavy-set black women that says “buy house-cleaning products” from me. All she has to do is say “You have the right to clean floors, Sugar/Honey Chile/Baby” and housewives run out and buy Pine-Sol? WTF?
    Is this the “mammy” thing all over again?

    Posted 28 Jul 2009 at 5:13 pm ¶

42. Fiqah wrote:

    @ashlynn: Gosh, that’s right. I remember that.

    @c.n. edaw, Phil Deeze: I have simply GOT to work on my Magical Mystical Big Black Woman Hypnotizing Powers. “Look deeeeep into my eyyyes, Sugarhoneychilebaaaabyyyy…you are feeling gennn-errr-oousss…now haaaand me your walll-let…”

    Posted 28 Jul 2009 at 5:41 pm ¶

43. c.n. edaw wrote:

    I should also admit, I thought Yaki was some Asian word, since so much hair used for weave is sold in Asian shops or comes from Asia.

    I NEVER got the connection to the yak, the animal. Perhas the advertisers had someone like me in mind? However, my response would have been more along the lines of “STFUP! No way!” rather than what’s portrayed in the ad.

    Of course, that, and not being a heavy set mystical magical black woman is probably why the only ad I was ever cast in was for frozen yogurt! And it only aired regionally, LOL!

    Posted 28 Jul 2009 at 8:12 pm ¶

44. Joy wrote:

    I watched every commercial on the site before discovering the yak ad had been removed.

    Anyway, my problem after watching all the other ads – like the guy getting brain freeze, or the milked hamster, or even the daiquiri girls – is that no one will think next time they see two teenage boys – “their milking hamsters!” or a middle aged white man – “he’s probably had brain freeze.” But, when they see a black woman (they think is) wearing weave the thought this commercial puts in mind is “Eww! That’s probably from a Yak!” Yup. I have a problem with that.

    Why is weave so fascinating again? I might have questions about, say a white woman’s hair for example, but I’d never be as ignorant in trying to figure stuff out as the ignorance of some people I have witnessed asking me or my friends questions about our hair. In fact, most of my questions get answered by reading magazines like Glamour or in normal conversation. Is it because it’s so “foreign” to people that it continues to be a source of humor and mystery?

    @Anonoymous, c.n.edaw & Jetessence – I understand why some black people disagree with the choice of some black women to wear weave. However, when you say that black women should wear an afro or another natural style, you are still requesting that they conform to a beauty standard – yours. Let them do what they do and look good doing it. Make your statement of what you think looks most attractive/most realistic through how you wear your own hair. No reason why all black women (people) should have a consensus on what looks best one each others’ heads.

    @c.n.edaw – weave can be very damaging. Tightly coiled hair is the most fragile hair type and while it holds styles well (bonus) it also doesn’t respond well when manipulated improperly (i.e. chemical alteration, weaving, etc.) However, when properly done, women who chemically relax or wear weave continue to have strong, healthy hair. Sorry, I got from your comment that you felt weave will always damage/weaken someone’s hair, but that is not true.

    Also, it is true that some black women have no problem growing long, thick hair. Other women have more trouble or are unable to attain that length or simply want a protective style. I also understood your post to say that all black women can achieve this and so none should wear weave. Sorry if that’s not what you were getting at.

    Posted 28 Jul 2009 at 11:10 pm ¶

45. Fiqah wrote:

    Some of these comments are seriously hurting my feelings. I know how long, flowy hair is tied to our views of feminity in this world, so please understand that I am not trying to be a jerk here.

    But.

    I ACHIEVED high school honors.
    I ACHIEVED my bachelor’s degree.
    The hair on my head, like the hair anywhere else on my or anybody else’s body, just fucking GREW. I did not EARN it. It is not an accomplishment worthy of praise, and people who insist on treating it that way are often given a not-so-gentle two-minute re-education. It is no worse and NO BETTER than any other woman’s hair because of its color, texture or length.

    We talk about long, flowing hair in aspirational terms and wonder why we seem unable to get out from under our issues. Our language gives away our true feelings on this.

    Every time.

    Posted 29 Jul 2009 at 10:02 am ¶

46. April wrote:

    @#27: Co-sign!

    I am very, very sick and tired of people saying “Black women should wear their hair natural” and implying that black women who wear extensions or relax their hair want to look (more) white or have some racial identity hang-up. It’s funny that no one ever uses that argument for people who color their hair. I’ve seen women with Afros, locks, braids, and other natural styles who have dyed their hair (some to blond or red, which I’d say are not naturally occurring among most black women). Are they running away from their identity? Of course not! Seriously, this line of argument needs to end. It’s plain stupid. And in the context of this post, it particularly irks me because it implies that fault lies with black women rather than this poorly done commercial.

    Posted 29 Jul 2009 at 5:11 pm ¶

47. c.n. edaw wrote:

    Some of my response comments appeared to have been moderated out. Understandable, as I am sure the intent of this post was not for the comments to degenerate into hair wars.

    I simple wanted to state that my comments were specific and particular to certain instances and conditions, not intended to disparage the weave (or its wearers) or endorse natural hair as I never said that in ANY of my posts.

    They simply meant to show why I might not view the ad the same as someone who is into and fully understands wearing weaves and where it comes from.

    I am just curious though @ Fiqah are you equally offended when someone says I was trying to “achieve a certain look” or “achieve a style” as you are to the word achieve being used in connection to hair length?

    I personally have never encountered anyone who took that view. And certainly some people do strive for a certain length of hair in the way you might strive to attain something else. I don’t think that’s always a bad thing or indicative of someone’s views on feminity.

    Posted 29 Jul 2009 at 9:11 pm ¶

48. anon wrote:

    As a white kid growing up in a very white (and Asian) area virtually the *only* portrayals of black people I saw were from TV/movies. I grew up thinking that African Americans were all constantly alternately angry and sassy, which made going to college near Philly a *huge* learning experience and required a serious attitude adjustment (which I still have to work on often, sadly.) While targeting this at a mostly PoC audience might just say to people “here’s some women who might be familiar (if slightly stereotypical) talking about our product” to an (ignorant) white kid it basically says “this is what black women are like. All of ‘em.” And that’s pretty much the main problem I have with it.

    (Hope that didn’t sound too poor-little-white-girl; ignorant little white kids that grow up to be ignorant powerful adults are a pain in the ass for all of society and the *constant* stereotypical portrayals of PoC do all of us a serious disservice by creating more of us unconsciously prejudiced little jerks. )

    I think the commercial mainly treated the WoC okaaay until the last line, as other people have mentioned. Maybe it would have been better to have the person doing her hair reaching for some hair and then the customer says “What? … it’s *yak* hair?” and then the person quickly switches to reach for a different, human piece of hair. Or something that emphasizes the “informed consumer” angle and not the “black ladies are so sassy!” angle.

    Posted 30 Jul 2009 at 12:44 am ¶

49. Fiqah wrote:

    @c.n. edaw: I live in Harlem. The words “achieve” and “weave” are combined so often in salon and beauty product store front windows here that it’s damn near a community slogan. It’s bigger than “Yes We Can.”

    I don’t want to derail. Latoya posted and cross-posted some amazing pieces with some illuminating comment threads that discuss all this. I think you’ll find them under “The Things We Do To Ourselves.”

    Posted 30 Jul 2009 at 7:31 am ¶

50. Queen Kaye wrote:

    I love your attempt at this deconstruction. AWESOME!

    But I have to disagree on some points. You are forgetting a few groups of people in your deconstruction:

    -black hair care distrubutors: how does the hair get from the yak to my head and I don’t know it’s yak?
    -women who wear natural hair: to them this ad is like YES!!! EDUCATE THE PEOPLE!!
    - the black folks who are REALLY HAPPY to know this little known fact about YAKI and and where it really comes from.

    I applaud KGB for taking a step like this and the black actresses who also stepped out on a limb as well. I think that one point of view that is also left out from the deconstruction of this comm. is the inquisitiveness of the women to ask where the hair came from. This is important. why? because it is important to know what you are putting on your head, and for that matter, with food, and medicine and the like, into your body.

    I think that the issue for most is, ‘oh no they didn’t put our business out in the street like that!’ well, oh yes they did. and that is OK. if it gets the community talking about how much money we give to the Black Hair Care Industry every year, an industry that is dominated by Korean Distributors (over 90%) then I am all for it.

    I wear my hair natural by the way, so I was one of the ones i was talking about about. I wear my hair natural for a few reasons. I have a way sensitive scalp, I am extremely allergic to perm products, and I refuse to give my money to and Industry that Exploits black people while taking my damn money. No thanks.

    Posted 30 Jul 2009 at 11:48 am ¶

51. Slush wrote:

    Not about hair exactly, but along the lines of racism in advertising and the test for agency, look at this awful palm pre commercial: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Hk8IzdwYEA

    Hundreds of asian-looking/dressed or black haired people surround and bow to a blond ballerina in a field with her phone. And the voice-over talks about how her life is connected to others. WTF?

    Posted 31 Jul 2009 at 7:39 pm ¶

52. CR wrote:

    I had a similar discussion w/ my friend a few days ago. I don’t think most ppl advocating “natural” hair believe that those doing otherwise are trying 2 b white-ive colored my hair, sometimes I press it…hair can b a versatile canvas 4 creativity that always regrows! Lol! But we’ve been so conditioned (no pun intended) 2 alter our hair, many of us don’t kno how 2 care 4 it and beautifully style it in its natural st8-so we throw up our hands in frustration, relax it, or weave it! I’m not h8n on processes n weaves but it saddens me when we c these things as “solutions” 2 the “problem” of our natural hair…

    Posted 03 Sep 2009 at 3:49 pm ¶

53. Onely wrote:

    Slush,
    Thanks for mentioning the Palm Pre ad. I have had to stop watching The Daily Show on comedy central because TDS has been inundated with that ad; it plays at every break and is driving me NUTS. I would like to encourage everyone to write to Comedy Central and let them know it’s NOT COOL.

    Christina at Onely

    Posted 18 Oct 2009 at 12:46 pm ¶