Conclusion

This is not a disagreement about etiquette. It is a dispute over who controls access to the Black body.

The law of battery answers that question clearly: the person whose body is touched has that right.

Black hair is part of the person. It is not a public exhibit, workplace curiosity, classroom teaching device, or object available for white inspection.

Adults are responsible for keeping their hands off other people’s bodies. Institutions are responsible for enforcing that boundary.

White curiosity does not create consent. When an adult deliberately touches a Black person’s hair without permission, the conduct is an offensive invasion of bodily autonomy.

When an institution excuses or downplays that conduct, it does not remain neutral. It protects racial entitlement and preserves an old hierarchy in modern form.

 Vernellia Randall, Professor Emerita of Law, University of Dayton School of Law.  Professor Randall used ChatGPT to assist in research, drafting, and editing; she reviewed, revised, and approved the final analysis and conclusions.