Monday, 3 October 2011

School Makes Black Football Prodigy Victim of His Success by Banning Him from Showing Overwhelming Touchdown Prowess
White Scheme to Discourage Africans from Running in White Countries

The News One for Black America blog, which is part of the Black Planet Universe, reports that:
An eleven-year-old [Black] football prodigy from Arkansas [named Demias Jimerson] has been banned from scoring touchdowns due to his dominance on the field.
This happened in Arkansas, where the players of the opposing white teams were prevented from winning because this Black player is so much faster and better than they are.

It seems to me that rather than pulling the amazing Black quarterback from the football court (or whatever it's called), they should endeavor to teach the other teams better defense.  If they did that, they might even discover that a white football player was able to learn to be so effective at defense that the eleven year-old Black runner couldn't get to the other end of the football field.

Instead of asking white players to rise to the occasion, the school takes the really outstanding player out, so that the white students can remain mediocre and win anyway.  The Black student is not larger or brawnier than the rest of the students.  He seems just to be incredibly faster and super at positioning himself to catch and run with the ball.  There has to be something useful the white opponents could learn by trying to stay competitive.

Sometimes it happens that Blacks just win and win and win, unstoppably.  The UK Guardian reports:
London witnessed another swashbuckling performance by Kenya's incredible marathon runners on Sunday. Kenyan athletes finished in the top three places in the men's race (despite their biggest star, Olympic champion Sammy Wanjiru, pulling out just weeks before the race), and also first and third in the women's race.
It began as a trickle – when Joseph Nzau won the Chicago marathon in 1983 – grew into a river, and has now become a roaring, unstoppable torrent. Last autumn, out of 42 elite men's marathons, 38 were won by Kenyans and four by Ethiopians.

The spring marathon season has so far been an even more dominant story, with Kenyans winning the men's and women's prizes in virtually all of the big races so far, from Paris to Rotterdam, London to Dubai.

In related news from Holland, race organizers are offering Africans only 1% of what a Dutch winner would win if he won the race, in an attempt to discourage perennial-winner Africans from racing and winning.  Dutch News reports that:
The organisers of the Utrecht marathon are offering prize money of just €100 to Kenyan nationals if they win the event, but a Dutch winner will get €10,000, the Volkskrant reports on Saturday.
The aim is to discourage Kenyans from taking part in the 42 km race, nicknamed the Dutch Battle, on April 25, the organisers say.


Last year Kenyan runners won the Rotterdam, Utrecht, Eindhoven, Enschede and Leiden marathons. The Utrecht race has been won by a Kenyan for the past four years and the organisers hope to give top Dutch athletes a chance to win this year.


Event director Louran van Keulen told the paper the prize money trick had been worked out with the help of a lawyer. Banning Kenyans outright would break discrimination laws but discouraging them from taking part is legal, Van Keulen said.


The race website does not mention the prize differences but says ‘only athletes who have been invited to take part are eligible for big money prizes’.


According to television programme EenVandaag, only people with a Dutch passport have been invited to take part in the race.
This is really insulting to the Dutch, effectively conceding that there is no human way that a Dutch person can learn to run as fast as an African.  That's color-aroused, but white people often don't care what they have to do to tip the scales in their favor, when they can't win on merit alone.  It would be better for Dutch self-esteem if the trained in Africa and learned to run as Kenyans and Ethiopians do.

Back in Arkansas, all of the students would learn something about humility by watching this prodigy, Demias Jimerson, run past them until he's practically out of sight.  It would teach kids that there are times when you simply are not going to win because there is someone dramatically better than you.  It would teach the losing kids to try to emulate the Black winner.  And it would teach the losing kids to brainstorm and look for a strategy or strategies that neutralized the speed of the little Black prodigy.  Instead of taking the Black kid off of the field, the white students should get up at six in the morning and learn to run faster or block and tackle better.

Taking this kid off the field is like taking Tiger Woods out of golf in order to give white players a chance to win.  Instead, the right model is the one white women tennis players evolved to beat Venus and Serena Williams.   Since the Williams sisters served approximately 33% faster than the white women in the sport, the white women were compelled to learn to be stronger and put more strength into their serves.  Venus and Serena Williams made all players play harder, regardless of their skin color, if they wanted to have any chance at winning the big trophies.

In this little town in Arkansas, the coaches of the losing teams simply need to teach their players to run faster and block better, or accept perpetual losses when they are perpetual losers.

Sunday, 2 October 2011

Presidential Candidate Rick Perry's Color-Aroused Dysfunction

It's a shame, but there's not much difference between naming a forest "N-head" and naming a Washington football team, "The Redskins."  The differences between these behaviors in these two circumstances are too small to be worth trying to parse and describe.

However, American society is much more attuned to the fact that using the "N" word is facially color-aroused and constitutes an act of color-aroused animosity, when white people use it, and particularly when they use it blithely, as if they think no one (important enough to be considered) will be offended by it.

It seems clear from the reporting that for a number of years Governor Perry told his friends and supporters, "Let's meet up at "N-head."  This is an example of "extreme color-aroused disorder" (ECAD).  You can see that it is by the amount of blowback he's now receiving and the risk that it could end his political career, as the maccaca (sp?) epithet ended Goerge Allen(sp?)'s senatorial aspirations and perhaps his public political career.

Two of the problems with the word and use of the term "racism" are that:

(1) we immediately start asking whether a particular act constitutes "racism," which reflects our lack of a clear and commonly understood definition of "racism", and

(2) once we decide that an act constitutes "racism," then we feel obliged to take yet another step and decide if someone "is" a "racist."

If an act or acts of color-aroused antagonism end your political career then that is a strong indication that the act or acts of color-aroused antagonism are "severe" in nature.

If you lose your job because of an act or acts of color-aroused antagonism, then that, too, is an indication that the color-aroused antagonism is "severe" enough to be affecting your career in a very negative way.

We should decide what constitutes "severe" color-aroused ideation, emotion and behavior disorder by examining the circumstances to determine the degree to which the symptoms are impairing the individual in important areas of life, e.g. public perception, social standing, economic standing, work history and present work efforts, and political careers.

By that standard, it's clear that Governor Perry presently has a difficulty with color-aroused antagonism (whether he knows it or not).  If the extreme behavior continues for six months or more then his color-aroused antagonism's extreme nature render him diagnosable with Extreme Color Aroused Disorder (ECAD).  Just because he has this disorder today does not mean that he will still have it six months or a year from now, which will further frustrate those who want to declare others to be "racists" and then, once having so branded them, to continually fight or dismiss them because of what they once were and possibly, but not necessarily, continue to be.

Contrary to what many people believe, there really is nothing wrong with bringing the scientific process into the area once called "racism."  It doesn't hurt us to look at things in a consistently methodical and objective way.

Admittedly, one of the theoretical difficulties with the diagnosis of Extreme Color-Aroused Disorder it that it depends upon subjective circumstances.   One could argue that being involved in the slave trade was not Extreme Color-Aroused Disorder because it actually helped white people to build their wealth and standing in their communities and internationally.  To that, I would respond that engaging in the slave trade involved color-aroused animosity and antagonism, even though the white social reference group most important to other whites approved of the practices at the time at the time.  Antagonism is antagonism regardless of the times.

Some people don't want the scientific method mixed with their "racism" accusations. It is true that many people WANT to be carried along by their unguided emotions and entirely subjective opinions. These people should not be in a position to judge what constitutes Extreme Color Aroused Disorder (ECAD).  Anti-scientific people, like those who continue to rely on the concepts and epithets of "racism" and "racist" respectively simply lack the intellectual rigor and discipline that is required to participate usefully in any discussion of Extreme Color-Aroused Disorder (ECAD).

Saturday, 10 September 2011

Forensic Psychology Writer Seeks to Publish Article on Blacks and Violence

AMJCA has received an offer and request from Allison Gamble, of forensicpsychology.net, to write and publish here an article discussing:

why is there so much violence in the black community? The article will include: statistics on crime in impoverished neighborhoods, explain why violence is more prevalent, and explain how Its not just because one race is more violent than another but because the way people are oppressed and through oppression comes coping mechanisms to get through life.
This Journal's response is as follows (but is subject to public comment from all quarters):
Allison:

I believe that one of the reasons there is so much crime in some Black communities is that whites hate Blacks and Blacks have turned that anger inward.  Take, for example, your use of the word "race."  What do you mean when you use the word "race"?  Are you suggesting that people with white skin and people with brown skin are from different species?  If you are, then I think that insults Blacks more than the "N" word does.
Whether it comes from Black or white people, I believe the assertion that "race" exists at all is a profound insult to Blacks that can only be based in malice or ignorance.  I, quite frankly, am sick and tired of the "R" word.  It is, in my opinion anachronistic and anti-science.

If you would like to write an article explaining why you still use the "R" word, even though the US Government's Human Genome Project has declared conclusively that "race" simply does NOT exist, then I would be very interested in reading and publishing your article on that topic.  I think we all will learn something, no matter what you say about what you mean when you use the "R" word.

When you use the "R" word, are you talking about the Black "skin color group" or are you asserting that we are from a different species?  If you are not asserting that we are from a different species, then why do you use the word "race"?

Having said that, if you want to write about Black people and crime, and you demonstrate that you have something new and original to bring to the topic, then I'll gladly publish what you write.  I would just request that you either define "race" as a factor in your research or find a way to describe what you mean to say without asserting that I and other people with brown skin belong to a species that is separate and distinct from that comprising the white skin-color-group.
If you insist that you cannot discuss this topic without using the word and the concept of "race," then I insist that you explain and support your definition of the "R" word in light of the findings of the US Government's Human Genome Project and the following articles:
'Race' and the human genome ppS1 - S2
Ari Patrinos
doi:10.1038/ng2150Full text | PDF (103K)
Editorial Top
The unexamined population pS3
doi:10.1038/ng2151Full text | PDF (50K)
Commentaries Top
Changing the paradigm from 'race' to human genome variation ppS5 - S7
Charmaine D M Royal & Georgia M Dunston
Published online: 26 October 2004 | doi:10.1038/ng1454Abstract | Full text | PDF (95K)
Forensic genetics and ethical, legal and social implications beyond the clinic ppS8 - S12
Mildred K Cho & Pamela Sankar
Published online: 26 October 2004 | doi:10.1038/ng1594Abstract | Full text | PDF (104K)
What we do and don't know about 'race', 'ethnicity', genetics and health at the dawn of the genome era ppS13 - S15
Francis S Collins
Published online: 26 October 2004 | doi:10.1038/ng1436Abstract | Full text | PDF (330K)
Perspectives Top
Conceptualizing human variation ppS17 - S20
S O Y Keita, R A Kittles, C D M Royal, G E Bonney, P Furbert-Harris, G M Dunston & C N Rotimi
Published online: 26 October 2004 | doi:10.1038/ng1455Abstract | Full text | PDF (102K)
Implications of biogeography of human populations for 'race' and medicine ppS21 - S27
Sarah A Tishkoff & Kenneth K Kidd
Published online: 26 October 2004 | doi:10.1038/ng1438Abstract | Full text | PDF (270K)
Genetic variation, classification and 'race' ppS28 - S33
Lynn B Jorde & Stephen P Wooding
Published online: 26 October 2004 | doi:10.1038/ng1435Abstract | Full text | PDF (850K)
Will tomorrow's medicines work for everyone? ppS34 - S42
Sarah K Tate & David B Goldstein
Published online: 26 October 2004 | doi:10.1038/ng1437Abstract | Full text | PDF (161K)
Are medical and nonmedical uses of large-scale genomic markers conflating genetics and 'race'? ppS43 - S47
Charles N Rotimi
Published online: 26 October 2004 | doi:10.1038/ng1439Abstract | Full text | PDF (118K)
Assessing genetic contributions to phenotypic differences among 'racial' and 'ethnic' groups ppS48 - S53
Joanna L Mountain & Neil Risch
Published online: 26 October 2004 | doi:10.1038/ng1456Abstract | Full text | PDF (226K)
Implications of correlations between skin color and genetic ancestry for biomedical research ppS54 - S60
E J Parra, R A Kittles & M D Shriver
Published online: 26 October 2004 | doi:10.1038/ng1440Abstract | Full text | PDF (1,666K)  | Supplementary Information

Wednesday, 7 September 2011

"The Help" Movie Perpetuates Lousy Roles for Black Actors

Like Granny Standing for Truth, I wouldn't pay to see "The Help" for two reasons:

(1) It won't show up in Brazilian movie theatres anytime soon;

(2) Brazilian television is full of all-white 70-member casts in which one of only two Black actors happens to be a maid. I'm tired of white-centric movies.  They almost always show color-aroused discrimination against Blacks in casting (no Blacks in a movie about New York?) and so they are offensive as well as boring.

I'm tired of seeing Black women as maids and Black men "Driving Miss Daisy (sp?)," and I'm not going to encourage Hollywood or Brazilian television by watching that crap.

As you know, I don't use the word "racist" because it comes from the word "race," and "race" doesn't exist as a matter of science. I prefer the terms "color-aroused antagonism" and "color-aroused marginalization" and "color-aroused discrimination in hiring" because these terms are based on the scientific fact of the existence of skin color.  We all agree that skin color DOES exist, although we may disagree on its meaning and import in our societies

The word "racist" is too facile, too easy, too general. The term "Color-aroused" forces you to think about what negative behavior is based on the color arousal, such as "discrimination" or "humiliation," or both and more. This teaches us to be more precise and teaches our readers (including our children) the various forms that color-arousal takes and the harms that color-arousal creates, like color-aroused "red-lining" in the housing market, and color-aroused loan denials and/or higher interest rates.

Whites are right to be sick of hearing the word "racism," because it is so general and ambiguous as to be nearly meaningless and always semantically wrong.

"Social-ism" is the belief in and propagation of joint societal social control and use of property, right? So, logically "rac-ism" is the belief in "race" and the propagation of arrangements based on that belief. If we believe that racism exists then we must believe that race exists, and if we believe that "race" exists, then we are "racists."

If YOU or I say that two people are of different "races," then doesn't that make us "racists?" Of course it does, because we are implicitly saying and explicitly implying that we believe in and propagate the belief in the existence of "races."

Since we are propagating the belief in the existence of races, we really ought to ask ourselves, 'Do we believe there are separate biological "races"?'

If so, then let's just acknowledge that, like the Stormfront white supremacist blog, we are "racists."  We believe that skin color means "race" and the words can be used interchangeably.

Now, someone will stand forth indignantly and insist that "racism" exists, and it does. "Racism" is a compendium of beliefs and behaviors based on the belief in the existence of "race."  Using the word "racism" is one of the behaviors based on the belief in the existence of separate "races." 

How can you discriminate against others on the basis of "race" if "race" itself does not exist?  The answer is that you can discriminate against others on the basis of "imputed race."  Race does not exist, but others im-"put"-e a racial tag on you and then treat you accordingly.

The term "racism" also has another meaning: "color-aroused subjugation and marginalization."  But this certainly is confusing to use one word to denote two different and contradictory beliefs systems.  Why not say what we mean, instead of using the same word that white supremacists at the Stormfront blog use, while hoping that our readers, Black and white, will understand the difference?

Because Stormfront uses the word "race" in a way that predates our sociology and power-based usage by about 400 years, we are compelled to disambiguate by leaving the words "race" and "racism" to the white supremacists.  They used those words first and they have a preexisting claim on them.

As such, it simply far too easy to confuse our readers when we use the same word to mean something entirely different. It's like using the word "sugar" to mean both and "sugar" and "salt."  That linguistic practice would cause confusion, chaos and ruined food in the kitchen, just as it presently causes confusion, chaos and ruined interactions in our society, between people of different skin colors and between people of the same skin colors.

Such confusion is to be expected when one root word has been given different and largely contradictory meanings.  Our human ability to vocalize sounds and words is far too great for us to allow ourselves be bogged down, and perpetuate confusion, by using one vocalization to mean two different and contradictory things.

Friday, 2 September 2011

SCLC and Tarrant County, TX Chastized for Use of the "R" Word

In FORT WORTH, TEXAS, "The Southern Christian Leadership Conference cordially invite leaders to lunch with Sister Joyce James, Associate Deputy Executive Commissioner for the Center for Elimination of Disproportionality and Disparities at the Texas Health and Human Service Commission."  The invitation to the meeting asks the question, "Can We Undo Racism?"  The meeting is also intended to "increase efforts to improve racial disproportionality in Texas."

One way to overcome "racism" in Texas is by no longer using a word that insinuates that whites and Blacks and Latinos are from separate and different "races."  We are not from separate "races."  We are all members of the same human species. 

Therefore it is not possible for people to discriminate against us on the basis of "race" because "race," itself, as a matter of genomic science, simply does not exist, according to the US Department of Energy's Human Genome Project.

Anti-discrimination laws have long recognized that we can be discriminated against on the basis of "imputed race.  In these cases, people believe the victim is of another race when, in fact, all humans are from the same species.  It is insulting to use vocabulary that implies otherwise.

Skin color and skin color groups obviously exist and have been the basis for discrimination and the deprivation of rights and liberty.  But differences in skin color do not create separate "races" in the realm of biology.  It is time we allowed the anachronistic and humiliating word "race" fall into the garbage bin of historical misconceptions.  Ironically, the more you use the word "racism," the more you lend support to the unscientific and offensive belief that we are from separate "races."

There are no separate "races."  When we accept that we are all of the same species, then we will be intellectually much closer to overcoming discrimination on the basis of skin color and skin color group. 

Unquestionably, the ubiquitous use of the terms "race" and "racism" and "racist" underscore and lend credence to the preposterous idea that separate races ever existed in the first place.  The belief that there are separate "races" helps to perpetuate systemic and individual color-aroused ideation, emotion and behavior. 

In 2008, we did not elect a President of a different "race."  We did not elect a "biracial" President.  We elected a president of a different skin color when compared to the skin color of the Presidents who precede him.  We elected a president whose parents were a hetero-chromatic couple, of different skin colors.  Where the word "race" tries to separate us into different species, with no basis in science, the alternative term "skin color" acknowledges the obvious.  America and the entire world have populations with a broad array of skin colors.  But, "race" does not exist on the basis of skin color or on any other basis.

Monday, 29 August 2011

Is the American Diabetes Association Research Foundation Excluding HBCU’s From Research?



by L.N. Rock

According to the American Diabetes Association, African Americans are disproportionately affected by diabetes as 3.7 million or 14.7 percent of all African Americans aged 20 years or older have diabetes. In addition:

-African Americans are 1.8 times more likely to have diabetes as non Hispanic whites
-25 percent of African Americans between the ages of 65 and 74 have diabetes.
-1 in 4 African American women over 55 years of age has diabetes.

The American Diabetes Association (the Association) is a not-for-profit voluntary health agency that works to prevent and cure diabetes and to improve the lives of all people affected by diabetes. In October 1994, the Association’s Board of Directors established the American Diabetes Association Research Foundation, Inc. (the Foundation), as a subsidiary of the Association. The objective of the Foundation is to fund diabetes-related research leading to the prevention and cure of diabetes, the prevention and cure of the complications of diabetes, and new and improved therapies for individuals affected by diabetes.

Get this, the Foundation is exempt from income taxes under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (the Code) and charitable contributions to the Foundation qualify for charitable tax deductions as described in the code. The Foundation has been classified as an organization that is not a private foundation under Section 509(a) of the code. Even though they appear to have a bias against HBCU’s and black researchers. More on this later…

Research grants awarded by the Foundation generally extend over a period of one to three years, subject to renewal on an annual basis.

Upon investigation and review of the financial reports and records, this writer has found that Historically Black Colleges and Universities have been totally left out of the American Diabetes Association Research Foundation, Inc ward process as selected grantees.

Compared to the general population, African American researchers and HBCU’s are not receiving grant research dollars from the American Diabetes Association Research Foundation.

As an example, the Foundation provided over $33 million in research grants in 2010 without one gong to a HBCU. If one looks at their annual reports for ADA 2009 Research Foundation Financials and 2009 IRS Form 990 you will see the same challenge in the 2008 IRS Form 990, (check out the grantee database for information on ADA-funded research grant awardees), 2007 IRS Form 990 and 2006 IRS Form 990, no black awardees, no HBCU’s researchers

In other words the American Diabetes Association Research Foundation, Inc has not awarded not one research grant to HBCUs, even with the high incidence of black Americans with diabetes.

It is clear to this writer that the American Diabetes Association Research Foundation is saying that it has no interest in developing a strong research relationship with HBCU’s in relationship to issues of research related to the prevention and cure of diabetes, the prevention and cure of the complications of diabetes, and the development of new and improved therapies for individuals affected by diabetes.”

Although the ADA Research Foundation asks Americans to make a donation to the American Diabetes Association to help fund leading-edge research that affects the health and well-being of millions of people living with diabetes. It’s clear that funds are being awarded to friends and pals of the Board of ADA, and HBCU’s are being left out of the grant awards.

This should be no surprise. Rob Stein over at The Washington Post just reported on how Black scientists are significantly less likely than white researchers to win grants from the National Institutes of Health, according to an audit released Thursday that confirmed disturbing suspicions inside the agency about a lingering bias against African Americans.

Who said education is the great equalizer? When it comes to color aroused bigotry, it makes no difference if it’s NIH or the American Diabetes Association Foundation; color continues to play a factor in the way we address research of diseases in this country, particularly as it relates to African Americans.

It’s too bad for America, too bad for those with diabetes, and too bad for HBCU’s and black researchers.

L. N. Rock is a management consultant, Democratic strategist, and 2008 credentialed blogger at the Democratic National Convention. He blogs at African American Pundit.

Thursday, 18 August 2011

Brazil is Half Brown, But Has No Brown-Skinned Women Among 27 Miss Brazil 2011 Candidates



Look at this year's candidates for Ms. Brasil. Of approximately 27 from each state and the Federal District in the country, not a single one has brown skin, even though the population of Brazil includes 50% of Brazilians with brown or tan Afro-descendent skin (see statistics below).

Fonte: IBGE * 2005 , ** Censo 2010

Etnias (Ethnicities) no Brasil

Pardos: 42,6%  (means brown skin, like e.g. Francis L. Holland)
Brancos: 49,7%
Negros: 6,9%   (means brown or black skin)
Indígenas: 0,3%
Amarelos: 0,5%


The population of the state of Bahia, where I live, has a ratio of ten brown-skinned people for every three white-skinned people, and yet the state's representative at the Miss Brazil contest will be white-skinned, whatever her heritage may be.  And for at least the last two years, Ms. Bahia has been white.

In all fairness and reality, if you carefully study the faces of each of the women in the above video, specialist in who has recent African ancestry may be able to identify three or four women whose noses and lips are of a shape often associated with brown skin, even though their skin is not brown.  And some of these women may proudly state that they are Black.  However, the skin color test is quite evident here, as it is in many other parts of Brazilian society.


Miss. Amapá, Miss Ceará, Miss Espiritu Santo, Miss Maranhão, Miss Mato Grosso, Miss Paraíba, Miss Paraná, Miss Sergipe and Miss Tocantins skin colors represent the outer limits of brownness for those seeking employment as dancers, guests and actors on many television soap operas and variety shows.  Any darker and they become invisible.

Just look at the all-white cast of a recent miniseries, called "Tí, Tí, Tí, to confirm that only three out of seventy-six characters have unambiguously brown skin, and one of the two Black women plays a maid.  In a country that is half brown, a television series has whites out-numbering Blacks by a ratio of 25 to 1.  Color-determined roles are worse on Brazilian television than politics South Africa's historical apartheid regimes.



The Ms. Brazil website foresees the controversy over an all-white competition and so it points out, in a special section entitled "Black Beauty," that one of the candidates for Ms. Brasil in 2010, Ms. Ceará, had copper-toned skin.  So, if you wait until next year, you may discover that a 50% brown and black-skinned country has at least one brown or black skinned contestant for Miss Brazil.  This year, the contest might as well be for Miss Switzerland.

I do not refer to "race" above, because it is entirely possible in Brazil that one or more of the women in the video has a brown-skinned parent or grandparent. So, it would be arbitrary and speculative to say that all of these women with white skin are from the "white race."

Instead, it is entirely possible that one or more of the women shown here considers herself to be Black. But NONE of them, out of approximately 27, has brown skin.  (There are 26 states and the Federal District in Brazil, each with a contestant for Miss Brazil.)


I would mention something like this to my beige-skin step-daughters, but they wouldn't understand how it was relevant that they had virtually zero percent chance of becoming Ms. Brazil, simply because their skin is too dark.

My obsession with realities such as these is one of the reasons I could not get along with my wife's daughters (e.g. I felt disgusted at the smell and the reality of their hot irons burning their hair straight, and their inability to understand why all-white institutions bothered me so), and so we split up.  You might well say that my family was a victim of color-aroused ideation, emotion and behavior, at the individual, familial and societal levels.

Their mother would understand.  She has Rasta Locks, unlike the entire herd of Ms. Brazil candidates, all with straight and/or straightened hair.