“Ban hair discrimination gaining momentum”
by Candace Norwood
Why do supporters think the CROWN act is necessary?
Oregon state Rep. Jenelle Bynum, who introduced the CROWN act bill in her state legislator this year, said one of the biggest challenges is how little lawmakers know about the issue of hair discrimination.
“People don't even realize that white dominant culture has been normalized and has been imposed upon people whose hair texture is different.” Bynum said.
Anthony said that when she first introduced CROWN Act legislation in 2019, she was “laughed out” of some rooms and told to focus on “serious” legislation. That criticism came from both sides of the political aisle, she noted.
After Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts vetoed a hair discrimination bill passed by his state legislature last year, he issued a statement saying, “The bill covers features based on multiple characteristics that are not attributable to one racial group. While hair type is an immutable characteristic, hairstyles can easily be changed. Additionally, the hairstyles named in the bill (locks, braids, and twists) are not exclusively worn by one race.”
How does the quotation from the expert Oregon state Rep. Janelle Bynum support the central idea. “The CROWN Act is necessary because prohibitions are tied to racial discrimination”?
A. By indicating that many individuals can easily change their hairstyles.
B. By demonstrating how many politicians are becoming aware of hair discrimination.
C. By explaining that white beauty standards have been forced upon and used to marginalize black people.
D. By clarifying the connection between employment discrimination and hair discrimination.