"THE BLACK DENIAL"
By Frances Robles of "The Miami Herald."
Published: Wednesday June 13, 2007 - Dominican Republic.


Picture by Candace Barbot (Miami Herald).

SANTO DOMINGO - Yara Matos holds her hair extensions as a stylist in the Herrera neighborhood prepares to give herself the look of long, straight hair. Nearly all Dominican women straighten their hair, which experts say is a direct result of a historical learned rejection of all things black thus the "Black denial." Yara Matos sat still while long, shiny locks from China were fastened, bit by bit, to her coarse hair. Not that Matos has anything against her natural curls, even though Dominicans call that pelo malo -- bad hair.

A professional Dominican woman just should not have bad hair, she said. "If you're working in a bank, you don't want some barrio-looking hair. Straight hair looks elegant," the bank teller said. "It's not that as a person of color I want to look white. I want to look pretty." To many in the Dominican Republic, to look pretty is to look less black. Dominican hairdressers are internationally known for the best hair-straightening techniques. Store shelves are lined with rows of skin whiteners, hair relaxers and extensions. Racial identification here is thorny and complex, defined not so much by skin color but by the texture of your hair, the width of your nose and even the depth of your pocket. The richer, the "whiter." And, experts say, it is fueled by a rejection of anything black. "I always associated black with ugly. I was too dark and didn't have nice hair," said Catherine de la Rosa, a dark-skinned Dominican-American college student spending a semester here. "With time passing, I see I'm not black. I'm Latina. At home in New York everyone speaks of color of skin. Here, it's not about skin color. It's culture."

The only country in the Americas to be freed from black colonial rule -- neighboring Haiti -- the Dominican Republic still shows signs of racial wounds more than 200 years later. Presidents historically encouraged Dominicans to embrace Spanish Catholic roots rather than African ancestry. Here, as in much of Latin America -- the "one drop rule'' works in reverse: One drop of white blood allows even very dark-skinned people to be considered white.

P.S: Here is the email of the actual reporter who wrote the article frobles@miamiherald.com for any of you who may wish or want to contest her reported story. Meanwhile, your thoughts and opinions on the asked question bellow.

THE QUESTION WE WILL BE DEBATING IS: Is it racial inferiority complex or just trendy fashion statement?

I think that it's both trendy fashion and the fact (that you haven't been able to recognize) that DR don't, and never will, adopt the one drop of blood view that is prevalent on the US, like a cancer eating away at its foundations. For example, in my personal case, being a person of color hasn't (and never will) stopped me to go on living with an european lifestyle, or to have european values as the core of my being. Human beings have, and ever will, in their majority adopt the values of the culture that for them represents progress, or, as the populace says, the culture that is on top. Although I have to recognize that I have some sort of admiration for those native and african heroes of this continent that have put their lives on the line to fight for the freedom of their people (Exs.: The taino cacique Enriquillo and the african chieftain Lemba during their fight against the spanish colonists on this island in the XVI century, the chilean native mapuche chieftain Lautaro, the peruvian native chieftain Tupac Amaru in the XVIII century, etc.).

In my opinion, the one drop of blood rule is tyrannical because it forces individuals to acknowledge only one of his/her heritages, based on the superfluous trait of skin color, denying the individual the CHOICE of the culture that he'll practice on a daily basis, forcing him/her to adopt one that may not suit his/her personal tastes to the fullest. Besides, I find it ironic the fact that the article comes from a community (the cuban-americans) that have always characterized itself from its deep seated racism. In fact, for all our flaunted racism, marriages between people of different races are more prevalent on the DR than they are, and ever will, on Cuba and the US, and, unlike Cuba, we haven't had a racial war (like they had one on the year 1812), so I find their hipocrisy highly rich and amusing.

Lautaro well said as regards acknowledging the source of the cultures we are part of.

In response to Afro's question I would say it all depends on the individual person. Just because you straighten your hair doesn't mean you personally lack consciousness and pride of African heritage. I wouldn't deny that as a group this behavior amongst Dominicans has roots in racism, but still it isn't fair to assume of an individual that it is anything other than an aesthetic preference.

I would add that as far as I know altering your hair is not necessarily alien to African cultures. Hair has always been a form of human expression, while this claim against Dominicans (as if no one else straightens hair or lightens their skin) is a recent development.

If any person every tries to reverse their race through cosmetics, that individual has a problem, be it from racism, low self esteem, or whatever the crap is wrong with Michael Jackson.
I don't know if racism is the #1 reasoning behind their obsession in the DR, but I think it is prelavent. I know a couple black women in the US who feel that their appearance is ugly, and they were raised in white neighborhoods by white parents. None of my friends raised around black people feel that way and embrase the beauty of their race.
If your surroundings dictate the changes you make to your body in the name of fashion, and your surroundings are telling you to make yourself whiter, then your surroundings MUST be racist.

That article was part of a series dealing with 'AfroLatinos'. The author seems to have put together this piece with her own preset pov, she takes random comments and then injects her own opinion and then comes to sometype of convoluted conclusion by stereotyping an entire nation and making them out to be sometype of cartoonish characters. Here are two different articles that debunk much of what she states:

Sunday Jul 8, 2007 — By Clutch

Special Thanks Afro-Dominicano for Making Us Aware of this Article.


By: Christina Violeta Jones and Pedro R. Rivera

On June 13, 2007, the Miami Herald ran a story titled “Black Denial” by journalist Frances Robles. Featuring images and pointing to experiences of women in the Dominican Republic, the piece sought to underline a topic that many stereotypically associate with this country—a level of racial confusion that presumably finds no parallel in the Caribbean or Latin American regions.

We do not intend here to write a paper to challenge observations that seem to pathologize the Dominican people’s definition of their identity (we rather save the retort for our academic dissertations), but to identify some of the misinformation contained in “Black Denial” and raise other concerns. Beyond its dissemination in the paper, the article was widely circulated in influential electronic forums and message boards, causing immediate outrage.

In order to make the article worthy of its title, Ms. Robles chose not to focus on the positive impact by the works of torchbearers in the Dominican Republic. In “Black Denial,” the deeds of people who have dedicated their lives to spread the ancestral legacy of preserving and honoring our African heritage only serve the reporter to convey a message of local frustration and defeat. The story began to take a familiar path.

However, our concerns increased when Ms. Robles failed to give proper treatment to Manuel Nunez. Nunez is briefly depicted and offers a relatively unprejudiced opinion on Haitian-Dominican matters. But Nunez’s book, El ocaso de la nacion dominicana, represents one of the highest expressions of anti-Haitian and Negrophobic discourses in the Dominican Republic, and if the reporter wanted to render a careful account of “black self-denial,” Nunez would have certainly been cast in a very different light, if not given center stage in the discussion.

But by far, the clearest discrepancy in the story was the comments attributed to two academic representatives of the Dominican population in the United States, Dr. Ramona Hernandez, Director of the CUNY Dominican Studies Institute at City College in New York City, and Dr. Ginetta E. B. Candelario, Professor of Sociology at Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts. The quickest reading of their alleged comments leads to a strong sense of disbelief for anyone familiar with their ideas. Their words are conflated to support the ideology of whitening as a way of racial, personal, and professional improvement for women of color. This is clearly in sharp contrast to the critical views we find in the research both of these scholars have published and sponsored.

After the comments appeared in the newspaper, we made telephone calls to Drs. Hernandez and Candelario demanding an explanation. We were stunned by their accounts. We were given evidence that the editor of the Miami Herald, for reasons unknown to them and us, failed to publish their letters of response in which they terribly lament the distortion, mischaracterization, misquotation, and de-contextualization of their comments. Allowing misinformation and confusion to prevail in public platforms, the paper failed to give Drs. Hernandez and Candelario a chance to speak.

In the future, researchers will look back to the Miami Herald as a primary source, and the general public today must be interested in making sure that newspapers collect and report data responsibly. The mistaken approach by the journalist raises questions at fundamental levels, and the editor’s reluctance to correct the misinformation in “Black Denial” seriously compromises the integrity of the Miami Herald as a respectable entity.

While the voices of Drs. Hernandez and Candelario in the United States were constrained to a few words later in “Letters to the Editor” (06/20/07), we should continue to discuss whether the Miami Herald accurately represented the opinions and experiences of the homeland-Dominicans featured in “Black Denial.”

We are circulating the letters by Drs. Hernandez and Candelario to the editor of the Miami Herald (as provided to us). We are also suggesting further readings and references beyond the article published in the Miami Herald. As it is, we believe that “Black Denial” not only degrades the intellectual reputation and public image of two distinguished Dominican scholars, but also it reinforces prevalent stereotypes impinged upon the entire Dominican population in the homeland and in the diaspora.

To the Editor:

The portrayal of the views attributed to me in your article of June 13, “Black Denial,” is utterly false, and absolutely opposed not only to what I believe, but also to what I have dedicated my professional life to changing.

In fact, the interview “quoted” in this article took place immediately after a lecture by Professor Ginetta Candelario on “Black Behind the Ears: Blackness in Dominican Identity from Museums to Beauty Shops” at the Dominican Studies Institute (cosponsored by the CUNY Institute for Research on the African Diaspora in the Americas and the Caribbean), designed to address the issue of Dominican identity.

The most charitable interpretation of the attribution of these completely offensive and inexcusable remarks to me is that the reporter conflated my characterization of racist attitudes that unfortunately still exist among some Dominicans with my own opinions. They are not — and I very much regret and resent that they were credited to me.

abrazos,
ramona
———————————————————— —–
Ramona Hernández, Ph.D.
Director, CUNY Dominican Studies Institute &
Professor of Sociology
The City College of New York
Convent Avenue at 138th Street
New York, NY 10031
Tel. (212) 650-7496
Fax (212) 650-7489

To the editor:

The comments attributed to me in your article of June 13, “Black Denial,” are a shockingly simplistic and distorted misrepresentation both of the research I presented at the Dominican Studies Institute in the fall of 2006, for which Ms. Robles was present, and of the interview I granted her afterwards.

I explained at length to Ms. Robles the argument in my forthcoming book, Black Behind the Ears: Dominican Identity from Museums to Beauty Shops (Duke University Press, 2007) — that racial formations in the Dominican Republic and among Dominicans in New York and Washington, D.C. are the product the country’s historic relationships to Spain, Haiti, and the United States, and of its people’s persistently disadvantaged and vulnerable position in the hemisphere’s economic order.

In lieu of engaging any of that research, the article resorts to facile attributions of self-hatred, denial or social pathology to Dominicans as whole. The reality - historic and contemporary - is far more complex than that.

It is sadly troubling that Ms. Robles’ piece failed to convey that complexity and instead repeated sensationalist and tired stereotypes.
¬¬————————————————————
Ginetta E.B. Candelario
Associate Professor
Sociology and Latin American & Latina/o Studies
Program for the Study of Women and Gender Committee Member Smith College
Northampton, MA 01063
Tel: (413) 585-3454
Fax: (413) 585-3554

Quote:
Dear Jaime,
Thank you for keeping me abreast of all these articles, which to me represent what is intrinsically wrong with us as a people.
In one article you sent me, the one regarding Dominican women straightening their hair to deny their negritude: I found line of reasoning to be rather laughable.

Hair straightening with chemicals began in the 50's and officially in the 70's by Revlon. Before that hair straightening was done with hot combs, and this began in the late 1880's. Now check out these excerpts:

So much so that the national complexion of skin and general physiognomic traits may well be described as being alight brown, approaching the copper color of the North American aborigines, straight black hair in the case of the females, glossy and in luxurious profusion and a combination of features resulting from about an equal blending of the African, Caucasian and -Indian physiognomies. The very visible traits of the latter would seem to indicate, although we are not aware of the existence of any other evidence of it, that the aboriginal race instead of having been entirely exterminated, had been particularly amalgamated. In “The Dominican Republic in the Island of St. Domingue” by S. A. Kendall, page 243, 1849

The “pure” race wholly died in (Hispaniola) at the latter end of the “last” century; but their characteristic features and luxuriant hair, are still to be traced among their descendants, from intercourse with Europeans, Africans and colored people. These are still called Indios. In Harper's statistical gazetteer of the world / by J. Calvin Smith ; Illustrated by seven maps. Publication date: 1855.Collection: Making of America Books

In other words, Dominican women were known for their beautiful hair long before there were any hair straightening techniques. That said, why do so many women in the DR straighten their hair? First off, not ALL DR women do. Some do, some don’t. Second its not about denial of race is about aesthetics. More women straighten their hair in Africa than in the DR, are they too trying to deny being black? Also white women dye their hair blond, and I assure you that more of them are using peroxide to dye their hair than DR women using lye to straighten theirs. So what are these white women denying? NOTHING! It’s all about people trying to look better in their own eyes. When a Japanese man perms his hair curly or makes an dreadlock, he is simply making a fashion statement, not a racial one.

All these articles are an attempt by Ultra-Afrocentric intellectuals to force people into their own points of view.

I would never suggest that all Dominicans with straight hair are Indian. Indian, Black or white are matters of culture. WE as a tripartite people will always either identify with one or all of our heritages.

This argument is weak. If Dominicans don’t identify with their African roots as we should its because we have very few African Icons that survived during slavery. Other than music and religiosity (two strong vehicles for "escaping" the reality of slavery) there is little material culture. Once Dominicans can pinpoint where our African ancestors came from, perhaps we can then investigate that part of ourselves. To say that Dominican women are denying their negritude because of the hair thing, begs for another question, if the women straighten their hair to deny their negritude, what do the men do? or is it just the women!

In most of the forums where there are these incredulous people, most of them are either not informed or non-academic. I do think that they have the right to voice out their Afrocentric sentiments after all that is also a reality in the DR and the Caribbean. They only fail when they become ultra afrocentric and then want everyone else to see what they believe. The fact is that there are three heritages in the DR and because of this we will always have four identities:
(1) there will always be people who identify with the Spanish
(2) there will always be people who identify with the African
(3) there will always be people who identify with the Indian
(4) and last but not least, there will always be people that identify with all three.
My point is that they are all equally valid. No one has the right to tell anyone how to identify. What do these forums people have to say that is positive either way?
All the best
Jorge

1. From the beginning of history people, in particular women, have tried to modify their hair according to what's fashionable in their culture and particular time period.
2. This includes women from SubSahara Africa. Women in this region have colored/straighted/curled, etc. their hair with various natural substances long before contact with Europeans.
3. An African American woman is the actual inventor of hair straightening as it is known today.
4. Dominican womens' hair texture varies widely due to their particular ethnic mix. Many Dominican women, like many women elsewhere, style their hair in many different ways. This includes coloring/curling/straigthning or natural. Contrary to what the author implies, plenty of Dominican women of all hair textures also wear it natural.

The author tries to pseudopsychoanalyze an entire nation by connecting hair straightning with 'black denial'. What about other factors such as skin color and facial features? And what about African countries that in addition to hairstraighting also have a skin bleaching problem almost as bad as India? I give this author a big F for completely failing to know or understand what she is writing about.

Lautaro,
That article is one of the favorite pieces used in the prevalent anti-Dominicanismo I come across. Any triviality is blown out of proportion and used. The favorite targets, in addition to DR are Cuba, Puerto Rico, Brazil, Colombia (any LatinAmerican country with Afrodescendants).
And you're right, there is a ton of hypocrisy in this. I've actually argued with African Americans who live on the West Coast (where there are no significant amount of Dominicans) who believe Cuba was more 'progressive' in terms of race/color issues than DR. They get their knowledge from dumb articles like the one posted on here.

THE LACK OF INTEREST IN BLACKNESS.
By Manuel Núñez.


Picture of Manuel Núñez by Candace Barbot/Miami Herald.

CRISTO REY, SANTO DOMINGO - As black intellectuals here try to muster a movement to embrace the nation's African roots, they acknowledge that it has been a mostly fruitless cause. Black pride organizations such as Black Woman's Identity fizzled for lack of widespread interest. There was outcry in the media when the Brotherhood of the Congos of the Holy Spirit -- a community with roots in Africa -- was declared an oral patrimony of humanity by UNESCO.

"There are many times that I think of just leaving this country because it's too hard," said Juan Rodríguez Acosta, curator of the Museum of the Dominican Man. Acosta, who is a black skinned Dominican, has pushed for the museum to include controversial exhibits that reflect many Dominicans' African background. "But then I think: Well if I don't stay here to change things, how will things ever change?" A walk down city streets shows a country where blacks and dark-skinned people vastly outnumber whites, and most estimates say that 90 percent of Dominicans are black or of mixed race. Yet census figures say only 11 percent of the country's nine million people are black. To many Dominicans, to be black is to be Haitian. So dark-skinned Dominicans tend to describe themselves as any of the dozen or so racial categories that date back hundreds of years -- Indian, burned Indian, dirty Indian, washed Indian, dark Indian, cinnamon, moreno or mulatto, but rarely negro. The Dominican Republic is not the only nation with so many words to describe skin color. Asked in a 1976 census survey to describe their own complexions, Brazilians came up with 136 different terms, including café au lait, sunburned, morena, Malaysian woman, singed and "toasted."

"The Cuban black was told he was black. The Dominican black was told he was Indian," said Dominican historian Celsa Albert, who is black. "I am not Indian. That color does not exist." People here in the Dominican often tell me, "You are not black." Often I would reply back to them, "If I am not black, then I guess there are no blacks anywhere, because I have curly hair and dark skin."


NOW IN THIS PIECE, THE QUESTION WE WILL BE DEBATING IS: Is racism being denied by many in the Dominican Republic by hiding behind influential historical colonialism resentment as excuses?

Manhattanite,

Many cannot ignore nor deny that, the texturizing or straightening of hair no matter what the given method was, has always been known as the fad that colonialism eras have instilled in society due to lack of importance they used to have about people of color.

This fashion trend started being embraced by people of color because of the condescending psychological impact it had on them that they were made to feel inferior. If they did not have the certain looks or attributes of that of their former masters so to speak, survival was a lot tougher to make it or become professionally accepted by many if you looked simply and only of direct African descent back then. Which explains, if you recall even in musical industries back then, African-Americans or people of color, as it was the trend almost worldwide had to basically alter their nappy natural hairs to look curly, wavy or straight. Unless they were mixed which generally "mulatto" was the only name there was for anyone who was of mixed race regardless of how many drops of racial bloodline their mixture have consisted of.

All together, even being called "mulatto" was not a positive thing. Ironically back then, someone of mixed blood used to be rejected from both end, but was somewhat still much preferred before someone of direct African roots could have ever been accepted anywhere.

P.S: Generally and more predominantly, that is where the psychological inferiority complex of the trend is from regardless if the fashionable excuses of today dictate that many do so for looks. The key word is "Looks" to look european. These are the facts regardless of any denials period.