Vendetta1 said:

the schools policy is just sexist. they aren't telling girls with shoulder length hair that they have to have it braided a specific way or else they are segregated. the policy only is in effect for boys.

if they used the same rules for shoulder length hair, it would be stupid, but at least it wouldn't be ridiculous.

but the fact is, they aren't regulating the same haircut and length on the girls, just on the boys, and it's sexist and discriminatory.

would it be acceptable for them to have a special set of rules that allows the boys getting to do smoething the girls aren't allowed to? if the situation was reversed, people would very correctly be up in arms about sexist double standards. but because this kid is male, people think its a rule that should be taught.

all this entire argument is based in is 50 year outdated gender roles: girls have long hair, boys have short hair. girls take home economics, boys take woodshop. it's just silly.

thejason said:

if he were a girl would it distract you?

and if i am reading it right, that ponytail is only because the school dictated it has to be above his ears and not on the back of the head.

that stupid pebbles braid is the school's rule.
[Edited 1/12/10 19:37pm]

cborgman said:

But do we know if the girls don't have a similar requirement or are we just assuming it? Like I said, my daughter's school regulates what hairstyles they can wear.

To me, this is not a sexist issue. It's just like not allowing skinny jeans or baggy pants.

Vendetta1 said:

what public school tells girls they can not wear their hair down?

it's an assumption, yes, but a reasonable one. i have never heard of a public school telling any girl they can not wear their hair down. if anyone knows of any, i would love to hear it, but i would very surprised.

.
[Edited 1/12/10 19:44pm]

cborgman said:

no, it wouldn't distract me if it were a girl...but I'm simple like that...when I see a four year old boy doing something that is totally not the norm for a four year old boy, I tend to notice...


the school said his hair had to be braided, close to his head, off of his collar, over his ears....they said if he came with a ponytail again, he would be sent to the library..

cborgman said:

I don't know of any but as far as I am concerned, I have to follow rules I don't like or are fucking stupid everyday. We all do. When that little boy grows up, there will probably be places of employment he won't be able to work at with long hair. I have a tattoo. It harms no one but I can't display it at work.

thejason said:

well, if boys with long hair really disturbs you so much you can't focus on anything else around you, but a girl with the same doesn't... i don't know what to tell you other than you might have ADD.

i mean, seriously... do we really need to have our boys clearly marked as male and our girls marked as girls do badly that a 4 year old can't have long hair without causing all the other children to become illiterate uneducated morons?

i have shoulder length hair and a penis. does it mean that my hair is so distracting the rest of the org can't possibly function?

Vendetta1 said:

he's not working at a bank, he's going to school. how in the world does this cause other children to not be able to learn?

i personally think the tattoo thing is stupid too, but let's put it into gender specific and gender related terms. would you be willing to submit if the boys were allowed to show tats but the girls weren't?

because that is what this boils down to. the rule is not applied evenly, it is only applied to the boys. it's a sexist rule. if it were evenly applied, i would think it was stupid, but it would at least be fair. but this is a sexist rule.

cborgman said:

a boy with long hair neither bothers me nor disturbs me....a 4 year old boy with a ponytail on top of his head sticks out like a sore fucking thumb...I couldn't give a fuck about the length of his hair...my 10 year old son has long hair, I have long hair...but if he woke up one morning and decided to pony it up on the top of his fucking head, I guess my ADD would kick in because it would certainly get my attention...

is it that hard to imagine other 4 year olds being distracted by that fucked up hairdo on a little boy?? 4 year olds are distracted by the wind blowing...you throw in a great visual like that and the shit really flys...

i just looked... here is the mesquite ISD's dress code for elementary school:


[Edited 1/12/10 20:03pm]

thejason said:

and if they told your son he has to cut his hair to fit their guidelines for boys or wear it braided to give the illusion of it being short?

this kid used to wear it down according to the article. the ponytail was to meet their stupid guidelines, and then they rejected that too.
[Edited 1/12/10 20:02pm]

cborgman said:

his education is more important than his locks
if he wanted to fight it, so be it, I'd support it...but he'd cut his hair in the meantime...the hair will grow back...

my son plays football...some atheletic programs dont allow the boys to have long hair...he knows this...I asked him what he would do if he was forced to decide...he said the hair would be gone...his decision

thejason said:

why are the only choices boys have either short hair or the illusion of it or no one can be educated?

and the football thing is a safety issue. that one makes sense to a point.

thejason said:

I think this is important. If it's stupid, then fight it. in the meanwhile, the rules have to be abided by. it's not like they made this decision when this one little boy decided to go to their school.

cborgman said:

I just don't agree it's sexist.

.
[Edited 1/12/10 20:19pm]
[Edited 1/12/10 20:20pm]

cborgman said:

I'm no feminist!!!

I dont think women should have long hair either...

or play football

Vendetta1 said:

but the girls aren't held to the same rules. if the girls were also required to submit to the less than earlobe length rule, it'd be different. but they have rules that are spefic to the boys that i listed, and it's sexist. it is so beyond silly that a tax-funded government institution should be allowed to make one set of rules for boys and a different one for girls that is based in nothing more than archaic gender roles.

thejason said:

i didn't mean you, tiger.

but

i'd love to see women play football, but not co-ed. the boys wouldn't be able to take the ass-whoopin.

i can not even believe i am arguing against gender bias rules with feminists, and the only person who seems to strongly agree with me is the otherwise conservative right-winger.

i feel like i am in a twilight zone episode.


[Edited 1/12/10 20:24pm]

cborgman said:

I think the rule is pointless and outdated...the article says the board is gonna review the rules this summer...so it may change
but, the rule isn't new, so the parents were privy to it...to me, it would make way more sense to simply follow the damn rule while fighting it...and stop making the kid look like one of the fucking Snorks...

thejason said:

yes, the snork is stupid, but the rules are waaaaay stupider.

i applaud these parents. hell yes, challenge a pointless stupid ass sexist rule that exists only to fit outdated gender role ridiculousness.

that's teaching all those kids a great lesson: fight sexism and the government telling you have to fit mysoginistic roles.
[Edited 1/12/10 20:37pm]

Vendetta1 said:

I agree with Vendetta point of view.

In most cities in the U.S. we have all types of program to mentor young adults, helping them to find gainful employment. It never ceases to amaze me how many of our young people have been allowed to reach adulthood without a clue how to dress or conduct themselves on a job interview. Those who wish to have philosophical debates about their rights, their freedom to express their individuality to prove a point, more power to you. It's easy to argue those points when you live on mommy and daddy. Mommy and daddy won't live forever; it's a disservice to you and your child not to give them the proper tools on how to navigate through society.

=====
[Edited 1/12/10 22:28pm]

cborgman said:

they could still fight the ignorrant rule...and not cut his hair...all they got to do is braid it in the meantime...
but the braids hurt...wwaaaaahhh...everybody involved in this is a bunch of pussies....

I agree with the notion that you fight the good fight and stand up for what's "right"...but there's smarter ways to do things and there doesn't seem to be much 'smart way doing' happening in this case...I just be damned if my child would miss class time because of his hair...

thejason said:

cornrows hurt. against my better judgement (aka sobriety) i got talked into cornrows. they freaking hurt.

cborgman said:

pussy

thejason said:

more man than you'll ever be, and more women than you'll ever get.

JustErin said:

I know right???
I couldn't get past this statement.

I'm ok with dress codes to a certain extent. Are girls allowed to wear their hair touching their collars?

And on the other hand, don't get mad at me parents, but I think it's kinda bullshit how overboard we can go about kids having "self expression". No. Suck it up and follow some rules. Be pissed about it, you don't have to like it, but do it. It does teach you that life isn't always done your way.
The only self expression a kid that age should have should come in the form of construction paper and crayons.

cborgman said:

I've never, ever used that giggle emoticon...ever....that atleast gives me a slight advantage in the more man dept...

TD3 said:

even with long hair and a penis, i worked a respectable job as an exec assistant to the presidents of a multi-million dollar IR firm. i was organizing and running investor presentations with the CEOs and CFOs of some of the biggest investment firms on wall street.

and i was mostly raised in foster care, meaning no real reliance on my parents other than on my mother from 15-18, when i was finally allowed to see her again.

long ahir combined with a penis does not a loser make. those programs aren't filled with boys with long hair, they're filled with people with lousy parents.