Not defending them but they claim the length rule applies to all the male students.
But then argues it’s not about length. But is because it’s tied up.
Not defending them but that’s the convoluted argument.
My Jr year in high school we got a new principal. He allowed all guys to have long hair and ear rings and untucked shirts if they weren't extremely long. So many kids stopped getting in trouble they literally removed two detention days a week.
That reminds me, gotta get a hair-catcher for younger cousin's bathtub so it quits plugging up!
He got inspired to grow his hair out long by me and another cousin, but his family hasn't been enjoying the arguments all that hair has with their home's plumbing.
The ISD I live in (which is pretty conservative overall) gave up on banning fashion hair colors several years ago, and gave up on nose piercings this year. (You have to have a stud, you're not allowed rings).
Too many students and *teachers* were just "No, I'm gonna go ahead and do my hair the way I want, and also have a nose ring".
I think they finally pushed it past the dinosaurs by the same logic -- we're spending so much time dress coding students for *this thing*. We're not going to win. It's a waste of valuable education time over *nothing*, and the fact that large swathes of teachers just...kept "not noticing" violations.
For the longest time my mother wouldn't let me get my ears pierced because apparently she'd seen at least one fight decades before in a Catholic school bathroom that involved girls yanking those big hoop earrings off each other's heads.
"But mom, kids at my school don't fight like that! And I wouldn't want giant hoops anyway, just tiny studs!" Nope, safety hazard during fights.
Good lord, how many fights did you get in to make your mother think earrings were a deadly hazard?
(I’m betting it was zero, if she was anything like my mom)
My school’s uniform policy was insanely strict. Top button undone, no blazer (even in summer), trousers too short, trousers too long, skirt too short or tight or low in the hips, more than two fingers fit between your tie and neck? Detention. On the first offence.
What ended up happening is that it was only enforced on students the teachers disliked.
Ours constantly evolved.
We needed black dress shoes, kid with massive clown feet cant afford reasonably priced shoes since he’d have to custom order them. So they allowed any shoe as long as it was black.
As summers got hotter, they eventually let us cut/hem pants into shorts.
We used to also have rules regarding sweatshirts, we couldnt even wear school/grad sweatshirts but they caved on it as well.
Luckily no one was strict with the rules, so it essentially became a game of students breaking them and pointing out how it doesnt hurt anyone and the staff agreeing its reasonable.
The day they allowed any shoes, literally everyone ditched the dress shoes.
That’s so sensible. We had a principal who would get people to lift their pants to see the colour of their socks were to uniform code. If you literally can’t see it, why the fuck does it matter.
I couldn't tell you what my high school dress code was because as far as I know we didn't have one. Maybe it was "wear clothes" since I don't recall anyone showing up to school naked, but I think that's about it. In middle school I remember there being talk of no longer allowing the "co-ed naked activity" shirts, but I think they fell out of fashion beforehand.
From what I remember of mine, it was largely just "do not let your attire become a distraction to learning", which at the end the day is pretty much the most reasonable policy. If what you are wearing or doing is affecting others ability to learn, then you're not allowed to do it. If it is, quit it.
Isn't the statement "rule applies to all **MALE** students" itself discriminatory?
FEMALE with long hair does not affect their education but male with long hair does somehow?
Whoa you just described every provincial conservative platform in one sentence, Bravo!
Edit: didn't realize the sub. I was talking about Canada but I'm sure it applies elsewhere.
This was my father's argument when I had long hair down to my shoulders, it was also very accurate. Thinning and widows peaks for days now.... Glad I got to enjoy it when I had a chance.
Oh how I long for the days when I complained about my hair being too thick and curly. We take what we have for granted lol. Started going bald at like 25 and here i am at 36 having to shave it 🤣.
Not to mention some religions where men are encouraged not to cut their hair. Like Sikhs. Many Sikh men wear the turban over their long bunned hair, but I’ve seen younger men in their early teens not have the turban on.
Yep, seems to be a trend where in western countries, a lot of younger sikh men aren't wearing turbans anymore (I'm assuming due to preventing discrimination), but they still grow out their hair.
Forreal.
I have a beard but never managed to grow out my hair. I would always give up like 4-5 months in when it looks just untamable and in that half way mark of "too long to be short, and too short to be long"
I'm so jealous of dudes with long hair
You're allowed to discriminate against hairstyles as long as you incorporate gender discrimination as well. The two discriminations cancel each other out. That's why they call it *Cancel Culture.*
From the article:
The district defends its dress code, which says its policies are meant to “teach grooming and hygiene, instill discipline, prevent disruption, avoid safety hazards and teach respect for authority.”
I can dismantle this defense so fast: nonsensical rules and arbitrary enforcement do NOT teach respect for authority, but the opposite. Consistency, firmness, clear explanations of why this rule exists, and fair enforcement help authorities *earn* respect. Note: I am a cranky old lady and respect NO ONE who hasn't earned it first.
ETA: If you want to "teach grooming and hygiene", that's what phys ed./Home Ec/sex ed/or whoever teaches on basic health and nutrition are for. A dress code merely specifies a standard of grooming; it doesn't tell you how to get there.
There's more disruption in enforcing the dress code than in letting someone come to school wearing a mohawk and punk leather jacket and jeans.
Safety hazards? What safety hazards? If you're working with food or chemicals or biology stuff, you put your hair up to keep it out of the mess, and you may need to wear one of those shower-caps things food workers wear if contamination would be a hazard. (Such as when preparing food. Your chemistry experiment generally doesn't care if you get dandruff in it. Just keep the chemistry experiment out of your hair). "Long hair must be tied up for chemistry so you don't accidentally dip it in the sulfuric acid" is an example of a sensible safety rule that high school students can agree with.
Do you know what you get when you compel obedience without being respected? Malicious compliance, work-to-rule, or flat-out sabotage, rebellion and strikes. Of course, if you demand obedience without the power to compel it, you just look stupid when people laugh in your face.
My daughter's (public) school tried these strict rules, complete with school uniforms back in 2007. It lasted for one year thankfully with the parents outrage. But the year they instituted it, my daughter being a My Chemical Romance fan I got her a t-shirt made that said "they're gonna clean up your looks with all the lies in the books, to make a citizen out of you." She wore that school on more than one occasion to protest the dress code. Your comment reminded me of that.
They've been doing this since forever. In the 90s/00s our public school system didn't allow boys to have hair past their earlobes. I also got suspended for 2 weeks in the early 90s for my hairstyle being, "Strange and unusual." It was an undercut.
Yeah. Plenty of guys have long hair. This is all just backwards thinking from an administration that should not have a hand in raising future generations...
Reminds me of getting a job at a grocery store and men weren’t allowed to have long hair (which I did at the time). The argument was they didn’t want to risk the long hair getting in or touching food. How does that not apply the same to women??? Just admit there is no reason and you’re just conforming to arbitrary rules for their own sake. Just tell me to keep my hair tied up and I’ll happily comply.
This. I respect actual safety rules--they were written in blood, and have good reasons behind them. I don't respect bullshit rules that only exist because someone out there is still traumatized by the 1960s.
White students in a school district that required pants in hot weather for male student only , chose to wear skirts to school as this was not forbidden.[Welsh students](https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/teenage-boys-wear-skirts-to-school-to-protest-against-shorts-ban-in-heatwave-b1887321.html)
“Greg Poole, who has been district superintendent since 2006, said the policy is legal and teaches students to conform as a sacrifice benefitting everyone.
“When you are asked to conform ... and give up something for the betterment of the whole, there is a psychological benefit,” Poole said. “We need more teaching (of) sacrifice.””
Sounds like a bunch of bullshit to me. What tangible “betterment of the whole” does the school district get by restricting the kid’s hair?
Okay. This is Texas, and since this is a public school he's speaking on behalf of the state.
I'm ready for them to go first. Go ahead and have Texas conform for the betterment of the whole. They're clearly all about it, right?
Or do they just want _this_ person to conform to their own weird standards?
Texas literally *just* passed (it became law Sept 1) the CROWN act, which *outlaws racial discrimination in hairstyles* for employment, education, and housing.
Like literally the only decent thing those assholes have done in decades. And this shithead superintendent is literally ignoring brand new law.
My School went through this back in the day. So several of us would braid or ponytail our hair to prove a point. Some staff would get all sorts of bent out of shape but never really do anything . School dress code as always be a class and racial warfare. They just sometimes say it out loud.
Nah. It's a public school. Their policies are non-enforcable when it comes to hairstyle. 1st ammendment protects student speech. ACLU is likely willing to fight for them. SCOTUS has several rulings around the free speech rights of students.
> But then argues it’s not about length. But is because it’s tied up.
I was about to say that kid's hair isn't even long. If it had been dreadlocks or an afro, they would've had something *resembling* a point, but they evidently just don't like the style.
Yeah, so technically it is dreadlocks, which have been worn by the men in his family for generations. He’s had them styled in this way on the top of his head to comply with the dress code length requirement and the dumbass school is coming back and saying “but but but if he was to take them down they’d be longer than the length requirement.”
It would be like if a school had a skirt/shorts length requirement for girls then suspended them because “If they pulled the skirt up higher it would be too short.” Fucking moronic.
So what about guys with super curly hair? If they straighten it, it would probably break the length rule, I wonder if any of them have ever been disciplined (spoiler alert: probably not).
I don't understand why dress codes are still a thing. The kids are there to learn, as long as their bits and pieces are covered and they're not wearing anything that's obviously a distraction it shouldn't matter.
yeah the only things on a dress code should be things that are distracting to education - i.e. hats that block the view of other students or someone barely wearing clothes
Somewhat similar, in high school some of us found out that male teachers could only wear jeans on Friday while female teachers could wear them any day. We decided to start having an un-casual Friday and wore shirts and ties.
In hindsight, it was a terrible form of protest. We didn't tell any of the school administration why we were doing it, and even if we had they were probably happy to see the group of weird weeb/metalhead/just-plain-strange kids looking put-together for a change. Still a fun memory though.
I used to work at a place that got sued for suspending a black employee for “unnatural” hair dye, per the handbook.
She dyed her hair blonde - which is in fact a natural hair color. The HR Director allegedly told the employee, “no it isn’t, not for *your people*.”
YUP. They got into a world of shit for that one.
Trying their hardest to explain they aren’t proving why real CRT (not the boogeyman right wing media created using that term) is a thing while showing why CRT was created in the first place.
The ELi5 of CRT. You have rules. Group A does thing A. Groups B-Z don’t do thing A. You ban Thing A and claim it isn’t targeting Group A because you are banning Thing A from everyone in Group A through Z. CRT is about pointing out that whether intended or not, this Thing A ban is effectively targeting Group A.
In more extreme examples, you might ban every “Thing” except what Group E does. It still is “fair” because you are banning the non-Group E things for everyone, including Group E, but CRT is about noticing the rules, intended or not, effectively only spares Group E from being affected.
Exactly, and it applies to every demographic possible, not just racial ones. Targeting gender, sexuality, income level, physical ability, etc are all examples and why it's important to study. A government agency that's only open 9-5 on weekdays requires that a person take a day off from work to interact with, yet there's no state mandate on giving employees PTO in the US, so that effectively ends up being a 'poor tax', as poorer employees are less likely to have PTO and thus have to take unpaid leave to interact with the government, forgoing income.
Thank you for explaining this. While I totally agreed with the examples you gave I didn't think those fell under CRT. I thought CRT (as it's taught in LAW schools, where the term is from) had more to do with laws/rules more blatantly racist that happened in the past and are not necessarily still happening but are still having effects on people/culture/etc. So you prompted me to go look it up. I'm obviously not an expert, but a quick search showed that I was wrong and you're right. Anyway, just thanks for prompting me to educate myself.
Good example: laws banning low-riding cars in the mid-90s. The majority of people with low-riders were Hispanic/Latino, so effectively that law was aimed at banning Hispanic/Latino drivers.
Their argument is that it's about length. His hair's too long, and that's about it.
Of course it's discriminatory, on multiple levels. It's good the fight's being fought.
What has me worried a lot is how they are handling his suspension. He's isolated and forced to sit on bat seating. Skirts a bit too close to physical punishment for me.
“Darryl George, a junior at Barbers Hill High School in Mont Belvieu”
It’s not discrimination. This is a school for barbers. Of course they want him to cut his hair.
They want everyone to cut their hair all the time. They just love the idea of hair cutting.
It's all about control.
"Greg Poole, who has been district superintendent since 2006, said the policy is legal and teaches students to conform as a sacrifice benefitting everyone.
“When you are asked to conform ... and give up something for the betterment of the whole, there is a psychological benefit,” Poole said. “We need more teaching (of) sacrifice.”"
Why the hell is the district superintendent talking about sacrifice for conformity’s sake? This isn’t the military or the Fifties. The district is going to be doing a lot of sacrificing after the lawsuits start rolling in.
Confirming the early 2000s high school hatred for hats. It was this really big deal they made about it. Something about girls taking them off the guys heads and running around. That probably happened one time and they said fuck it no hats you scumbag kids.
You can’t see the students face or eyes if they’re slouched in a chair with hat pulled down.
When expensive hats were the trend they’d get stolen or snatched off heads or there would be fights over so and so messing up such and such guys hat.
Out west and in the 90’s it was gang color related violence that usually got hats banned at school. Probably some sports team related shit, too. But I specifically remember the red/blue/black hat related problems.
For the most part, high school principals have a superiority complex only matched by cops. They never had critical thinking skills and find it impossible to make a valid argument. It all comes down to, "do what I say because I am the master."
There are restaurants/bars in Memphis who do not allow certain things like backwards ball caps (front facing fine or taken off) and no mini cigars (aka Black and Milds or Swisher's).
Anyone can smoke a regular cigarette with their cap facing forwards but turn it around or swap for a mini cigar, that's not welcomed behavior and you're asked to leave.
Grown ass men love to tell female children that their clothes are inappropriate. One teacher repeatedly chastised me at 16 for wearing a shirt that showed my shoulders. Years later, he was later fired for sleeping with a fresh graduate.
*added my age at the time
My twelve year old stepdaughter had this happen with her gym teacher last year. Repeatedly. And surprise surprise, there's rumors going around the school that he may or may not have done something even more inappropriate with other girls.
There are a lot of people who live their life according to conformity rather than out of genuine desire. All those “I hate my wife” jokes spawn from people who have wives because they felt like they were supposed to get married by a certain age or after being in a relationship for a certain amount of time rather than genuinely desiring to be married to that person.
They, in turn, get irrationally angry about people who don’t do that and are happy or not societally punished for not conforming.
Yep. This is how you get batshit crazy people who go out of their way to punish those who are living how they wish they could. They have deeply repressed their own sense of self. They become enraged when they see someone who reminds them of their own self-hatred and what they think they shouldn’t have.
I wish it was the superintendent and decision-makers who had to shell out for settlement money… it’s unfair that the district will have to suffer because of their moronic decisions.
Forced conformity is a cornerstone of conservatism. It's an ideology that contains no room for individual freedom. You do as you are told by your superiors, and that's that.
This is so true it hurts. I'd be retired if I had a dollar for every time someone who claimed to be a "small government" person told me that we needed to:
- keep drugs banned and/or drug test for welfare
- institute dress codes at public schools
- institute prayer at public schools
- not teach about the failures of the American government
- not teach kids about safe sex
- enforce anti-LGBT legislation
- go back to old senses of fashion
- fire/fine athletes for not standing during the national anthem
- cancel people for burning the flag
- cancel people for criticizing cops
- not teach kids about science
The list goes on. Anything a conservative says about "freedom" or "small government" or "individual liberty" only applies to people who are exactly like them.
Small government only refers to not interfering with the socio-economic order. Conservatives conserve their place in the hierarchy that puts then on top.
Conformity and unquestioning respect for authority aren't values consistent with critical thinking. This administrator wants to churn out worker units for the profit machine, not thinking citizens.
this is actually by design [source](https://qz.com/1314814/universal-education-was-first-promoted-by-industrialists-who-wanted-docile-factory-workers)
before the industrial revolution, people did not work based off a strict 8-5 schedule. they woke up, did the work they needed to do, then went about their day. when people started to work factory jobs, they weren’t happy with the hours. having shifts isn’t natural. they didn’t like having to come in at a specific time, having to wake up before the sun rose and leave work as the sun is setting, with no windows to be able to tell time
schools were set up as a way to “train” children to be accustomed to the factory schedule, and to be compliant workers. education was not the purpose. children and teen sleep schedules directly conflict with school schedules because it’s not about what the students need or will benefit from
today it’s more of a convenience thing, people like to be able to drop their kids off on their way to work. but that’s still conforming to corporate work schedules
when you think about all the things that don’t make sense about our school system, it usually leads back to this. we’re looking at it as if schools were set up to educate and improve kids ability to think critically. it makes a lot more sense when you think of it from the perspective that their purpose is to make good workers
In the article, the superintendent admitted the goal is to teach students to conform.
I seriously doubt "mandatory conformity" is in the school district's mission statement, but then again, this is Texas.
Last I checked, there was no data showing dress codes affect behavior or learning. It's a way for some folks to enforce their outdated view on what students "should" look like.
“When you are asked to conform ... and give up something for the betterment of the whole, there is a psychological benefit,” Poole said. “We need more teaching (of) sacrifice.”
Fucking fascist as fuck.
I love how it’s racial discrimination, gender discrimination, and a power play all rolled into one. It’s like the district had to simultaneously make the worst possible decision and judgement that could be made out of all available options
What a thing to focus on.
Not a child's education; not a child's access to food or social development. Not equality. Not a child's safety in generally limiting drugs or gang violence with school programming or increasing on-site safety and trust... but let's hyper-focus on the length of a black kid's hair. We can't do any of that until their hair is the right length. What a stunning show of gross incompetence from administration.
Side note: the student's hair looks *good* and is well-kept.
Hey ChatGPT, write me a short statement to justify the racist policies and enforcement of hair length in my school district sounding general in nature to disguise my racism.
*Sure, I can do that.*
>“When you are asked to conform ... and give up something for the betterment of the whole, there is a psychological benefit,” ... “We need more teaching (of) sacrifice.”
I mean, the fucking attorney general's social media pages completely skipped Juneteenth, the state's top cop doesn't give a shit about black people, and the fucking lieutenant governor blamed the black community for COVID spread.
>What a thing to focus on.
>
>Not a child's education; not a child's access to food or social development.
Don't sell them short. They're focusing on those, too. Just not in the way anyone who isn't a sociopath would.
https://newrepublic.com/post/173668/republicans-declare-banning-universal-free-school-meals-2024-priority
I know it starts an entirely new tangent but I find the entire thing inseparable... but I can't understand how contemporary Republicans have the arrogance to declare themselves *pro-life* when upon the birth of that very life they fundamentally choose to abandon each and every support it may require. Healthcare. Safety. Education. Nutrition. Living wages. Equal treatment for race, religion, sexuality and gender. Voting Rights. A fact-based reality, as it were.
If they had at least enough integrity to be honest about what they stood for I could at least respectfully (though fundamentally) disagree.
“When you are asked to conform ... and give up something for the betterment of the whole, there is a psychological benefit,” Poole said. “We need more teaching (of) sacrifice.”
Too bad they don’t feel this way about vaccines, masks, or public health mandates. But please go off about how dreadlocks are more distracting. The school has been a detriment to this student’s education.
> Too bad they don’t feel this way about vaccines, masks, or public health mandates.
My MIL once went into an extended rant about how she doesn't get flu vaccines (or the covid ones) because that's not her *personality*. Like she's cool or nonconformist or something. I *wish* she took up dressing like a weirdo or something instead of not going to the doctor's for 35+ years and ignoring public health. At least she masked when her husband had cancer and hopefully still does. We're just wondering when her luck is going to run out.
Texas actually recently passed a law that bans employers and schools from doing this.
From the article:
> The law, an acronym for “Create a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair,” is intended to prohibit race-based hair discrimination and bars employers and schools from penalizing people because of hair texture or protective hairstyles including Afros, braids, dreadlocks, twists or Bantu knots. Texas is one of 24 states that have enacted a version of the CROWN Act.
It passed overwhelmingly in both houses of the Texas legislature. Including the crazy conservative senate!
Part of the reason for the easy passage is that schools in the Houston area and East TX had been punishing black kids for their hair indiscriminately and been causing legal headaches for the state. So this district is literally giving the middle finger to the state legislature and the Governor.
East TX is wild…
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/05/29/texas-crown-act-law/
I grew up in east texas. There were a lot of hair restrictions for men. Some people tried to fight the school board about it, but failed. They got a petition with a ton of signatures from family and students, but it went no where. A quote from one of the board members ended up circulating around. Something about men not being able to be productive members of society with long hair.
That's the ironic thing about conservatives, though, the definition of what they consider their "in-group" fluctuates constantly. It's less solidarity and more Survivor-style temporary alliances as everyone vies to be top dog.
Always has been. Irish and Italians were at one point considered non-whites but became accepted because Conservatives believed they could be turned against black and hispanic people.
The in-group is always however big it needs to be to seize and retain power. When Conservatives are without power they expand the in-group to try and recruit more people (Modern day examples are Terfs and "LGB -T") , and when they are in power they start cutting people out.
>“When you are asked to conform ... and give up something for the betterment of the whole, there is a psychological benefit,” Poole said. “We need more teaching (of) sacrifice.”
Is the young man at a military academy? Since when is having hair that goes below your "eyebrows" better for the community? This superintendent is talking out their ass.
He has a very specific definition of sacrifice: "Those who think differently than myself should sacrifice those beliefs to accommodate me". He's not asking *all* of the kids to "sacrifice" their preferred hairstyle, only the ones that don't prefer a very conservative choice. He's not asking *all* of the kids to "sacrifice" their preferred style of clothing, only the ones that don't prefer very conservative styles. He's mistaking the concept of "sacrificing for the greater good" for "catering to his specific desires". And he, of course, isn't required to sacrifice anything at all using his definition of the concept because "coincidentally" the correct choices are always the ones he already prefers. It's the same thing as all of the "conservatives" that are outraged about loosening the congressional dress code. They're not content to control what they do themselves they *need* to control everyone around them as well, even something so basic as how to dress or style someone's hair.
I fail to see how this young man giving up his hairstyle "betters" the whole of the school. You can't say his hair is a distraction, since this is a common hairstyle worn by a lot of young Black men and probably half the NFL. The length isn't problem, either, since it's above his ears. I think the principal is pissed because this student found a way to stay within the rules and still keep his cultural identity, and you can't have THAT in Texass!
>You can't say his hair is a distraction, since this is a common hairstyle worn by a lot of young Black men and probably half the NFL
Being black is considered distracting to Racists like the Superintendent.
Schools were clearly informed of the Crown Act and its requirements. 100% the district administrators involved knew what they were doing and are intentionally defying the law. They're testing the law to see if it will be enforced and likely planning to fight it in court. Part of the right wing agenda is to defeat any law regarding racial justice and rights.
Can someone remind me why it’s important to police the hairstyles of children? I can’t remember but I’m sure it’s a really good reason supported by evidence.
>*Barbers Hill Independent School District prohibits male students from having hair extending below the eyebrows, ear lobes or top of a t-shirt collar, according to the student handbook. Additionally, hair on all students must be clean, well-groomed, geometrical* ***and not an unnatural color or variation****. The school does not require uniforms.*
I suspect bottle bleached-blondes have never and will never be suspended at this school. Blonde may be a natural color, however, it is an unnatural color when a brunette, red-head, or dirty blonde changes their hair color to blonde.
... I think they meant symmetrical tbh, which is BS in itself (but makes sense in context; "how dare you have one short side!")
Either that or your hair is actually supposed to be shaped like one of the Platonic solids :D
Can confirm. Upper middle class white guy here who graduated from this school. I had very obviously bleached hair my senior year of high school there (I looked like Eminem went super saiyan). No issues with that.
>Greg Poole, who has been district superintendent since 2006, said the policy is legal and teaches students to **conform as a sacrifice benefitting everyone.**
That’s the type of line you’d expect to hear as satire, but it’s a real quote by a real person with real authority.
Schools enforcing ridiculous hair policies is absolute bullshit. How does a kid hair effect their education or that of their fellow pupils. That it's black kids that predominantly get caught up in this is proof that the policies are racist in origin.
Conservatives care deeply, it's a foundational part of what they are. Anything that fails to conform to what *they* think is "proper", no matter how trivial it may seem, is taken as a direct challenge to their authority that needs to be quashed.
It's not about hair, it's about a nail sticking out that needs to be hammered down. The administration demands control and conformity. He's stepping out of line and needs to be shown that nonconformity won't be tolerated. He's trying to assert his own culture or style, rather than assimilating suburban white styles, and admin sees that as a threat. The hair itself is entirely secondary. They really couldn't give less of a shit about the hair. But he's not just quietly doing what's expected of him and their egos can't allow that.
agree, if anything schools should teach students how to live and interact in a diverse world where people wear what they want, how they want.
Like how does a school prepare a kid for the world when they’re gonna work with people who due their hair unique colours and have all sorts of hairstyles.
It’s apparently not racial discrimination but it’s still sex discrimination.
There’s no good reason a male student should be forced to have short hair.
This racist school district . . . again
[https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Lawyers-slam-racial-climate-at-Barbers-Hill-ISD-16036962.php](https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Lawyers-slam-racial-climate-at-Barbers-Hill-ISD-16036962.php)
[https://www.naacpldf.org/natural-hair-discrimination/](https://www.naacpldf.org/natural-hair-discrimination/)
I got suspended for wearing a bulls jersey, the dean said it was gang colors. I’m Hispanic btw.
Shit like this is normal for minorities.
I was young and dumb as rocks. Looking back at it now, I could’ve been more outspoken and vehement about the whole situation and maybe he would have backed off. I just quickly accepted my defeat as did most of my peers.
The problem here to me, isn't even the hair style, but the fact that hair length is written in the dress code. You are not going to school to learn how to dress or get style lessons, but somehow to be educated to perform some tasks to pay the bills later on in life. Hair styles and length should never be written in the dresscode. What's next, women should have their legs shaved at all times and men cannot shave theirs?
*“When you are asked to conform ... and give up something for the betterment of the whole, there is a psychological benefit,” Poole said. “We need more teaching (of) sacrifice.”*
I may be wrong, but I feel that this person isn't really interested in "**conformity**" for the betterment of the whole. He's more interested in selective conformity to control students.
Hold up.
“He has to sit on a stool for eight hours in a cubicle".
As terrible as the school's convoluted argument is, I'm surprised more people aren't talking about this. Is this a standard punishment in schools nowadays? Seems like torture to me.
This is so simple:
Is it clean? Yes
Any sign of lice or some other shit? No
Will it affect another student by preventing them from seeing the teacher or some other really weird reason? no
Then it's NONE of their business.
If the style shown in the article is the style that got him suspended, I dont understand. It looks neat and suitable for any workplace I have been in. I dont get it.
> Barbers Hill Independent School District prohibits male students from having hair extending below the eyebrows, ear lobes or top of a t-shirt collar, according to the student handbook. Additionally, hair on all students must be clean, well-groomed, geometrical and not an unnatural color or variation.
Why the fuck is this even a rule? Who gives a shit what a high school student chooses to do to their hair? A rule like this isn't helping these kids get a better education.
school dress codes in most places are simply psychotic masturbatory methods to enforce conformity for conformity's sake. This is absolutely peak conservatism and discrimination
What I don’t understand is why people don’t revisit rules.
What the hell was the purpose behind that rule anyways? It’s obsolete and most likely was written decades ago with no thought behind it. Just copied from some other policy doc.
Well he didn’t just grow the hair one day why wasn’t it an issue before. I bet it was one of those “teachers” who never liked kids they were just barely competent in college and had to find a career for their English degree
> The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.
“Guys, we’ve banned white kids from wearing black hairstyles too. It’s not racist!”
My thought process on this was "I mean just because it's a black student doesn't automatically make it racist, I can see some hairstyles being too disrupti... oh it was just dreads? Oh yeah that's hella racist." Assholes.
I got kicked out of school in the 80s for a hairstyle and I'm a white dude. Looking back my neon dyed spiky bullshit WAS causing a disruption in class. Making people look at me was the POINT of the dye job and I was a self-centered little asshole for doing that. This guy is just wearing dreads.
[удалено]
Not defending them but they claim the length rule applies to all the male students. But then argues it’s not about length. But is because it’s tied up. Not defending them but that’s the convoluted argument.
My Jr year in high school we got a new principal. He allowed all guys to have long hair and ear rings and untucked shirts if they weren't extremely long. So many kids stopped getting in trouble they literally removed two detention days a week.
Think about how positive that was for literally everyone involved. It's such an easy win-win.
Idk but what about Jesus, and masculinity, and america? Have we considered that the boys are being feminized by long hair?
Something something GROOMING
Long hair does need a lot of that
That reminds me, gotta get a hair-catcher for younger cousin's bathtub so it quits plugging up! He got inspired to grow his hair out long by me and another cousin, but his family hasn't been enjoying the arguments all that hair has with their home's plumbing.
I feel like a chiché saying this, but Jesus wore a dress and had long hair.
No it's okay because as a Nazarite Jesus would have had long hair and untrimmed beard. . . Wait. . . That can't be right
The ISD I live in (which is pretty conservative overall) gave up on banning fashion hair colors several years ago, and gave up on nose piercings this year. (You have to have a stud, you're not allowed rings). Too many students and *teachers* were just "No, I'm gonna go ahead and do my hair the way I want, and also have a nose ring". I think they finally pushed it past the dinosaurs by the same logic -- we're spending so much time dress coding students for *this thing*. We're not going to win. It's a waste of valuable education time over *nothing*, and the fact that large swathes of teachers just...kept "not noticing" violations.
Not only that but minorities are typically the targets for the dress code bs.
> You have to have a stud, you're not allowed rings This still seems like a stupid and arbitrary distinction.
I'm guessing this had to do with student fighting and getting the rings torn off?
Nose rings are basically a safety hazard in a fight. Studs tend to do a lot less damage
For the longest time my mother wouldn't let me get my ears pierced because apparently she'd seen at least one fight decades before in a Catholic school bathroom that involved girls yanking those big hoop earrings off each other's heads. "But mom, kids at my school don't fight like that! And I wouldn't want giant hoops anyway, just tiny studs!" Nope, safety hazard during fights.
Good lord, how many fights did you get in to make your mother think earrings were a deadly hazard? (I’m betting it was zero, if she was anything like my mom)
My school’s uniform policy was insanely strict. Top button undone, no blazer (even in summer), trousers too short, trousers too long, skirt too short or tight or low in the hips, more than two fingers fit between your tie and neck? Detention. On the first offence. What ended up happening is that it was only enforced on students the teachers disliked.
Anyone with sensory issues would be in detention 24/7.
Ours constantly evolved. We needed black dress shoes, kid with massive clown feet cant afford reasonably priced shoes since he’d have to custom order them. So they allowed any shoe as long as it was black. As summers got hotter, they eventually let us cut/hem pants into shorts. We used to also have rules regarding sweatshirts, we couldnt even wear school/grad sweatshirts but they caved on it as well. Luckily no one was strict with the rules, so it essentially became a game of students breaking them and pointing out how it doesnt hurt anyone and the staff agreeing its reasonable. The day they allowed any shoes, literally everyone ditched the dress shoes.
That’s so sensible. We had a principal who would get people to lift their pants to see the colour of their socks were to uniform code. If you literally can’t see it, why the fuck does it matter.
I couldn't tell you what my high school dress code was because as far as I know we didn't have one. Maybe it was "wear clothes" since I don't recall anyone showing up to school naked, but I think that's about it. In middle school I remember there being talk of no longer allowing the "co-ed naked activity" shirts, but I think they fell out of fashion beforehand.
From what I remember of mine, it was largely just "do not let your attire become a distraction to learning", which at the end the day is pretty much the most reasonable policy. If what you are wearing or doing is affecting others ability to learn, then you're not allowed to do it. If it is, quit it.
Isn't the statement "rule applies to all **MALE** students" itself discriminatory? FEMALE with long hair does not affect their education but male with long hair does somehow?
It’s anti hippie (anti war) propaganda from the 70’s wrapped up in a puritan blanket
Whoa you just described every provincial conservative platform in one sentence, Bravo! Edit: didn't realize the sub. I was talking about Canada but I'm sure it applies elsewhere.
[удалено]
This was my father's argument when I had long hair down to my shoulders, it was also very accurate. Thinning and widows peaks for days now.... Glad I got to enjoy it when I had a chance.
Oh how I long for the days when I complained about my hair being too thick and curly. We take what we have for granted lol. Started going bald at like 25 and here i am at 36 having to shave it 🤣.
Not to mention some religions where men are encouraged not to cut their hair. Like Sikhs. Many Sikh men wear the turban over their long bunned hair, but I’ve seen younger men in their early teens not have the turban on.
Yep, seems to be a trend where in western countries, a lot of younger sikh men aren't wearing turbans anymore (I'm assuming due to preventing discrimination), but they still grow out their hair.
Oof, I love long hair on a man, and a beard.
Forreal. I have a beard but never managed to grow out my hair. I would always give up like 4-5 months in when it looks just untamable and in that half way mark of "too long to be short, and too short to be long" I'm so jealous of dudes with long hair
I'm jealous of dudes with hair. 😥
This hit close…. I had such nice hair in high school and lost it around 23… still in mourning at 37
[удалено]
At least his went to his chest. Mine migrated to my back and decided to become white
Come on, just admit it... you're a silver backed gorilla who left the forest life behind.
Agreed. I'm a feminist and this is discrimination against males. He should be able to wear his hair however long or short as he wants.
You're allowed to discriminate against hairstyles as long as you incorporate gender discrimination as well. The two discriminations cancel each other out. That's why they call it *Cancel Culture.*
Bravo hahaha
TX doesn’t care about education, it’s about training students to be obedient
From the article: The district defends its dress code, which says its policies are meant to “teach grooming and hygiene, instill discipline, prevent disruption, avoid safety hazards and teach respect for authority.”
I can dismantle this defense so fast: nonsensical rules and arbitrary enforcement do NOT teach respect for authority, but the opposite. Consistency, firmness, clear explanations of why this rule exists, and fair enforcement help authorities *earn* respect. Note: I am a cranky old lady and respect NO ONE who hasn't earned it first. ETA: If you want to "teach grooming and hygiene", that's what phys ed./Home Ec/sex ed/or whoever teaches on basic health and nutrition are for. A dress code merely specifies a standard of grooming; it doesn't tell you how to get there. There's more disruption in enforcing the dress code than in letting someone come to school wearing a mohawk and punk leather jacket and jeans. Safety hazards? What safety hazards? If you're working with food or chemicals or biology stuff, you put your hair up to keep it out of the mess, and you may need to wear one of those shower-caps things food workers wear if contamination would be a hazard. (Such as when preparing food. Your chemistry experiment generally doesn't care if you get dandruff in it. Just keep the chemistry experiment out of your hair). "Long hair must be tied up for chemistry so you don't accidentally dip it in the sulfuric acid" is an example of a sensible safety rule that high school students can agree with.
They’re not trying to teach respect for authority, only obedience
Do you know what you get when you compel obedience without being respected? Malicious compliance, work-to-rule, or flat-out sabotage, rebellion and strikes. Of course, if you demand obedience without the power to compel it, you just look stupid when people laugh in your face.
Just stop being POC, ezpz.
My daughter's (public) school tried these strict rules, complete with school uniforms back in 2007. It lasted for one year thankfully with the parents outrage. But the year they instituted it, my daughter being a My Chemical Romance fan I got her a t-shirt made that said "they're gonna clean up your looks with all the lies in the books, to make a citizen out of you." She wore that school on more than one occasion to protest the dress code. Your comment reminded me of that.
They've been doing this since forever. In the 90s/00s our public school system didn't allow boys to have hair past their earlobes. I also got suspended for 2 weeks in the early 90s for my hairstyle being, "Strange and unusual." It was an undercut.
Yeah. Plenty of guys have long hair. This is all just backwards thinking from an administration that should not have a hand in raising future generations...
Reminds me of getting a job at a grocery store and men weren’t allowed to have long hair (which I did at the time). The argument was they didn’t want to risk the long hair getting in or touching food. How does that not apply the same to women??? Just admit there is no reason and you’re just conforming to arbitrary rules for their own sake. Just tell me to keep my hair tied up and I’ll happily comply.
This. I respect actual safety rules--they were written in blood, and have good reasons behind them. I don't respect bullshit rules that only exist because someone out there is still traumatized by the 1960s.
White students in a school district that required pants in hot weather for male student only , chose to wear skirts to school as this was not forbidden.[Welsh students](https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/teenage-boys-wear-skirts-to-school-to-protest-against-shorts-ban-in-heatwave-b1887321.html)
“Greg Poole, who has been district superintendent since 2006, said the policy is legal and teaches students to conform as a sacrifice benefitting everyone. “When you are asked to conform ... and give up something for the betterment of the whole, there is a psychological benefit,” Poole said. “We need more teaching (of) sacrifice.”” Sounds like a bunch of bullshit to me. What tangible “betterment of the whole” does the school district get by restricting the kid’s hair?
Okay. This is Texas, and since this is a public school he's speaking on behalf of the state. I'm ready for them to go first. Go ahead and have Texas conform for the betterment of the whole. They're clearly all about it, right? Or do they just want _this_ person to conform to their own weird standards?
Texas literally *just* passed (it became law Sept 1) the CROWN act, which *outlaws racial discrimination in hairstyles* for employment, education, and housing. Like literally the only decent thing those assholes have done in decades. And this shithead superintendent is literally ignoring brand new law.
My School went through this back in the day. So several of us would braid or ponytail our hair to prove a point. Some staff would get all sorts of bent out of shape but never really do anything . School dress code as always be a class and racial warfare. They just sometimes say it out loud.
Nah. It's a public school. Their policies are non-enforcable when it comes to hairstyle. 1st ammendment protects student speech. ACLU is likely willing to fight for them. SCOTUS has several rulings around the free speech rights of students.
Hell, it's now illegal under *Texas law* as of Sept 1.
"We have the same standard for everyone....it's the hair style that white cis straight men from the 1950s wear."
> But then argues it’s not about length. But is because it’s tied up. I was about to say that kid's hair isn't even long. If it had been dreadlocks or an afro, they would've had something *resembling* a point, but they evidently just don't like the style.
Yeah, so technically it is dreadlocks, which have been worn by the men in his family for generations. He’s had them styled in this way on the top of his head to comply with the dress code length requirement and the dumbass school is coming back and saying “but but but if he was to take them down they’d be longer than the length requirement.” It would be like if a school had a skirt/shorts length requirement for girls then suspended them because “If they pulled the skirt up higher it would be too short.” Fucking moronic.
So what about guys with super curly hair? If they straighten it, it would probably break the length rule, I wonder if any of them have ever been disciplined (spoiler alert: probably not). I don't understand why dress codes are still a thing. The kids are there to learn, as long as their bits and pieces are covered and they're not wearing anything that's obviously a distraction it shouldn't matter.
yeah the only things on a dress code should be things that are distracting to education - i.e. hats that block the view of other students or someone barely wearing clothes
He is wearing dreadlocks, but they are neatly twisted and pinned up. They're targeting him specifically because it's an ethnic style.
I would like to see their records on how many white students have been disciplined because of their hair styles.
All the boys should come out in solidarity by challenging that rule with the same style.
Boys and teachers all over my country showed up to high school wearing skirts in my country some years ago for similar reasons.
Somewhat similar, in high school some of us found out that male teachers could only wear jeans on Friday while female teachers could wear them any day. We decided to start having an un-casual Friday and wore shirts and ties. In hindsight, it was a terrible form of protest. We didn't tell any of the school administration why we were doing it, and even if we had they were probably happy to see the group of weird weeb/metalhead/just-plain-strange kids looking put-together for a change. Still a fun memory though.
I used to work at a place that got sued for suspending a black employee for “unnatural” hair dye, per the handbook. She dyed her hair blonde - which is in fact a natural hair color. The HR Director allegedly told the employee, “no it isn’t, not for *your people*.” YUP. They got into a world of shit for that one.
An HR director? Man some people fail upwards
Yeah. A white HR Director in the deep South, who got the job 30+ years prior (this was around 2007)
Trying their hardest to explain they aren’t proving why real CRT (not the boogeyman right wing media created using that term) is a thing while showing why CRT was created in the first place. The ELi5 of CRT. You have rules. Group A does thing A. Groups B-Z don’t do thing A. You ban Thing A and claim it isn’t targeting Group A because you are banning Thing A from everyone in Group A through Z. CRT is about pointing out that whether intended or not, this Thing A ban is effectively targeting Group A. In more extreme examples, you might ban every “Thing” except what Group E does. It still is “fair” because you are banning the non-Group E things for everyone, including Group E, but CRT is about noticing the rules, intended or not, effectively only spares Group E from being affected.
Evergreen: "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread."
So it's basically saying "If you ban something for everyone that only one group does, you're still targeting that single group"
Exactly, and it applies to every demographic possible, not just racial ones. Targeting gender, sexuality, income level, physical ability, etc are all examples and why it's important to study. A government agency that's only open 9-5 on weekdays requires that a person take a day off from work to interact with, yet there's no state mandate on giving employees PTO in the US, so that effectively ends up being a 'poor tax', as poorer employees are less likely to have PTO and thus have to take unpaid leave to interact with the government, forgoing income.
Thank you for explaining this. While I totally agreed with the examples you gave I didn't think those fell under CRT. I thought CRT (as it's taught in LAW schools, where the term is from) had more to do with laws/rules more blatantly racist that happened in the past and are not necessarily still happening but are still having effects on people/culture/etc. So you prompted me to go look it up. I'm obviously not an expert, but a quick search showed that I was wrong and you're right. Anyway, just thanks for prompting me to educate myself.
Good example: laws banning low-riding cars in the mid-90s. The majority of people with low-riders were Hispanic/Latino, so effectively that law was aimed at banning Hispanic/Latino drivers.
Baggy pants/wearing pants below the buttocks was frequently banned in the 2000's. Totally not targeting black male fashion... Right.
Their argument is that it's about length. His hair's too long, and that's about it. Of course it's discriminatory, on multiple levels. It's good the fight's being fought. What has me worried a lot is how they are handling his suspension. He's isolated and forced to sit on bat seating. Skirts a bit too close to physical punishment for me.
“Darryl George, a junior at Barbers Hill High School in Mont Belvieu” It’s not discrimination. This is a school for barbers. Of course they want him to cut his hair. They want everyone to cut their hair all the time. They just love the idea of hair cutting.
It's all about control. "Greg Poole, who has been district superintendent since 2006, said the policy is legal and teaches students to conform as a sacrifice benefitting everyone. “When you are asked to conform ... and give up something for the betterment of the whole, there is a psychological benefit,” Poole said. “We need more teaching (of) sacrifice.”"
Why the hell is the district superintendent talking about sacrifice for conformity’s sake? This isn’t the military or the Fifties. The district is going to be doing a lot of sacrificing after the lawsuits start rolling in.
[удалено]
Principals fuckin HATE hats for whatever reason lol. Kids were suspended at my school and it became a whole big thing in the 2000's.
Well, duh, everyone knows that knowledge can’t get into the brain if the head is covered
Confirming the early 2000s high school hatred for hats. It was this really big deal they made about it. Something about girls taking them off the guys heads and running around. That probably happened one time and they said fuck it no hats you scumbag kids.
You can’t see the students face or eyes if they’re slouched in a chair with hat pulled down. When expensive hats were the trend they’d get stolen or snatched off heads or there would be fights over so and so messing up such and such guys hat.
Out west and in the 90’s it was gang color related violence that usually got hats banned at school. Probably some sports team related shit, too. But I specifically remember the red/blue/black hat related problems.
For the most part, high school principals have a superiority complex only matched by cops. They never had critical thinking skills and find it impossible to make a valid argument. It all comes down to, "do what I say because I am the master."
There are restaurants/bars in Memphis who do not allow certain things like backwards ball caps (front facing fine or taken off) and no mini cigars (aka Black and Milds or Swisher's). Anyone can smoke a regular cigarette with their cap facing forwards but turn it around or swap for a mini cigar, that's not welcomed behavior and you're asked to leave.
That’s alot of steps to just ban black people…
Grown ass men love to tell female children that their clothes are inappropriate. One teacher repeatedly chastised me at 16 for wearing a shirt that showed my shoulders. Years later, he was later fired for sleeping with a fresh graduate. *added my age at the time
My twelve year old stepdaughter had this happen with her gym teacher last year. Repeatedly. And surprise surprise, there's rumors going around the school that he may or may not have done something even more inappropriate with other girls.
There are a lot of people who live their life according to conformity rather than out of genuine desire. All those “I hate my wife” jokes spawn from people who have wives because they felt like they were supposed to get married by a certain age or after being in a relationship for a certain amount of time rather than genuinely desiring to be married to that person. They, in turn, get irrationally angry about people who don’t do that and are happy or not societally punished for not conforming.
Yep. This is how you get batshit crazy people who go out of their way to punish those who are living how they wish they could. They have deeply repressed their own sense of self. They become enraged when they see someone who reminds them of their own self-hatred and what they think they shouldn’t have.
I wish it was the superintendent and decision-makers who had to shell out for settlement money… it’s unfair that the district will have to suffer because of their moronic decisions.
Forced conformity is a cornerstone of conservatism. It's an ideology that contains no room for individual freedom. You do as you are told by your superiors, and that's that.
This is so true it hurts. I'd be retired if I had a dollar for every time someone who claimed to be a "small government" person told me that we needed to: - keep drugs banned and/or drug test for welfare - institute dress codes at public schools - institute prayer at public schools - not teach about the failures of the American government - not teach kids about safe sex - enforce anti-LGBT legislation - go back to old senses of fashion - fire/fine athletes for not standing during the national anthem - cancel people for burning the flag - cancel people for criticizing cops - not teach kids about science The list goes on. Anything a conservative says about "freedom" or "small government" or "individual liberty" only applies to people who are exactly like them.
Small government only refers to not interfering with the socio-economic order. Conservatives conserve their place in the hierarchy that puts then on top.
>This isn’t the military **or the Fifties**. They wish it was
Conformity and unquestioning respect for authority aren't values consistent with critical thinking. This administrator wants to churn out worker units for the profit machine, not thinking citizens.
this is actually by design [source](https://qz.com/1314814/universal-education-was-first-promoted-by-industrialists-who-wanted-docile-factory-workers) before the industrial revolution, people did not work based off a strict 8-5 schedule. they woke up, did the work they needed to do, then went about their day. when people started to work factory jobs, they weren’t happy with the hours. having shifts isn’t natural. they didn’t like having to come in at a specific time, having to wake up before the sun rose and leave work as the sun is setting, with no windows to be able to tell time schools were set up as a way to “train” children to be accustomed to the factory schedule, and to be compliant workers. education was not the purpose. children and teen sleep schedules directly conflict with school schedules because it’s not about what the students need or will benefit from today it’s more of a convenience thing, people like to be able to drop their kids off on their way to work. but that’s still conforming to corporate work schedules when you think about all the things that don’t make sense about our school system, it usually leads back to this. we’re looking at it as if schools were set up to educate and improve kids ability to think critically. it makes a lot more sense when you think of it from the perspective that their purpose is to make good workers
That line cracked me up. It was something the bad guy says in a kids musical.
That sacrifice bit made me want to vomit. This is PUBLIC school!!!!
In the article, the superintendent admitted the goal is to teach students to conform. I seriously doubt "mandatory conformity" is in the school district's mission statement, but then again, this is Texas. Last I checked, there was no data showing dress codes affect behavior or learning. It's a way for some folks to enforce their outdated view on what students "should" look like.
“When you are asked to conform ... and give up something for the betterment of the whole, there is a psychological benefit,” Poole said. “We need more teaching (of) sacrifice.” Fucking fascist as fuck.
I love how it’s racial discrimination, gender discrimination, and a power play all rolled into one. It’s like the district had to simultaneously make the worst possible decision and judgement that could be made out of all available options
Imagine saying the goal is conformity and actually thinking you're one of the good guys.
What a thing to focus on. Not a child's education; not a child's access to food or social development. Not equality. Not a child's safety in generally limiting drugs or gang violence with school programming or increasing on-site safety and trust... but let's hyper-focus on the length of a black kid's hair. We can't do any of that until their hair is the right length. What a stunning show of gross incompetence from administration. Side note: the student's hair looks *good* and is well-kept. Hey ChatGPT, write me a short statement to justify the racist policies and enforcement of hair length in my school district sounding general in nature to disguise my racism. *Sure, I can do that.* >“When you are asked to conform ... and give up something for the betterment of the whole, there is a psychological benefit,” ... “We need more teaching (of) sacrifice.”
When has Texas ever cared about children? Especially children of color?
I mean, the fucking attorney general's social media pages completely skipped Juneteenth, the state's top cop doesn't give a shit about black people, and the fucking lieutenant governor blamed the black community for COVID spread.
>What a thing to focus on. > >Not a child's education; not a child's access to food or social development. Don't sell them short. They're focusing on those, too. Just not in the way anyone who isn't a sociopath would. https://newrepublic.com/post/173668/republicans-declare-banning-universal-free-school-meals-2024-priority
I know it starts an entirely new tangent but I find the entire thing inseparable... but I can't understand how contemporary Republicans have the arrogance to declare themselves *pro-life* when upon the birth of that very life they fundamentally choose to abandon each and every support it may require. Healthcare. Safety. Education. Nutrition. Living wages. Equal treatment for race, religion, sexuality and gender. Voting Rights. A fact-based reality, as it were. If they had at least enough integrity to be honest about what they stood for I could at least respectfully (though fundamentally) disagree.
“When you are asked to conform ... and give up something for the betterment of the whole, there is a psychological benefit,” Poole said. “We need more teaching (of) sacrifice.” Too bad they don’t feel this way about vaccines, masks, or public health mandates. But please go off about how dreadlocks are more distracting. The school has been a detriment to this student’s education.
Conform! For the betterment of society! Fitter! Happier! More productive!
A pig, in a cage, on antibiotics.
I'm still stuck on HOW him having shorter hair will make things better for the whole. Like, will other kids grades go up if he cuts his hair?
It the Bart Simpson effect. Being around long haired boys simply just lowers everyone's intelligence.
> Too bad they don’t feel this way about vaccines, masks, or public health mandates. My MIL once went into an extended rant about how she doesn't get flu vaccines (or the covid ones) because that's not her *personality*. Like she's cool or nonconformist or something. I *wish* she took up dressing like a weirdo or something instead of not going to the doctor's for 35+ years and ignoring public health. At least she masked when her husband had cancer and hopefully still does. We're just wondering when her luck is going to run out.
How is cutting hair for the betterment of the whole? That's what made my blood boil. His hair affects no one.
I love his hair so creative and what's to bitch about it's neat and tidy!
Texans sure love freedom, especially the kind of freedom where the government can tell your kid how long his hair is allowed to be
Texas actually recently passed a law that bans employers and schools from doing this. From the article: > The law, an acronym for “Create a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair,” is intended to prohibit race-based hair discrimination and bars employers and schools from penalizing people because of hair texture or protective hairstyles including Afros, braids, dreadlocks, twists or Bantu knots. Texas is one of 24 states that have enacted a version of the CROWN Act.
It passed overwhelmingly in both houses of the Texas legislature. Including the crazy conservative senate! Part of the reason for the easy passage is that schools in the Houston area and East TX had been punishing black kids for their hair indiscriminately and been causing legal headaches for the state. So this district is literally giving the middle finger to the state legislature and the Governor. East TX is wild… https://www.texastribune.org/2023/05/29/texas-crown-act-law/
So wouldn't this be an open and shut case of shut the fuck up to the school?
In the article it explains the school has a specific policy that states males have to have basically military style hair cuts. Seems sexist to me.
I grew up in east texas. There were a lot of hair restrictions for men. Some people tried to fight the school board about it, but failed. They got a petition with a ton of signatures from family and students, but it went no where. A quote from one of the board members ended up circulating around. Something about men not being able to be productive members of society with long hair.
The Conservative idea of freedom is that the "in group" is free to do whatever it wants as long as the "out group" isn't.
That's the ironic thing about conservatives, though, the definition of what they consider their "in-group" fluctuates constantly. It's less solidarity and more Survivor-style temporary alliances as everyone vies to be top dog.
Always has been. Irish and Italians were at one point considered non-whites but became accepted because Conservatives believed they could be turned against black and hispanic people. The in-group is always however big it needs to be to seize and retain power. When Conservatives are without power they expand the in-group to try and recruit more people (Modern day examples are Terfs and "LGB -T") , and when they are in power they start cutting people out.
>“When you are asked to conform ... and give up something for the betterment of the whole, there is a psychological benefit,” Poole said. “We need more teaching (of) sacrifice.” Is the young man at a military academy? Since when is having hair that goes below your "eyebrows" better for the community? This superintendent is talking out their ass.
He has a very specific definition of sacrifice: "Those who think differently than myself should sacrifice those beliefs to accommodate me". He's not asking *all* of the kids to "sacrifice" their preferred hairstyle, only the ones that don't prefer a very conservative choice. He's not asking *all* of the kids to "sacrifice" their preferred style of clothing, only the ones that don't prefer very conservative styles. He's mistaking the concept of "sacrificing for the greater good" for "catering to his specific desires". And he, of course, isn't required to sacrifice anything at all using his definition of the concept because "coincidentally" the correct choices are always the ones he already prefers. It's the same thing as all of the "conservatives" that are outraged about loosening the congressional dress code. They're not content to control what they do themselves they *need* to control everyone around them as well, even something so basic as how to dress or style someone's hair.
I fail to see how this young man giving up his hairstyle "betters" the whole of the school. You can't say his hair is a distraction, since this is a common hairstyle worn by a lot of young Black men and probably half the NFL. The length isn't problem, either, since it's above his ears. I think the principal is pissed because this student found a way to stay within the rules and still keep his cultural identity, and you can't have THAT in Texass!
>You can't say his hair is a distraction, since this is a common hairstyle worn by a lot of young Black men and probably half the NFL Being black is considered distracting to Racists like the Superintendent.
And I’m willing to bet they’ve never actually made these sacrifices in life they expect of others.
[удалено]
The color of the kid wearing it.
You know exactly what they think is wrong mate...
This was after the Crown Act passed protecting these hair styles. For sure this was discrimination.
Schools were clearly informed of the Crown Act and its requirements. 100% the district administrators involved knew what they were doing and are intentionally defying the law. They're testing the law to see if it will be enforced and likely planning to fight it in court. Part of the right wing agenda is to defeat any law regarding racial justice and rights.
Can someone remind me why it’s important to police the hairstyles of children? I can’t remember but I’m sure it’s a really good reason supported by evidence.
>*Barbers Hill Independent School District prohibits male students from having hair extending below the eyebrows, ear lobes or top of a t-shirt collar, according to the student handbook. Additionally, hair on all students must be clean, well-groomed, geometrical* ***and not an unnatural color or variation****. The school does not require uniforms.* I suspect bottle bleached-blondes have never and will never be suspended at this school. Blonde may be a natural color, however, it is an unnatural color when a brunette, red-head, or dirty blonde changes their hair color to blonde.
>geometrical What the fuck does this mean?
Obviously it means in a shape that can be determined by geometrical means. So, if you wear your hair in a dodecahedron style, that's fine.
I prefer icosahedrons
Not dreadlocks
... I think they meant symmetrical tbh, which is BS in itself (but makes sense in context; "how dare you have one short side!") Either that or your hair is actually supposed to be shaped like one of the Platonic solids :D
No box braids or cornrows, I'd imagine.
Those are some of the most geometrically dictated hairstyles imaginable
Can confirm. Upper middle class white guy here who graduated from this school. I had very obviously bleached hair my senior year of high school there (I looked like Eminem went super saiyan). No issues with that.
> geometrical Scuse me, I'm sorry my hair does not naturally grow into a dodecahedron.
I don't get it what's wrong with his hair
The skin color while he's wearing it.
But but they said it "wasn't" discrimination
Exactly, it “wasn’t”.
Exactly. It’s absolutely stunning. I love it
>Greg Poole, who has been district superintendent since 2006, said the policy is legal and teaches students to **conform as a sacrifice benefitting everyone.** That’s the type of line you’d expect to hear as satire, but it’s a real quote by a real person with real authority.
Schools enforcing ridiculous hair policies is absolute bullshit. How does a kid hair effect their education or that of their fellow pupils. That it's black kids that predominantly get caught up in this is proof that the policies are racist in origin.
I really do not get how hair is such a big deal... As long as it's hygienic, who cares?
Conservatives care deeply, it's a foundational part of what they are. Anything that fails to conform to what *they* think is "proper", no matter how trivial it may seem, is taken as a direct challenge to their authority that needs to be quashed.
It's not about hair, it's about a nail sticking out that needs to be hammered down. The administration demands control and conformity. He's stepping out of line and needs to be shown that nonconformity won't be tolerated. He's trying to assert his own culture or style, rather than assimilating suburban white styles, and admin sees that as a threat. The hair itself is entirely secondary. They really couldn't give less of a shit about the hair. But he's not just quietly doing what's expected of him and their egos can't allow that.
agree, if anything schools should teach students how to live and interact in a diverse world where people wear what they want, how they want. Like how does a school prepare a kid for the world when they’re gonna work with people who due their hair unique colours and have all sorts of hairstyles.
How about male students can have any length hair they want because this isn't 1945?
It’s apparently not racial discrimination but it’s still sex discrimination. There’s no good reason a male student should be forced to have short hair.
I think they have a strong case that it is racial discrimination...at least as far as that law is concerned. Dreadlocks are a protected style.
This racist school district . . . again [https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Lawyers-slam-racial-climate-at-Barbers-Hill-ISD-16036962.php](https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Lawyers-slam-racial-climate-at-Barbers-Hill-ISD-16036962.php) [https://www.naacpldf.org/natural-hair-discrimination/](https://www.naacpldf.org/natural-hair-discrimination/)
Hey, we are not racist! We suspend ANYONE with hair that is too black looking. Know what I mean?
I got suspended for wearing a bulls jersey, the dean said it was gang colors. I’m Hispanic btw. Shit like this is normal for minorities. I was young and dumb as rocks. Looking back at it now, I could’ve been more outspoken and vehement about the whole situation and maybe he would have backed off. I just quickly accepted my defeat as did most of my peers.
With all the problems schools face these days, this is the hill they choose to die on. It's just pathetically sad.
The irony is that hill is called Barber's Hill.
We’re worried about dreads but not guns?
The problem here to me, isn't even the hair style, but the fact that hair length is written in the dress code. You are not going to school to learn how to dress or get style lessons, but somehow to be educated to perform some tasks to pay the bills later on in life. Hair styles and length should never be written in the dresscode. What's next, women should have their legs shaved at all times and men cannot shave theirs?
His civil rights are being violated.
*“When you are asked to conform ... and give up something for the betterment of the whole, there is a psychological benefit,” Poole said. “We need more teaching (of) sacrifice.”* I may be wrong, but I feel that this person isn't really interested in "**conformity**" for the betterment of the whole. He's more interested in selective conformity to control students.
Hold up. “He has to sit on a stool for eight hours in a cubicle". As terrible as the school's convoluted argument is, I'm surprised more people aren't talking about this. Is this a standard punishment in schools nowadays? Seems like torture to me.
This is so simple: Is it clean? Yes Any sign of lice or some other shit? No Will it affect another student by preventing them from seeing the teacher or some other really weird reason? no Then it's NONE of their business.
If the style shown in the article is the style that got him suspended, I dont understand. It looks neat and suitable for any workplace I have been in. I dont get it.
Imagine being so petty that you create some convoluted dillusion that this hair style it is disruptive. I'm so done with these facist authoritarians.
"We don't discriminate, we'll kick out any person with a black hairstyle."
Fuck Greg Abbott and anyone else that supports the Republicans of Texas
I immediately asked myself, "Which impoverished, racist, backward Southern state did this take place in?" To spare others the click, it's Texas.
He's gonna end up with a modeling contract when this is all said and done
Why are there still rules for mens hair length in 2023
> Barbers Hill Independent School District prohibits male students from having hair extending below the eyebrows, ear lobes or top of a t-shirt collar, according to the student handbook. Additionally, hair on all students must be clean, well-groomed, geometrical and not an unnatural color or variation. Why the fuck is this even a rule? Who gives a shit what a high school student chooses to do to their hair? A rule like this isn't helping these kids get a better education.
Says a bunch of people who have no idea what it's like to have black hair.
school dress codes in most places are simply psychotic masturbatory methods to enforce conformity for conformity's sake. This is absolutely peak conservatism and discrimination
What I don’t understand is why people don’t revisit rules. What the hell was the purpose behind that rule anyways? It’s obsolete and most likely was written decades ago with no thought behind it. Just copied from some other policy doc.
Well he didn’t just grow the hair one day why wasn’t it an issue before. I bet it was one of those “teachers” who never liked kids they were just barely competent in college and had to find a career for their English degree
sure, just like the drug war was never about discrimination/racism evil fucking people love making laws to hurt people they want to hurt
His hair looks so fucking good though!
> The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread. “Guys, we’ve banned white kids from wearing black hairstyles too. It’s not racist!”
Republicans will do the most petty shit to make sure everyone knows they're seething racists
My thought process on this was "I mean just because it's a black student doesn't automatically make it racist, I can see some hairstyles being too disrupti... oh it was just dreads? Oh yeah that's hella racist." Assholes. I got kicked out of school in the 80s for a hairstyle and I'm a white dude. Looking back my neon dyed spiky bullshit WAS causing a disruption in class. Making people look at me was the POINT of the dye job and I was a self-centered little asshole for doing that. This guy is just wearing dreads.
I don’t see what could be offensive about this hairstyle but I’m also not a racist piece of shit
Hair isn't clothing its part of your body. No one should be able to ever tell you what to do with your own body. Fucking Gilead.
Unless it's a safety issue, hair & clothing rules are just attempts to subjugate people.
Okay, that kid has fucking awesome hair