reviewing the Darryl George suspension in Texas over his hair length, wouldn’t this be case for gender discrimination? Why different rules for different genders at both schools and business? Has anyone pursued this approach in court?
I totally agree with you, but we’re talking about Texas, so winning a lawsuit there even in a situation where he is being so obviously wronged is going to be a real challenge. Even if it goes to the Supreme Court, look who’s in control of it.
Very interesting question. I know there are cases where schools will ban shorts but allow girls to wear skirts and so on hot days some boys will wear skirts. Those are presented as Ha Ha that’s so silly rather than investigative reports on gender discrimination.
I don’t know about gender discrimination, but it is clearly racial discrimination. Texas even enacted a law last spring called the CROWN Act. It is supposed to protect racial hairstyles related to natural hair texture.
His hair isn’t too long by the stated policy. He keeps it in tight locs close to his head.
This is a backwards small town in East Texas, Mont Belvieu. I’m totally not surprised this is the setting of this event.
[Moderating]
I think that this thread would fit much better in IMHO. Moving.
I started going to middle school in Texas way back in 1987. while the dress code permitted shorts for boys, it was my understanding this was a recent change to the code. Hair length wasn’t something covered in the dress code from what I can recall. We certainly had plenty of heavy metal boys who wore their hair long and it was never an issue.
I’m a little surprised this is an issue almost 40 years after I started school in Texas. Not shocked. Just surprised. Generally speaking, I’m supportive of dress codes in schools, but I think they have to be reasonable. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to have a dress code that ecludes anything that doesn’t cover the belly, but this isn’t reasonable at all. My standard for hair is that it should be neat and clean and Daryl passes both those requirements. This just makes the school district look like its run by a bunch of troglodytes.
Could be gender discrimination. Could be racial discrimination. Definitely a stupid waste of time and public resources, and a distraction from education from beginning to end. 50+ years ago I was fighting to have long hair. WTF business is it of anyone else’s how long my hair is?
Unless you’re refusing to wear a hair net or whatever in certain classes where long hair is a genuine safety issue, this is stupid and a massive waste of time and resources.
From the first article I read, the school banned two students in 2020 for the same thing. The policy was overturned by a federal court, and led to the CROWN Act that seemingly isn’t being enforced. The school must be looking for a federal ass-kicking to do the exact same thing again.
Oh, and the policy is to combat iPhone distractions. Because that definitely makes sense.
That was the exact case in my Texas high school in 1986 or so. Boys wearing skirts was a big enough scandal (I don’t think it was ever covered by the media) to get the school to rescind the ban on shorts. Turns out the school’s big concern was short shorts that were in style in the 70s. The students’ response was, “what? those are for <some inappropriate insult we don’t use anymore>, we all wear board shorts that come down to our knees from Ocean Pacific or Vans.”
So the new rule became shorts and skirts were allowed, as long as they were of modest length, unless you were a cheerleader or on the drill team, in which case you could wear short skirts that didn’t cover your butt.
To bring it around to the OP (original post, not Ocean Pacific), based on my bias from learning that boys being “gay” wearing skirts was threatening enough to change the shorts ban, my first thought on hearing this story was that long hair on boys was considered a gay thing, and that was the problem. I have no factual basis for this belief in this incident.
Ok, I downloaded and read the dress code. It’s definitely strict, and has strong gender role restrictions.
It starts reasonably enough.
The General Guidelines restrict any type of lewd designs or tobacco or alcohol or illegal substance promotions; gang paraphernalia or insignias; restrictions for modest clothing, not having exposed skin; restrictions against sleepwear or beach attire, e.g. flipflops.
So far so good. Then come more detailed restrictions on tops, readonable. Pants can’t be holey or torn, etc. No sagging pants or shorts.
Hair policy:
Hmmmm.
Next, boys must be clean shaven - no beards, mustsches, or goatees. Also, sideburns are limited not below the earlobe and not flaring.
No tattoos, only girls can have only ears pierced, no other piercings, and boys can’t have their ears pierced.
Boys also are not allowed to wear makeup or painted fingernails.
It definitely starts to sound like something from the 1950s.
What the heck does this have to do with education?
Boys only? I wonder what they’d do if they ever encountered a girl with polycystic ovary syndrome (a common symptom of which is excess facial hair, up to and occasionally including a full beard).
Wait wait, that is a very strict dress code.
I do believe there should be one in schools. With in reason.
The problem is whose reason will they use.
I vaguely remember we had student body representation in the highschool I went to, on these discussions.
OTOH have you ever seen a group of teen girls when one girl bleaches/dyes her hair. It will cause uproar in the classroom, at first.
I think beards and mustaches on teen boys is not a good idea.
ETA …I fear this case is more racial discrimination.
Having Hair While Black is against that dress code. Which is exactly what it’s meant for.
Actually, they’d probably complain that a full shave was against dress code, too. So the problem is actually Existing While Black.
One of my anthroplogy professors had really long hair and a crazy goatee. One of the key groups of people he studied were racist organizations here in the United States, when he told us this one of the students sarcastically said something like, “Oh, they must love your long hair.” The professor replied, “I look just like them, I don’t stick out at all. There are plenty of guys there with long hair.”
I don’t think long hair has been “gay” for a very long time. In general, I think the school rules are more likely about rebellion and making sure kids stay in line. But depending on how those rules are enforced there could be a racial element as well.
Have you been in a classroom this millennium? Forget teen girls, probably 10% of the kids at my elementary school have had unnatural hair dye at some point. It’s super common and, beyond the initial, “Ooh, I love that blue streak in your hair!” unremarkable.
Of course it has been accepted for a long time. But look at the other rules they have, stuff like no earings on boys. That has also been pretty main stream for a long time. My gut bias comes from the sense I get from the people who write those rules that anything that feminizes boys is bad because it will turn them gay, or a sign that they are gay, or something something homosexuality bad.
Like I said, this isn’t a well formed hypothesis I’m willing to defend, it was just my gut reaction after having grown up (40 years ago) under a similar regime.
Also the teachers have dyed hair and visible tattoos.
Actually, let me amend that: Having Hair is against that dress code. If it’s in more than one direction, it falls afoul of bullet point 3, and if it’s all in the same direction, that’s a “geometric pattern”, which falls afoul of bullet point 2.
It’s just only enforced against black students.
Why? I had a beard and shoulder length hair in high school (late 70’s) and it wasn’t a code violation even then.