Dangerous Long Hair Threatens Elementary School!

Remove all ads!

What if the kid really really doesnt want to cut his hair? Think the entire issue is as many here have pointed out very very silly.

 

Well, kids need to learn that regardless of what they want sometimes they have to do things that they don't want to do. But IMHO it's the job of the parents to do the teaching of that little gem when it comes to hair -- NOT the public school's.

As I said, private school's are a different kettle of fish. They can demand whatever (legally) they want of their students as long as the policy is made clear up front. If parents don't like it, then other private schools or the public ones beckon.

 

If anyone ever tried that on my child in school, I would have them charged with assault.

 

Kids also need to learn that you don't need to roll over every time an organization tries to abuse its authority to make you do something it has no right to make you do. If the kid wants long hair and the parents are OK with it, a public school deserves no say in the matter. It would be easier to just do what the school wants, but easier isn't always better. It's OK to go to bat for your kid. Even for something that might seem silly to an adult.

 

So far as I'm concerned, the rule involved is sexist and should be struck down. If any child in the school is allowed to have long hair, then all children in the school should be allowed to have long hair. End of story.

 

I think the school is at fault for this one, and yes it is a dumb rule.

Though there are arguably similar things elsewhere. A bit back (still in college) I had applied for a job at a Sentry grocery store. The manager wouldn't hire me unless I cut my hair for policy reasons (note that I had already shaved off the beard I had at the time and was willing to match any restrictions a female worker had with regard to her hair).

It was a short job interview. I figured that if that grocery store wouldn't hire me I may as well apply to one of the ones down the street a bit that wasn't as concerned with the length of my hair.

Still, I could have faced trouble if that Sentry was the only employer available. Is that more my fault or theirs?

 

Wow, can I be wrong, this might offend even though it isn't intended to. I had you totally pegged as a female pplr, not sure why but I was even sure you had identified yourself as one and I dont know how but well, you struck me as a female. Just goes to show that just when you think you have learnt to judge people by text alone someone throws you a curve ball.

 

While I am not offended (at this time), I am very much a man and very sure I never said I was a woman.

I would point out to you thought that this isn't the first time you've been party to stereotyping and maybe it would be better if you cut back on that.

 

I would argue that a business traditionally has the right to demand certain grooming policies -- a dress code -- from its staff -- you don't see too many nose studs, tattoos, or punk haircuts in high end clothing stores, for example. That's tradition.

Is it a good tradition? That's debatable. Perhaps you could claim discrimination, but at least here in Canada, grooming is not a protected field in human rights law -- if you can argue that your grooming is cultural or religious, you might have a case for discrimination. If not, though, it's likely that you'll lose the job opportunity to someone whose grooming is more compatible with the image the store is attempting to project.

In joacqin's defense, I am much more likely to engage in stereotyping than he is!

Also, the earlier argument applies only to businesses, NOT public schools.

 

I've had long hair (Around/past shoulder length) for the past 7 or 8 years. If someone wants to judge me on that, their loss.

If I "Need" short hair for whatever reason, I tie it back.

 

True, but those rules typically apply for both men and women, unlike hair length rules. Both the places I work at have dress codes, but do not have hair length rules.

 

Stefanina, how do the stores address ear piercings? Do they allow them for both genders, do they disallow them for both (in some cases, there may be real cause to justify such a ban), or do they allow them for women but not for men?

 

Some stores might have hair style rules, and under that umbrella forbid men to have long hair.

I don't really have a problem with that in a business as long as it is something that is made clear in the very beginning. I would be concerned if there had been no such policy and then boom! either cut your hair or get out!

I say this because some businesses are quite concerned about image, and some business models put a high priority on maintaining a particular image. It may not be fair, and indeed, some companies might really be losing out on some kick butt employees, but I don't think it's a violation of rights in a legal sense.

I'm also a little conflicted about the public schools -- there must be some lines drawn somewhere in terms of dress and grooming -- most public schools I know of have a dress code -- but where is the line drawn? I'm not the only one who's not got the perfect answer for this, as it's gone to court many times, and I think it's just as unfair to label the institution as the second coming of Adolph as to label the kids godless commies out to undermine the American way of life.

Speaking as a teacher, I have to mention that the idea of rules matters. Discipline matters. School rules should be designed to maximize the learning experience and foster a pleasant, cooperative atmosphere in the school. That means that some rebellious elements must be reined in, or you start down a slippery slope toward a lousy school. I believe that most people who make the rules have the best interests of the student body -- and staff -- at heart. Despite opinions to the contrary, teachers are not a bunch of jack-booted douchebags. Some may portray that immage to maintain classroom control, but I've yet to personally meet one who is such a jerk.

The problem is that even with the best of intentions, mistakes can be made. This case is an example. I doubt that you could seriously classify this little kid as a rebellious element.

But I can see a teacher saying "if we let this kid get away with flouting the rules, it'll set a precedent, and he'll be a pain in the hiney for all of his teachers for the next 12 years. Better he learns now who's boss"

Speaking as a teacher, I can empathize with that position without supporting it. Because this is true: In a class of children, they have to know that you're the boss. All the warm fuzzy horses*** doesn't mean a thing when you're trying to get 25 7 year olds to do some seatwork for 15 minutes or so. I know many don't like that idea, but it's the truth. That doesn't mean we beat or tase the little darlings, but it does mean that a teacher and by extension the educational system that supports that teacher must have clear, fair, and regularly enforced expectations, or it all goes to poop. The problem here is with the second adjective -- the rule is not fair, even if it was implemented with the best of intentions.

 

That is funny, but I don't know if you've managed to top yourself from when you declared that LKD LETS IT ALL HANG OUT in the discussion about privacy and the guy (in Texas?) who was arrested for being naked in his own home.

 

Both my workplaces are colleges. Earrings have not yet been an issue. There are many male faculty & staff with pierced ears, but none have worn earring(s) outrageous enough to cause complaint. The colleges do take a bit of a "if it's not broken, don't fix it" mentality.
Now then, I do work at the veterinary college of the university, and jewelry is restricted in lab/surgical areas due to possible contamination/hazards. But, that is across the board, and not restricted by sex.
I am aware that I am very liberal in my thinking that anything permitted for men should be permitted for women, and vice versa. Since I am not willing to give up my own long hair, I feel that men should have the right to keep long hair same as women. This is why I will never likely become a full fledged professional, I'll just stay in IT. Rules are still pretty relaxed in this field.

 

I remember an incident from when I was about 13 - my grandmother, who hadn't seen me in a while, saw some picture of me and was evidently shocked and chagrined by how long my hair was. She called me on the phone, insisting on how dangerous that hair was - I could be slamming a car door shut and my hair would get caught in there and before I'd know it, my whole scalp would be torn off! (No, it was not that long.)

Near the end of that phone call I ended up shocking her further by saying a naughty word.

There's just something about long hair on a boy.

"Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering." - 1 Corinthians 11:14-15

But look at that kid in the article! That's not even really long. That's like a Beatles haircut. Or Danny from The Shining. The lengths some people will go. Pun intended.