Cancer Survivor Teen Suspended From School for 'Locks of Love'

[spacejamz]

This is some bullshit. I would sue the school system

Great...just we what we need, another frivolous lawsuit...never mind the fact that the parents already agreed to the conform to the school's stated dress code....

All of these stories where little Johnny or Jane should be treated special so we need to bend the rules for them are getting old...

 

[actuarial]

Is there a charity that I can show my support for by working shorts and t-shirts to work (does Jimmy Buffet have any favorite charities that we can show our support for in this manner LOL)? Even though my work has a dress code, how could they deny allowing me to wear what something for a good cause? Those evil corporate bastards...

For me, the issue isn't the fact that there is a dress code, but rather that the dress code only applies to boys.

If he was a girl, he would be allowed to grow out his hair.

 

[monovillage]

For me, the issue isn't the fact that there is a dress code, but rather that the dress code only applies to boys.

If he was a girl, he would be allowed to grow out his hair.

Girls usually have their own dress code. There is a difference between the 2 genders.

 

[HumblePie]

I do see this side of the argument as well. The issue I have is whether or not things are enforceable if they are illegal, simply because you agreed to it.

The example I gave was racially segregated washrooms. Yes, it is an extreme example, but one to show the premise. Would it be okay to have segregated washrooms as long as the parents agreed to it?

I do know there are often differences in dress codes between genders, and honestly I don't think it would be enforceable if someone pushed it hard enough. In almost all circumstances, male dress codes are more restrictive than females. If the opposite were true (for example not allowing females to wear pants - skirts only) you know there would be an uproar.

My usual test for gender discrimination is this: if you have to ask what gender the person is to determine if they are violating a rule, you're probably in the wrong.

There is such a thing as LEGAL discrimination people. Good gawd were you born yesterday?

Want a good example of LEGAL and racial discrimination? Try and force a Hollywood movie studio to hire a WHITE guy to play the role of Martin Luther King in a movie about it. See how far that gets you.


This was a completely optional, and thus not forced public, school that the student and his family decided to go to. They knew the rules before hand. They broke the rules FIRST without putting through a request for an exemption first. Now they are butt hurt because they are having to deal with the consequences of breaking the rules they agreed to before hand. Then you have idiots like Dave in the OP trying to stir the pot over a non-issue. As stated the family has many options. They can switch school and continue to let the kid grow his hair or accept the current form of punishment while they appeal to the school board in hopes of an exception or rules change. Whoop deee frikking doo. This isn't even much of a news story really.

 

[spacejamz]

For me, the issue isn't the fact that there is a dress code, but rather that the dress code only applies to boys.

If he was a girl, he would be allowed to grow out his hair.

OMG....the boys are not allowed wear makeup either (except clear lip protecterant)...

HAIR/MAKEUP
A. Girls
• Hair must be clean, and neat and free of unnatural or distracting colors.
• Hairstyles determined to be distracting by the staff will not be allowed.
• Hair accessories need to be solid color in school colors, black or white and not
distracting.
• Hair accessories may not be so numerous or of such size that they make noise
when moved.
• Light makeup may be worn in upper grades only. Grades 6, 7, 8,9,and 10
• Light colored lip gloss or protectant for grades 5 and under.
• Makeup determined to be distracting by the staff will not be allowed.
• ONLY Clear nail polish may be worn by students in K-6.
• Students in grades 3 and above will dress for gym class. The PE uniform is to be a
solid navy tee shirt worn with solid navy sweat pants or knee length shorts.
• No hats are permitted.
B. Boys
• Hair must be clean, neat, free of unnatural or distracting colors, off the collar, off
the ears and out of the eyes.
• No initials, wavy lines, cut-in designs, spiked hair, Mohawks, fauxhawks, pony
tails, or pig tails.
• Braids must not touch the collar or must be pinned/braided above the collar.
• Hairstyles determined to be distracting by the staff will not be allowed.
• Facial hair must be removed or barely noticeable.
• No makeup allowed except clear lip protectant.
• No nail polish allowed.
• Students in grades 7 and above will dress for gym class. The PE uniform is to be a
solid color tee shirt worn with solid color sweat pants or knee length shorts.

 

[actuarial]

I actually said that they can enforce whatever rules they want AND that the parents agreed to.

And yes, while gender discrimination has been mostly eliminated, there are still some places that can/should have different rules for each gender -- and I'm fairly sure the courts have agreed (so far).

I doubt parents can sign a child's rights away.

Certainly there are still instances where there is gender separation (washrooms, sports), but not too many cases where there are different rules for genders. I'm nearly certain if the rule was more radical (say, girls aren't allowed to take science class) that people would be more up in arms.

In my opinion, we either enforce gender equality or we don't. That's not to say that everything has to be equal all the time, but that we can't just arbitrarily impose rules on one gender only. There should be a reason if there is to be any difference.

Hair length is definitely something where there is no reasonable argument why a boy and a girl should have a different standard, other than to enforce gender stereotypes.

 

[xBiffx]

OMG....the boys are not allowed wear makeup either (except clear lip protecterant)...

But I like the colored flavored ones too. Come on, pleeeeaaaseee!

 

[actuarial]

There is such a thing as LEGAL discrimination people. Good gawd were you born yesterday?

Want a good example of LEGAL and racial discrimination? Try and force a Hollywood movie studio to hire a WHITE guy to play the role of Martin Luther King in a movie about it. See how far that gets you.

This was a completely optional, and thus not forced public, school that the student and his family decided to go to. They knew the rules before hand. They broke the rules FIRST without putting through a request for an exemption first. Now they are butt hurt because they are having to deal with the consequences of breaking the rules they agreed to before hand. Then you have idiots like Dave in the OP trying to stir the pot over a non-issue. As stated the family has many options. They can switch school and continue to let the kid grow his hair or accept the current form of punishment while they appeal to the school board in hopes of an exception or rules change. Whoop deee frikking doo. This isn't even much of a news story really.

What does you example have anything to do with the current situation? I'm perfectly fine with the legal and racial discrimination that you talked about above, because it's not arbitrary in any way. There is a perfectly good reason for it.

There is no reasonable explanation I have ever heard why a boy needs to have short hair but a girl does not.

 

[HumblePie]

What does you example have anything to do with the current situation? I'm perfectly fine with the legal and racial discrimination that you talked about above, because it's not arbitrary in any way. There is a perfectly good reason for it.

There is no reasonable explanation I have ever heard why a boy needs to have short hair but a girl does not.

Nope there is no reasonable explanation to force this haircut difference, but it is not illegal for this school to do this if they wish either. That is what I'm trying to point out. The a private school wants the students to fill certain roles as that is their method of teaching their students then so be it. This is NOT a public school, but a private one. They can decide to teach how they want to teach and you have the option of going there to be taught that way or not. For example, my friend who went to a private Catholic school had to wear a stupid little "boys" uniform instead of what he wanted to wear. He also had to take classes on Catholicism and other religious non-sense despite not wanting to. OMG it's religious discrimination!!!!111!!one1!

I'm trying to make a point. This kid was never once forced to go to this school. They picked this school and the school said if you wish to go here then you need to follow these rules. If they had a problem with the rules they should have dealt with them then and there. While I personally agree that different rules in regards to hair for boys and girls is stupid, this school did not think that is the case. And you know what? They have a RIGHT to think that way and enforce their rules upon those that agree to them if they wish to remain apart of that school.

I don't agree with different rules for boys versus girls haircuts. I don't agree with a school uniform or dress code. I don't agree with many things which is WHY I will not be sending my kids to a private school that would dictate such things. Simple as that.

 

[spacejamz]

What does you example have anything to do with the current situation? I'm perfectly fine with the legal and racial discrimination that you talked about above, because it's not arbitrary in any way. There is a perfectly good reason for it.

There is no reasonable explanation I have ever heard why a boy needs to have short hair but a girl does not.

It is a rule in the handbook which was probably based on custom and tradition. If the parents had a problem with it, they should have talked to the board to see what the process is the change the rule. Having their kid just grow his hair in direct violation of the stated rule is not the right away to go about this.

I also see no reason why a boy cannot wear a skirt, do you???

 

[actuarial]

Nope there is no reasonable explanation to force this haircut difference, but it is not illegal for this school to do this if they wish either. That is what I'm trying to point out. The a private school wants the students to fill certain roles as that is their method of teaching their students then so be it. This is NOT a public school, but a private one. They can decide to teach how they want to teach and you have the option of going there to be taught that way or not. For example, my friend who went to a private Catholic school had to wear a stupid little "boys" uniform instead of what he wanted to wear. He also had to take classes on Catholicism and other religious non-sense despite not wanting to. OMG it's religious discrimination!!!!111!!one1!

I'm trying to make a point. This kid was never once forced to go to this school. They picked this school and the school said if you wish to go here then you need to follow these rules. If they had a problem with the rules they should have dealt with them then and there. While I personally agree that different rules in regards to hair for boys and girls is stupid, this school did not think that is the case. And you know what? They have a RIGHT to think that way and enforce their rules upon those that agree to them if they wish to remain apart of that school.

I don't agree with different rules for boys versus girls haircuts. I don't agree with a school uniform or dress code. I don't agree with many things which is WHY I will not be sending my kids to a private school that would dictate such things. Simple as that.

Well maybe it is legal. I went to a public Catholic school (Canada), and we certainly had different dress codes between guys and girls. On occasion, some guy would wear a kilt to school for that very reason. The admin never did anything to them though, probably because they figured it'd cause more of a ruckus asking him to stop and guys aren't going to want to do it anyways.

But in my opinion there is a fundamental difference between the things you've listed and what's happening here. Being forced to take religious classes isn't religious discrimination. Being forced to take communion would be. And I doubt even a private school could force a person to accept communion (or for example bar them from entering a mosque in their free time). I certainly wasn't forced to at Catholic school, and there were non Catholics that went there.

I understand the point about accepting the conditions, but where does it end? Like I've asked numerous times, does the school have the right to have segregated washrooms as long as the parents agree to it? If yes, then at least there's some consistency. If no, then we've established that just because it's a private school and the parent agreed to it doesn't mean they can enforce any rule they want.

 

[actuarial]

It is a rule in the handbook which was probably based on custom and tradition. If the parents had a problem with it, they should have talked to the board to see what the process is the change the rule. Having their kid just grow his hair in direct violation of the stated rule is not the right away to go about this.

I also see no reason why a boy cannot wear a skirt, do you???

No, I don't. And if a boy wanted to wear one, I would just as staunchly defend his right as long as skirts were allowed to be worn by girls.

If all students were required to wear pants (boys and girls), then of course the boy shouldn't wear a skirt to school.

 

[Exterous]

I do see this side of the argument as well. The issue I have is whether or not things are enforceable if they are illegal, simply because you agreed to it.

The example I gave was racially segregated washrooms. Yes, it is an extreme example, but one to show the premise. Would it be okay to have segregated washrooms as long as the parents agreed to it?

Why bring a hyperbole into this? It's been long established that schools can allow separate dress codes for boys and girls.

Now before someone goes and again says something about segragation having been established and long allowed I do not see any great outcry about gender discrimination in school dress codes. And, frankly, if someone does compare boys hair length to segregation they would be insulting the civil rights movement

I doubt parents can sign a child's rights away.

I am pretty sure hair length is not a constitutionally defended right - not to mention the courts have already decided the schools have greater leeway when it comes to maintaining a positive learning environment. I would be curious to know what right you think pertains to hair length? You might get around this if there was a well established religious reason for the long hair but thats about it

 

[HumblePie]

Well maybe it is legal. I went to a public Catholic school (Canada), and we certainly had different dress codes between guys and girls. On occasion, some guy would wear a kilt to school for that very reason. The admin never did anything to them though, probably because they figured it'd cause more of a ruckus asking him to stop and guys aren't going to want to do it anyways.

But in my opinion there is a fundamental difference between the things you've listed and what's happening here. Being forced to take religious classes isn't religious discrimination. Being forced to take communion would be. And I doubt even a private school could force a person to accept communion (or for example bar them from entering a mosque in their free time). I certainly wasn't forced to at Catholic school, and there were non Catholics that went there.

I understand the point about accepting the conditions, but where does it end? Like I've asked numerous times, does the school have the right to have segregated washrooms as long as the parents agree to it? If yes, then at least there's some consistency. If no, then we've established that just because it's a private school and the parent agreed to it doesn't mean they can enforce any rule they want.

Just read this and stop being so butt hurt.

http://www.halloran-sage.com/Knowledge/articleDetail.aspx?storyid=2055

And actually, a Catholic school CAN force all students to do communion on the school. It is perfectly legal. Most don't though because they don't want the hassle of dealing with butt hurt parents they accepted which weren't catholic into the school, but some do. A private Catholic school can completely discriminate and state that they only accept students of the Catholic religion and nothing else. So long as they aren't receiving any public funds directly, they can legally do this.

As I am trying to point out, private and public schools have a huge difference in what rules and laws apply to them. Private schools can legally discriminate on who they accept, just like the Boyscouts can legally discriminate that they don't want gays, or the KKK can discriminate that they don't want blacks in their organization. The school can state they don't accept male students with long hair. END OF STORY.

 

[Exterous]

Like I've asked numerous times, does the school have the right to have segregated washrooms as long as the parents agree to it?

I believe washrooms are already segregated - BY GENDER

 

[actuarial]

Just read this and stop being so butt hurt.

http://www.halloran-sage.com/Knowledge/articleDetail.aspx?storyid=2055

That doesn't apply here at all, unless for some reason hair length is a bona fide occupational qualification for attending school (and school isn't even an occupation). And if it was, then why a boy cannot learn with long hair but a girl can.

 

[actuarial]

Why bring a hyperbole into this? It's been long established that schools can allow separate dress codes for boys and girls.

Now before someone goes and again says something about segragation having been established and long allowed I do not see any great outcry about gender discrimination in school dress codes. And, frankly, if someone does compare boys hair length to segregation they would be insulting the civil rights movement

I'm not directly comparing them in any way. I'm just using it to show that the argument that 'it's a private institution and it was agreed to by the parents' isn't the be all end all, especially when it comes to discriminating against a protected class.

I am pretty sure hair length is not a constitutionally defended right - not to mention the courts have already decided the schools have greater leeway when it comes to maintaining a positive learning environment. I would be curious to know what right you think pertains to hair length? You might get around this if there was a well established religious reason for the long hair but thats about it

I was referring, generally, to the right to be free from gender discrimination. In the US it appears that this doesn't extend to the public in general the same way race does (though in my opinion it should).

But really it seems like no one agrees with me here, so we'll just have to disagree.

 

[Linflas]

That doesn't apply here at all, unless for some reason hair length is a bona fide occupational qualification for attending school (and school isn't even an occupation). And if it was, then why a boy cannot learn with long hair but a girl can.

Perhaps the school feels that maintaining haircut standards contribute to good order and discipline? In any case they really aren't required to justify it anymore than the military is required to justify why long hair on their male service members is prohibited while it is permitted for their female service members.

 

[Pens1566]

He can wait 4 months then do it for the rest of his pathetic emo life the whiny little shit. He can also donate blood. No good reason for the school board to reduce their standards and the standards his mommy agreed to when he went to the school.

No, he can't.

 

[Patranus]

Rules are the rules. Zero tolerance.
(At least that is what the "progressives" have been peddling for the last 30 years)

 

[Pens1566]

School seems to be on good ground to enforce their rules, but this is a colossal PR loser for them.

This ^. It's a stupid no win situation for everyone. They should let the kid go for however long it takes to grow it out.

 

[Exterous]

I was referring, generally, to the right to be free from gender discrimination. In the US it appears that this doesn't extend to the public in general the same way race does (though in my opinion it should).

I think thats because there are some very obvious differences between boys and girls other than just skin color or minor physical differences. As such trying to compare gender equality with racial equality will always be tricky and - IMO - inappropriate for discussions like this. Gender vs race should be handled differently because it IS different

To take the segregation issue you are so fond of P) we still have bathrooms segregated by gender but no longer by race

But really it seems like no one in the US agrees with me, so we'll just have to disagree.

FTFY :sneaky:

 

[spacejamz]

This ^. It's a stupid no win situation for everyone. They should let the kid go for however long it takes to grow it out.

If I decide to donate my entire salary to Locks of Love instead of paying my mortgage and bills, would that be bad PR for my mortgage company and creditors??

 

[Pens1566]

If I decide to donate my entire salary to Locks of Love instead of paying my mortgage and bills, would that be bad PR for my mortgage company and creditors??

Wow. Just wow.

 

[Gillbot]

Was this a private school? If so, then they have the right to enforce whatever rules the parents agreed to when they enrolled their child. Period.

If it's a public school, then the parents have a clear-cut case for discrimination that they should bring to the courts.

My high school soccer coach made me cut my hair to keep playing, so after a week or two of resisting and riding the bench, I did. I was certainly pissed, but life went on. A year later, I let the Army shave my entire head, which kinda makes my initial protest the year before seem rather silly, doesn't it?

When I was a freshman/sophomore, I donated mine to locks of love and 90% of my classmates had no idea my hair was well below shoulder length. I came in without a hat the day before I donated it with my hair at full length and everyone thought it was a wig, then was nearly bald the very next day after I had it shaved off and turned it in for donation.