School's Natural Hair Ban Sparks National Debate

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

All of it is stupid. As long as a kid isn't hurting themselves or others with their appearance leave them alone. Otherwise you're telling them how they look is more important than their education.

There is a saying to that effect It's not what's on your head it's what's inside your head that counts.

a reply to: Spider879

Yes there's plenty of time to conform once they become adults lol.

originally posted by: Spider879

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

All of it is stupid. As long as a kid isn't hurting themselves or others with their appearance leave them alone. Otherwise you're telling them how they look is more important than their education.

There is a saying to that effect It's not what's on your head it's what's inside your head that counts.

I would agree ... unless it has become a distraction for some reason.

Uniform schools go uniform for a few reasons. One of them is because of gang related clothing and another is to cut down on clothing related distraction - labels, inappropriate attire, etc.

Is it possible that the way kids were wearing their hair had in some way become a distraction interfering with the process of learning?

originally posted by: Hecate666
I would be quite annoyed if there were no restrictions on white kids. But they can't just have any hairstyle and also must conform by having a 'sanctioned' style. Every week there is a 'sad' looking estate mum whose kid can't have a mohecan or a hipster style, others are about girls who can't dye their hair an 'outrageous' colour, not even Henna.
Is it the same in America? Or are white kids allowed to do what they want with their hair?
I'm seriously asking.
To me a 'natural' Afro if just loose may be a non fitting style. Unless it is short.

I went to HS in Texas in the 80s. I grew my hair long and never got in any trouble formally, although the Legion of Doom (a gang of angry conservatives from my school) wanted to fight me one night. I very nearly took on the whole Suburban load of them. I guess they weren't expecting a long hair to fight hack.

We had some punks, too. Some had mohawks, some had liberty spikes, some had a tic tac toe pattern shaved in the side of thier head. All the dumb, less enlightened conformist morons wrote them off as failures, but they ended up doing better than most in life.

The long hairs and the punks were friends. I viewed them as confident, intelligent and funny.

On the other hand, way back before i was born, some of the guys who'd eventually form the great American rock band Lynyrd Skynyrd were getting expelled from high school by thier coach, whose name is eerily similar to the band's name; mainly because they named the band after him.

So, I really wish they'd leave the kids alone and let them be who they need to be. It's all part of finding out who you are. Like The Who said: the kids are alright.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Spider879

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

All of it is stupid. As long as a kid isn't hurting themselves or others with their appearance leave them alone. Otherwise you're telling them how they look is more important than their education.

There is a saying to that effect It's not what's on your head it's what's inside your head that counts.

I would agree ... unless it has become a distraction for some reason.

Uniform schools go uniform for a few reasons. One of them is because of gang related clothing and another is to cut down on clothing related distraction - labels, inappropriate attire, etc.

Is it possible that the way kids were wearing their hair had in some way become a distraction interfering with the process of learning?

In the case of that particular school I don't think so, as their do not wear list leave you with very little option, and some would be surprised by me saying this but, I am not against uniforms but leave room for some individuality especially the cultural, a head scarf if you are Muslim a Yarmulke if one is Jewish complete with side locs, Christians with their crosses etc. when we get into extremes then yeah, we need to pull that back a lil..even when it's cultural.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

All of it is stupid. As long as a kid isn't hurting themselves or others with their appearance leave them alone. Otherwise you're telling them how they look is more important than their education.

I could not agree more.

Dress code was contentious point for me as a student, and as a parent.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

All of it is stupid. As long as a kid isn't hurting themselves or others with their appearance leave them alone. Otherwise you're telling them how they look is more important than their education.

I could not agree more.

Dress code was contentious point for me as a student, and as a parent.

My "mop head".

There is no way I'm making him unhappy by giving him a "boy cut".

Public schools have enough rules without this.

I don't know. When I went looking for a school, whether or not my kid could wear whatever was slightly less of a priority than what kind of an education he was going to be getting.

A dress code is a dress code. *shrug*

So long as all the kids are held to the same standards, then whatever.

originally posted by: ketsuko
I don't know. When I went looking for a school, whether or not my kid could wear whatever was slightly less of a priority than what kind of an education he was going to be getting.

A dress code is a dress code. *shrug*

So long as all the kids are held to the same standards, then whatever.

My attitude to uniform, as a parent, has always been about "me". Far easier to maintain and much, much cheaper than having to keep up with fashions (though thankfully, touch wood, the lad's oblivious to such things...so far). It is also a part of social learning, much less so now, but codes of dress still exist within some professions, it helps to understand, or be programmed, so that you understand the distinction, even if like me, it is because you never want to be told what to wear by anyone...and so avoid all professions with a dress code.

Plus, from my own experience of wearing a uniform at school (way back when) it provides a "safe" boundary to push against and rebel against, and in a way encourages children to seek to express their identity or individuality in more creative or productive ways, and not just be about appearance and possessions. I customised my uniform, made my own clothes. I think that those that feel a need to be different, will always find ways to do so, those that don't, won't. School's as good a place to test those dynamics as anywhere.

a reply to: Spider879

My thinking on this is simple.

One should not be forced to put ones children through an unnatural process, involving heat treatment of the hair, requiring a vast amount of preparation over and above that of other in the class, just to conform to a totally arbitrary set of rules, put in place for no good reason.

And as to the person spouting about schools being a place of learning, not a fashion show, the argument you put forth defeats itself. Natural hair is not a fashion accessory. It is merely how the stuff grows. Straight hair on those who would normally have frizzy hair, IS a fashion accessory, requiring time and preparation which puts added strain on the time before school begins, and no doubt on the time of parents and students alike, time which would be better spent with ones head in a book, than under a pair of straightening tongs. Bloody idiotic argument I am afraid.

When I was a lad, my family had little money. And yet, I was forced, by the dress code of my school, to keep my hair short, which necessitated a trip to the barbers every so often. I would have liked my family to not have to spend that money in order that I could go to school with compliant hair. I would have liked for our family to have spent next to nothing to ensure that I was able to go to school, ready to learn. I would also have liked to have been supported in removing the boot from my neck from an early age, by being allowed to grow out my hair, and live like a natural person, right from the off, rather than having to wait until I was part way through my teens before beginning the process, just because people who wanted control over me, said it was to be another way.

Self expression is not a right we afford to the young, and it should not be a right we afford to one group differently than another. It should be universal, or we should go the way of North Korea, with everyone in grey, everyone wearing the exact same hairstyle, shoes, nothing personal, nothing different or unique except in the slum prisons.

We should insist that our children be free to establish their identity as people, as a greater priority than to learn how to exist under a boot heel, if we want our children and their children to be free people, in control of their governments, rather than under control of their governments. The establishment may not make rules pertaining to the appearance of students, citizens or any other demographic. They may get what they are given, and be grovelling in their gratitude.

a reply to: TrueBrit
For context see my post on the first page

One should not be forced to put ones children through an unnatural process, involving heat treatment of the hair, requiring a vast amount of preparation over and above that of other in the class, just to conform to a totally arbitrary set of rules, put in place for no good reason. And as to the person spouting about schools being a place of learning, not a fashion show, the argument you put forth defeats itself. Natural hair is not a fashion accessory. It is merely how the stuff grows

I´m partly with you on that. Everybody should have the right for individuality. If it´s the natural hair that´s fizzy, it should be okay. But I think what the rules really are made for are the extreme examples like the Ladys hair in the first video. Schools are places to learn. If other children can´t see the board in front of the class because of (artifical) hairstyle it´s a problem. That´s a point where I think it can be beared even by the individual that has natural fizzy hair to get them tamed. It teaches an important lesson:

Sometimes, it´s good to go out of your way for the benefits of others, for short periods of time. It´s on the same level as giving a seat to an old person in the bus. Or letting someone in front of you at the cashier because he just has a single item and I have a cart full of goods. Or holding the door for someone else. Or if you see that by letting a group of cars get out of a sidestreet will avoid a greater traffic jam. It depends on the situation.

Those things above are all things that no one should feel entitled to. Still, it makes life easier in general, for everybody. The 30 seconds I have to wait longer at the cashier because I let someone in front of me that was standing behind me won´t hurt me. It´s a good investment, because next time someone might let me in front. So I exchanged 30 seconds for maybe 3 minutes or more. It happened often enough to me, it really pays back. At least here, in my region.

I don´t know if such things are a thing in the UK, letting someone in front of you so he can save time. I think so, and I hope you understand the angle I´m coming from.

a reply to: verschickter

I often stand aside so that others can go ahead of me, and stand so that others may sit.

However, that does not mean that I ought cut my hair differently than it is today, just so that it is not a distraction for the weak minded. And again, if a persons hair naturally sticks out away from their head, then it need not interfere with others. Sensible seating plans would ensure that possessors of such mighty locks as would defy gravity in such a manner of their own accord, could be seated toward the rear of the class to prevent their do from blocking the view of other students. It is hardly a difficult bit of logistics to pull off.

Manners are one thing, but it is possible to have good manners, without sublimating ones own identity, not only is it possible, in fact, but it is absolutely vital to growing up well adjusted, with a willingness to be good to others, without being prepared to accept the rod at ones back so to speak.

Again, half an hour extra prep time to tame a natural mop is an imposition, and not at all necessary.

a reply to: TrueBrit
It was not my intention to imply you do not stick back for others.
I really understand you but this, I was so free to emphasize:

However, that does not mean that I ought cut my hair differently than it is today, just so that it is not a distraction for the weak minded. And again, if a persons hair naturally sticks out away from their head, then it need not interfere with others. Sensible seating plans would ensure that possessors of such mighty locks as would defy gravity in such a manner of their own accord, could be seated toward the rear of the class to prevent their do from blocking the view of other students. It is hardly a difficult bit of logistics to pull off.

Not distraction for the weak minded but I get your point about that. Yeah I mean, then we´d have to teach our children in blank rooms without windows so no one is distracted ^^. My point is block of view. Think about it, how many will scream "discrimination" if you´d tried what I highlighted in italic in your post and also wrote before (sit them in the back or along the outlines).

Btw, If it´s you in the avatar (long hair), I can´t see how that would even block view, your hairstyle surely should not be a problem in school.