Talk:African black soap

Potash?

"First, they sun-dry the plant matter, such as plantain skins, palm tree leaves, cocoa pods and shea tree bark, and burn it to ash."

This sounds like potash in the traditional sense. The fact that they're reacting it with fats to form a soap seems to back this up. Is it okay to just go ahead and call it that?Nlburgin (talk) 21:04, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Eh, maybe it would be confusing, since potash today usually refers to potassium minerals from underground. I will just link to ash instead.Nlburgin (talk) 21:12, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Call it by what it’s called…culture is culture whether it’s confusing for you or more convenient for you to call or something else. It is drastically different from potash as you have corrected yourself it is an herbal ash soap in simple layman terms. AsaYoruba55 (talk) 20:09, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

• call it something else.

AsaYoruba55 (talk) 20:09, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Clarifying Innacurate Wiki About African Black Soap

“African” Black Soap is the given name globally to a soap with various names across and outside of Africa. Depending on the part of the world you are from you may know it by a specific name or the most popular “Ose Dudu/Dudu Osun” or simply African Black Soap. It is a kind of soap originating from various Yoruba peoples from what is now known today as West Africa. It spread from the Yoruba women in Nigeria to the ones in Ghana, Benin, Togo and now globally. It is originally made from the burning/ash of water, palm kernel(ekuro), cassava(paki), tree barks ex: cam wood(osun), fenugreek seeds (eru), omi aro (essence water of the unburned soap), palm oils (sometimes) and various Yorùbá herbs known as (Ewe Yorùbá) for specific added properties giving it its dark color after being burned. Depending on the Yoruba subgroup extra plant matter ingredients may be added (like plantain) or removed. Originally it had and still has a spiritual context (look up Akose IFÁ) depending on what herb is mixed in according to the Yorubas. It can have healing, cleansing or any other spiritual benefits though most people today just use it solely for cosmetics/beauty. There’s a misconception that Dudu Osun is just a Yorùbá version/brand of black soap but it is the modernized version of the traditional originally unrefined Yorùbá soap. It’s originally dark crumbly or having the texture of molded round soft but tough soap in a ball like shape. It is high alkalinity with a very high pH so it’s not for the most sensitive of skin and a little truly goes a long way. Various groups of people have adopted this practice and come up with their own version as cultural exchange usually creates. There are various versions across Nigeria and Africa with their own versions that largely deviate from the original recipe in color, method, process or purpose. Although, in Ghana they make a very close to original version of this soap with various ethnic groups in Ghana being the main ones popularizing, profiting and promoting this soap globally. The Ghanaians were taught to make this soap by way of interaction with the Oyo Empire and the Yoruba market/artisan women. They have preserved this soap very well as if it was their own, hence the misconception that it is a Ghanaian product of origination. This is my attempt at educating those who are looking for real education after being blocked from editing a wiki that very conveniently largely left out the people/culture (Yorùbá) that originated this amazing soap we all get to enjoy benefits from.

Claims about its invention and spread

Firstly, there is no evidence that it was invented by any group of people and spread by them or it was invented in an area. There is no reliable source for this delusion. Additionally, there is a lot of misattributions in the historical references which are also wrongly cited. Furthermore, they have no relationship or bearing to the group that supposedly invented it and diffused it. Extraordinary claims deserve extraordinary evidence. Around what time was it invented? and where was it invented and around what time did it spread? Are there historical contemporaneous accounts that tell us about its diffusion? or gives us an idea about the diffusion? The page seems to be toeing the line of nationalist historicist propaganda. NeguseCleaner (talk) 09:59, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

It's very odd that you would even remove sources from professional dermatologists who aren't even from the ethnic group being credited with its invention. I'm restoring them all. I believe the onus is on you to prove how the authors of the book are out to spread "nationalist historicist propaganda". Sohvyan (talk) 18:55, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Are "professional" dermatologists historians or are they contemporaneous historical actors to the historical event of the supposed diffusion? I don't care for Wikipedia or editing on it, the only reason why I came in here to correct the delusions and bullshit was that, charlatans with ulterior motives lifted from my page sources I once promulgated on another platform to come and neat together some fucking bullshit. I just felt responsible to come and correct the errors. It was so obvious those intellectually lazy clowns lifted from shit I have promulgated because they came here to repeat a misattribution I made on another platform over a year ago. This is not a new thing, many months after I promulgate some shit, I see some people coming to wiki to make edits with the information I promulgated. I find it annoying and pathetic, since if I err, they come and make the same errors.

The part of "where it is noted that in the Senegambia region the Portuguese valued the soap, likely for its effectiveness. However, they refrained from introducing the soap to Portugal to avoid disrupting their local soap-making industry" is wrong and bullshit, it was not noted in the Senegambia region (I recall making this error when I promulgated it) and the soap was not a "black soap". That being said, you seem to have comprehension problems if you think that I was referring to authors of some book as being out to spread "nationalist historicist propaganda". If you read the page and can't see the nationalist historicist propaganda, I don't blame you, since you are restoring erroneous misattributions, showing that you are so intellectually lazy, that you don't care to even cross-check with the sources cited. As long as sources are linked, even if they don't say what is claimed, or even if they don't even contain the information, it is fair game. You can keep the bullshit up. Have a nice day. NeguseCleaner (talk) 11:20, 23 July 2025 (UTC)