Kim Kimble is the woman behind Beyoncé’s hair on the iconic September Vogue cover, but one writer felt the need to over examine Beyoncé’s hair in the form of an article for The Atlantic. And she’ll probably never comment on a black woman’s hair ever again.
And rightfully so.
Megan Garber’s article waxed on about how ‘unpretty’ Beyoncé’s hair is on the cover, and that the ‘stringy’ hair was some sort of political statement.
“Bey and Vogue are not necessarily recommending that the Normals of the world start rocking stringy hair […] They’re making a political statement disguised as an aesthetic one,” she writes. “Here is Beyoncé, whose brand is strong enough to withstand being photographed with stringy hair, suggesting that, for the rest of us, the best hairdos might be the ones that don’t require all the doing.”
Sure, I get the point. She’s trying to say that simple is better. Even though maybe not for Beyonce. I think. Hell, I don’t even know what she was trying to say, besides trying to garner some click bait traffic.
In any event, social media wasn’t having it:
This Beyoncé political stringy hair bullshit < if ww think a wet n wavy wig is "unpretty" then I know what they think about my fro lol
— #Artbae (@MissAbdullah) August 13, 2015
Beyonce's hair does not look "undone" or "stringy." That is a style. BLACK. WOMEN. HAVE. VERSATILE. HAIR.
— jenn m. jackson (@JennMJacksonPhD) August 13, 2015
Lmao no. The difference between Beyoncé's wet hair and Becky's stringy white hair is that one is a thousand dollar weave
— baldheaded (@femmeminem) August 13, 2015
The political statement of Beyonce's stringy hair on the cover of Vogue. 😑 pic.twitter.com/BeoLwfQXiG
— Ronke Lawal (@ronkelawal) August 13, 2015
Good thing Beyoncé didn’t wear a kinky wig. I’m sure Garber would have called it nappy.
Image Credits: Vogue