posted
More ridiculousness in the treatment of this nation's children. A 4 year old has been suspended from a suburban Dallas pre-kindergarden because his hair was too long. He wears it long an in a pony tail. By his choice apparently. It's supposedly against the school's dress code, and when the parents refused to force him to cut it they suspended him. The hair is a 'distraction'. So... do they force the little girls to cut their hair short? The article doesn't say.
posted
I'm interested in hearing people's thoughts on this.
I'm leaning toward thinking they should have accepted the compromise: wear it up while at school. There are, IMO, hair styles that would be inappropriately distracting at school (like giant pink mohawks), so I don't see a big problem with drawing the line at long unrestrained locks. It should be applied equally to boys and girls, IMO.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
At some point, certain kinds of distractions are the sort that kids damn well BETTER learn how to deal with, otherwise they'll never get anything done in the real world.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I see no problem at all. When was the last time a girl was sent home for having long, wild hair?
Posts: 6367 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good for the school district. How will children learn to conform to conventional gender roles unless we force it on them while they're still impressionable? If we let boys have ponytails, they might start wanting to "express their feelings" like girls. That could lead to men caring for the children while the women go out and work, and society can not handle that sort of reversal. It would undermine the entire American culture! Get your pitchforks, boys, we need to teach these people a lesson!
Or, the short version: I don't like it.
Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: There are limits on what sorts of "dress code" they can enforce.
This hasn't been my experience. In my area there are some pretty wacky dress codes for public schools which are definitely enforced. One of them has an 8 page dress code policy. A few highlights..... No jeans, no logos (except the district logo of course), all tops must be a solid color without patterns, designs, checks, slogans, or pictures. Skirts must fit comfortably and be free of pockets below the hips, loops, straps and other comparable adornments
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I started high school wearing my grand-uncles much too big for me at the time air-force jacket, and my coats got bigger and longer as the years went by and this was post Columbine. At the beggining of my senior year I noticed that the new dress code said nothing about coats at all, by virtue of being of the most non-troublesom students I had won the right to wear a duster every day at school in addition to long hair and a chain on my wallet.
I fully support the mother in this matter, she is refusing to let them make silly demands of her child, hopefully he picks up on her stalwart nature as he matures.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:“It’s a trade-off,” said one board member, Gary Bingham, an insurance agent, in an interview. “Do the parents value his education more than they value a 4-year-old’s decision to make his own grooming choices?”
Errr does anyone else find his priorities to be swapped around? I'd think that YES his education IS more valuable than worrying about his grooming choices.
Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Were the parents aware of this dress code before the child started school? Did they say anything at that time?
Or
Did the school make a change in the dress code mid-year that turned a previous rule keeper into a rule breaker?
If the parents knew of the rule before their child started school, I agree with the school board. If there was a mid-year rule change, then I'm firmly on the fence.
For what it's worth, I think the kids hair looks awful, but, it doesn't bother me enough to get worked up about it. And it certainly isn't a distraction.
Posts: 692 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, I think the student (well, his parents) have a right to groom his hair however they want. At the same time, I think it's kind of a silly thing to fight the school over.
quote: The parents rejected a compromise proposed by the board under which they would braid his hair and pin it up.
True story: I know a girl who wore her hair in braids up until middle school when people started mistaking her for a boy. I'm not sure when people began to perceive braids as more "masculine" than loose hair.
quote: There are limits on what sorts of "dress code" they can enforce.
This hasn't been my experience. In my area there are some pretty wacky dress codes for public schools which are definitely enforced. One of them has an 8 page dress code policy. A few highlights..... No jeans, no logos (except the district logo of course), all tops must be a solid color without patterns, designs, checks, slogans, or pictures. Skirts must fit comfortably and be free of pockets below the hips, loops, straps and other comparable adornments
All of which are legally defensible.
I don't think the hair restriction is.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is really ridiculous. Hair in a ponytail is not a distraction unless the adults make it a distraction - which they obviously have done by removing him from the classroom. If it was a private school then I could see the argument was the rule in place before or after.... but its not. Its a public school which is required by law to provide education to the masses. Imposing a rule that is clearly gender biased is unfair. It seems the administration is more concerned with the rule then the child's education as well. Parents should not be forced by a school district into making certain decisions about their children.
Posts: 1132 | Registered: A Long Time Ago!
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
