Coco & Creme: Do Mixed Chicks Hair Care Products Make Light Seem Right?

Interesting blog post over at Coco & Creme. Now, I don’t know if I totally agree with the writer, but I do have my issues with Mixed Chicks — especially after the whole #teamlightskin thing a couple of months ago. Here’s a clip from the article:

Our various skin shades and hair textures are still used as tools of both internal and external oppression in a pointed way that keeps most black women tied up in knots that strangle our self-esteem. Our hair textures can’t help but be a major measuring stick of our relative value as beautiful or ugly. Hair makes us competitive against each other, and not having “good hair” can make us hate ourselves – or at least make escaping the chains of a self-hating self image an ongoing battle, even if many of us win it.

What do you think? I’ve commented on my thoughts about how many women in the natural hair community idolized more curly hair textures. If you don’t have very good self-esteem or self-confidence, then yeah, these images can bring you down and reinforce unrealistic, European beauty standards. Anyhoo, head over to Coco & Creme to read the full article and the comments — it’s a pretty hot discussion over there.


11 Comments Add yours

  1. Nik says:

    Thanks for this. I hopped on the site and made three comments. The article does have merit, although some would not like to admit that. Overall I am not offended by the name Mixed Chicks but would be offended if black media is being “pimped”, if you will, to market a product that is not for us. The reality is we have all hair textures in our community and I don’t care what a product name is (well, almost). If the ingredients are good for my hair, I’m using it! So far I’ll stick with my staples though.

    1. urbansista says:

      I just tried out my mom’s Mixed Chick’s Leave in. We’ll see how it works in hair that isn’t mixed. I understand that they are serving a niche, so I’m not bothered by that. The name does rub me the wrong way, but not so much that I’d never try their products. My problem is with them started with the whole #teamlightskin thing and the divisiveness of that tweet. I don’t think their products necessarily make light seem right, I think they just reinforce a stereotype and a standard. Maybe I’m sensitive because of my own issues, but I have to continue giving them the side-eye.

      1. Nik says:

        Yes, I do remember reading about the Team Lightskin issue on here. So, I can understand why people feel the name “Mixed Chicks” has implications other than it being just a product. That is something to think about, and unfortunately, because many sisters have a problem with their kinks and try to find products to make it do what it don’t, the aforementioned product could very well reinforce those issues.Whether it is a deliberate reinforcement, well, that’s up for debate I guess. Anyway, keep the interesting reads coming!!

  2. Alice says:

    I’m not offend by the name, but I think they need to be extra cautious with marketing. As soon as you start saying THIS IF FOR LIGHTSKINED GIRLS AND BOYS ONLY WITH “GOOD HAIR” (isn’t that what mixed hair is considered 9 times out of 10?) they’re playing into the idea that loose flowing curls is better than a head full of kinks. And MAYBE if you use our products, you can get good hair too! Now fork over lots of money for lots of cheap ingredients! 🙂

    1. urbansista says:

      I agree. Personally, I don’t care – I know what works for my hair and I’m very happy with the hair that I have. But in this community, we deal with a lot of unrealistic love of curly hair or hair that would be stereotypically seen as biracial. I think that Mixed Chicks, while they do serve a niche, play into that inferiority in the Black community that says that curly hair and light skin is better than kinky hair and darker skin.

  3. Sidjazz says:

    Its no better than the cheaper leave ins. I took someone’s advice to buy it when I first went natural and I see no difference with just leaving some conditioner on my hair. Never again I say, atleast not fo rthe $25, $26 bucks that I spent 🙂

    1. urbansista says:

      A friend of my told me she didn’t like it, so I never felt the need to try it. I assumed that it was for mixed chicks, not chicks like me. So, I never thought it would work. That being said, my mom who has a different hair texture than I do, loves it and uses it religiously. I don’t know if it would work for me, but I know that my Giovanni Direct Leave-in ($9.49) does work and is half the price 😀

      1. Nik says:

        Thanks for the accidental reminder to try Giovanni! I was just thinking that I needed to try a leave-in today and didn’t know what to choose. I know, shame on me for never using one!

  4. Sidjazz says:

    Also, I didn’t identify the name of the products with anything else other than just a name when I first bought the product. Remind you, I bought it on a whim at the suggestion of “the man” who owned the store. He sounded very sure of the product and his wife backed it up, I was newly natural so I bought it. Plus on the bottle it stated that women of all race could use it. However when I read about the “teamlightskin” thing I saw how decisive to black women that comment was. I felt that they product really was geared towards certain people and I had no business using it. Even now when I use it it irks me but I paid so much for it so once it’s finish that it, bye bye mixed chicks, hello dark and lovely, oh, oh, once I wrote that I wonder how light skin chicks felt about “dark and lovely’…haha, there’s another post for you Urbansista 🙂

    1. urbansista says:

      LOL! I think Dark & Lovely’s history shows that it was to separate itself from products that white women would use. Because Mixed Chicks was developed in the 21st century, I don’t think their supporters can use the Dark & Lovely name to support their arguments. And, through a little research, I just saw that Dark & Lovely is owned by Soft Sheen Carson, which is owned by L’Oreal. L’Oreal and I do not mix — they were found guilty of discrimination in 2009. So, Dark & Lovely gets the boot too.

      Truthfully, the name Mixed Chicks didn’t offend me, but it turned me off from the product, because I really didn’t think they were meant for me.

  5. Shan says:

    Interesting that the bottle would say it’s for all races but the product is called Mixed Chicks.

    I’ve said before that I often have Mixed Chicks pushed on me since I don’t usually have my daughter with me when I’m shopping for products. It’s getting annoying that people automatically assume my daughters hair is a certain way because she’s biracial and that some refuse to believe me that she has 4a hair. If I bought every product that was handed to me based on this notion of “biracial hair” I would have wasted a ton of money.

    My husband has biracial grandmothers (one White/Arawak, one Arawak/Black) and two Black grandfathers. He has the hair that Mixed Chicks is aimed at, but is definitely not playing on team light skin. That’s why I like the product line Curls, not just because the products work well on my daughters hair, but because they recognize that there are tons of different curls. It’s from them that I learned most of what I know about Black hair and how to care for it. I can use that line on my fair skin, curly hair son and on my darker skin, kinky hair daughter. It’s bad enough that in 2011 we still get comments from people on our childrens appearance and which is better or worse, we definitely don’t need it coming from the people we give our money to.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s