Opposition Testimony — Ladosha Wright, on HB 58, the Boutique Services Opportunity Act

Summary

Opposition testimony on HB 58, the Boutique Services Opportunity Act, from Ladosha Wright, a member of the Ohio Barber and Beauty Alliance, cosmetologist and salon owner, addressed to Chairman Johnson, Vice Chair Manchester, Ranking Member McNally and members of the Commerce and Labor Committee. The testimony argues that niche services are hairstyles taught in cosmetology schools and says the bill has no merit in the science of hair, skin and the business of hair salons. It asks the committee to vote no.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Cite this document

“Opposition Testimony — Ladosha Wright, on HB 58, the Boutique Services Opportunity Act.” Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/2023-04-18-commerce-labor-testimony-ladoshawright-58-test-7131e7b709/, SHA-256 ec235b463b72cf4c7c6591fc9a43e36d71423bfe620926de64d956883d3e18fe.

Full text

Opposition Testimony HB 58: 135th Ohio General Assembly

Chairman Johnson, Vice Chair Manchester, Ranking Member McNally, and
members of the Commerce and Labor Committee, thank you for allowing me to provide
opposition testimony for HB 58, the Boutique Services Opportunity Act.

I am Ladosha Wright, a member of the Ohio Barber and Beauty Alliance, cosmetologist, and
salon owner.

The plight of textured hair in Ohio and America has its roots in the systems, casts, and
stereotypes associated with and assigned to race. This plight pathed the path of the term
“natural” hair. The term “natural” hair is as pseudo as race.

HB 58 ignores, divides, and isolates. Ignorance, divisiveness, and isola on do not provide any
opportuni es. Natural hairstyling is basically an an -chemical movement with stolen
hairstyling techniques from cosmetology. Regardless of its popularity, it is without merit. In
the world of hair and the sciences, natural hairstyling will never last the gamut. It will never
garner the interna onal business recogni on and acumen that good old-fashioned hairstyling
does with and without chemicals for all humans with and without hair. That is what
cosmetology oﬀers.

The very act of introducing a bill that references the manipula on and intertwining of Afro
hair as “niche” is quite telling. Given the anthropological posi on of Afro hair in the scope of
humanity that Africans were the ﬁrst to people the planet. So did their hair. Afro hair birthed
coily, wavy, and straight hair textures. Again, this bill has no merit in the science of hair, skin,
and the business of hair salons. Straight hair is not ﬁrst. Afro hair is not 4c hair. People of
African descent do not own natural hair no more than White people own straight hair and
blue eyes. Per the words of one of America’s most dedicated African American ac vists, the
late Randall Robinson, “in the black community, we need be er representa on to get people
to know what they need to know.” From the looks of the person who introduced HB 58, that
representa on is void. To the African American proponents of the bill, you too are void of the
reality that again, niche services are hairstyles taught in cosmetology schools, rather you use
a chemical or not.

“Natural” hair is pop culture, trend, fashion, and sensa onalism. It was promoted by a
“natural” hair movement on social media whose ploy failed. And now they want to encroach
on the cosmetology industry. These people are mad about racism. Unfortunately, they have
convoluted racism with their lack of understanding about Afro hair. These natural hair
enthusiasts are autodidacts who are ignorant to the various African cultural hairstyling
techniques that are backed and regulated by their associated African governments. These
natural hair people are in denial that yes, you must be commi ed to pay for knowledge and
skills, rather you want to or not. You don’t deregulate what you don’t want to learn and pay
for.

In closing, did you know this bill sends all kinds of messages that are in extreme opposites of
the ethos of Afro hair. For example, to the millions of people pursuing the C.R.O.W.N Act,
“your hairstyles are not worthy of the unique tapestry cosmetology oﬀers its customers. Go to
your cousin’s house. Let her do it.” The other bad message, popular opinion powered by
Google searches, social media, and AI are reserved the for angry Black people with natural
hair. You know “those” kind who manipulate and guilt White poli cians who know nothing
about Afro hair to do their deed in the name of free enterprise of Americans for prosperity
and freedom from the government. The same government that regulates meat, produce,
airplanes and funds the recoveries of natural disasters, not natural hair?
Consider my words and experience. Please vote no.

File and source

File: 2023-04-18_commerce-labor_testimony_ladoshawright-58-test.pdf
Size: 330,916 bytes
SHA-256: ec235b463b72cf4c7c6591fc9a43e36d71423bfe620926de64d956883d3e18fe
Our copy: 2023-04-18_commerce-labor_testimony_ladoshawright-58-test.pdf
Original: No public link identified.