Support NeoGAF

[LOCK]

Yeah this is just fucked up.

That little girl did nothing wrong, and shouldn't have to deal with being treated like that. Seriously, what did the school expect the father to do, take the dreads out? Seriously WTF.

It may not be intentional but it seems racial, the policy, and the school deserves all the ire it gets until it is changed.

 

[Enzom21]

Ugh. I don't have the energy tonight to argue with every one of you over whether this was stupidity or racism. I think the schools rules are stupid, but it's probably not racist.

Let the outrage flow, I'm checking out.

Are you going to continue to do this in every thread involving racism towards blacks?

 

[akira28]

Just your thoughts on why you thought that?

Why?

Thats how charter schools are sold. Better than public schools, with better trained teachers, more advanced curriculums, everything that's wrong with public schools, redesigned and better.

Oh yeah, and non-Union.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

So they basically don't like ethnic hairstyles. I had an afro when I was in high school. It was kept nice and neat.

It's only a distraction to people that get twitchy around any culture that isn't White, Christian and 300% 'Merican.

It's bullshit like this why so many Black women go through fucking hell and back to straighten their hair.

Fuck that school.

 

[FyreWulff]

It may not be intentional but it seems racial, the policy, and the school deserves all the ire it gets until it is changed.

It's intentionally racial. This policy requires a large amount of black people to put chemicals in their hair to essentially near destroy it so their hair is 'white' enough to go to school, or go with a shaven head, which tends to not be an option for girls.

But I guess they'll try to convince people that a hair style that's been around before this country even existed is a 'faddish' hairstyle. I don't believe for a second they would have banned bowl cuts or pompadours.

 

[Rayis]

Not surprised people are being racially ignorant, African American hair usually grows naturally into an afro, which is why a lot of black women go through a lot of damaging treatments to hair such as relaxers, weaves and other things to make their hair look more "socially acceptable" even though it's bullshit.

 

[Cagey]

It's intentionally racial. This policy requires a large amount of black people to put chemicals in their hair to essentially near destroy it so their hair is 'white' enough to go to school, or go with a shaven head, which tends to not be an option for girls.

But I guess they'll try to convince people that a hair style that's been around before this country even existed is a 'faddish' hairstyle. I don't believe for a second they would have banned bowl cuts or pompadours.

It's inherently racist, but intentionally I'm not so sure about. As I mentioned earlier, this strikes me more like the product of a mind numbingly stupid bureaucratic decision-making process. I imagine the discussion wasn't "those hair styles that blacks have are distracting", but rather "weird hair styles like big afros and dreadlocks and mohawks are distracting" without the slightest consideration that they're legislating against black people.

Regardless, terrible policy.

 

[tirminyl]

Not surprised people are being racially ignorant, African American hair usually grows naturally into an afro, which is why a lot of black women go through a lot of damaging treatments to hair such as relaxers, weaves and other things to make their hair look more "socially acceptable" even though it's bullshit.

I agree. Unfortunately, a lot of black girls/women aren't taught healthy natural ways to straighten their hair if they want it straight. It's time consuming yes, but it can be done over the weekend and they can rock it for the week.

If I had a daughter, I would never put or let someone put straightening chemicals in her hair. That stuff is not good for you.

 

[Cagey]

Lastly, the movie Good Hair should be mandatory viewing for some people on this thread.

 

[Jazzy Network]

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

Wait...what?

 

[Dark Octave]

Black hair is so expensive and/or time consuming to keep up. We don't just roll out of bed looking fabulous. Dreds isn't just a faddish hair style for a lot of people. It's a good way to keep the maintenance low.

 

[eastmen]

Not a G/A/F moment, but still I saw this and instantly thought of the Bo Jefferson or whatever her name is thread.

http://www.fox23.com/news/local/sto...rl-home-over-hair/sGcEwBSrm02W8ZSBNnGoXQ.cspx



Remember back in the day when schools focused on educating kids. Those were the days. This might be the first time I've ever heard dreads referred to as a fad.

I'd just like to say that this was never the case . Girls would be sent home all the time for not wearing the proper clothing and so would guys. At least back in the 90s when I was in school and i'm sure it was even worse earlier.

 

[MikeDown]

Sounds positively dreadful.

well said my good sir

 

[ryutaro's mama]

You shouldn't even bother with it. Almost every thread about race, you can guarantee he'll post about how it's not about race.

Shit that pisses me off is the people that will defend obvious shit to the end and bend over backwards to give the benefit of the doubt.

Someone posted something in another thread:

Trying to explain racism to people like that is like a man trying to explain an erection to a woman.

Or a woman trying to explain childbirth to a man.

 

[border]

White folks with grown-out hair = A-OK and professional

Black folks with grown-out hair that can either be an Afro or maintained as as dreads = Unprofessional and even "thuggish"

Since when has long hair ever been considered a "professional" look??

That's almost never been the case in the last 50 years. Men are expected to keep their hair short, pretty much regardless of race.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Charter school? Why am I not surprised.

 

[Kitschkraft]

Black people are not allowed to wear their hair the way it actually grows out? Terribly racist policy.

This is the other side of the "good hair" problem that people talk about as much. A lot of places of employment surprisingly have similar policies. It's bullshit. Black hair is different and policies like this specifically target anyone that doesn't want to put chemicals in their hair or walk around with a crew cut.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relaxer

 

[joe2187]

Since when has long hair ever been considered a "professional" look??

That's almost never been the case in the last 50 years. Men are expected to keep their hair short, pretty much regardless of race.

Who said it applied only to men?

The article is about a little girl even. You see the other little girls with long hair and they get no issues. You're asking her to keep her hair short because if it grows out all of a sudden it's a school violation, her hair isnt going to grow any other way.

 

[FyreWulff]

Since when has long hair ever been considered a "professional" look??

That's almost never been the case in the last 50 years. Men are expected to keep their hair short, pretty much regardless of race.

Gee, I wonder who was influencing business policy 50 years ago

probably

white

men

 

[Kitsunebaby]

Since when has long hair ever been considered a "professional" look??

That's almost never been the case in the last 50 years. Men are expected to keep their hair short, pretty much regardless of race.

This thread is about a girl if you couldn't tell. If a black girl and white girl going to the same school can't wear their hair at the same length without one of them having to chemically treat it that tells you the policies are discriminatory.

 

[The Faceless Master]

A couple more additions to their 'faddish hairstyles' list and black girls are gonna have to show up bald to go to that school.

yeah, just throw in no pigtails and it's pretty much chemicals in your baby girl's head or bald.

 

[border]

This thread is about a girl if you couldn't tell.

I'm responding to the poster's general assertion (which implies a double standard for both genders, and seems to be concerned with male appearance by use of the "thuggish" adjective) . If you couldn't tell.

 

[bishoptl]

Lastly, the movie Good Hair should be mandatory viewing for some people on this thread.

Everyone in this thread.

Feep, I'm looking at you.

 

[The Faceless Master]

Since when has long hair ever been considered a "professional" look??

That's almost never been the case in the last 50 years. Men are expected to keep their hair short, pretty much regardless of race.

i dunno man, the straight hair version of short hair is quite a bit different from the nappy hair version...

 

[Infinite]

FYI principle and founder of the school wears a twist out, possibly a wig at that. http://www.dbcschool.org/index.php?page=deborah_brown

 

[Forceatowulf]

Shit like this is why we can't have nice things.

What fucking choice do Black females have in this society but to conform to the "white standard"? It's just fucked up.

 

[Kitschkraft]

FYI principle and founder of the school wears a twist out, possibly a wig at that. http://www.dbcschool.org/index.php?page=deborah_brown

In more ways than one.

 

[Infinite]

Everyone in this thread.

Feep, I'm looking at you.

Better yet folks in this thread should simply watch this: http://youtu.be/DTP96_61sGc

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

I knew a girl who started balding during her twenties due to the insane lengths he went to straighten her hair.

Last I knew he sorta started accepting it and some of the damage has healed, which is good.

 

[Vice]

It's in the schools dress code. Why is it that people who refuse to read the rules are instantly motivated to call the media in outrage, even if they're in the wrong? Get over it and change the hair style, or find a charter school that allows dreads. End of story.

Afros and dreadlocks aren't fad hairstyle for black people. They're some of the healthiest and most natural ways for use to grow our hair. For black women who don't want to fill their hair with products those two styles and braids are pretty much their main options for long hair.

 

[Derwind]

I knew a girl who started balding during her twenties due to the insane lengths he went to straighten her hair.

Last I knew he sorta started accepting it and some of the damage has healed, which is good.

So is this one person or two?

 

[Infinite]

And stop saying dreads they're called locs

 

[thespot84]

So how is it one concludes with certainty that a policy like this,which will certainly affect one group disproportionately over another, as has been established, was motivated by race?

I think I have an idea as to why this always happens in these threads. Something having to do with race pops up (bad policy, or what have you) and the word racism get's thrown around. Some people mention in to be intended, others merely inherent, but at the end of the day the word 'racism' has become nebulous. It means different things to different people.

I'm learning from this thread that 'racism' to some (according to some guy speaking for all minorities ever) means "anything bad that has to do with race". Or that's how I interpreted their definition. To others, it has a specific connotation of willfully intending to discriminate based on race (ie bigotry). And to others it's probably somewhere in between.

This is what causes the problem. I, for example, thought of racism as only those actions and institutions which intentionally discriminated, while a number of people here seem to see it as any action or institution which happens to discriminate, regardless of intent.

I'm not defending the 'racism-defenders'. Of course there are numerous examples of bad policy disproportionately affecting minorities, both intentionally (i'm thinking the criminalization of marijuana) and unintentionally. However, until 'racism' is clearly defined for all parties involved, this conversations will continue to be unproductive, with people on one side who know the 'true' meaning of racism upset with people on the other side defensive about the fact that they could be participating in something 'racist' and not even know it. I pride myself on how I personally approach issues of equality, so the cognitive dissonance I would experience to learn that I'm now "racist" would be significant.

Maybe we need a new word, or maybe we just need an education. This attitude that "there's always one guy who'll say it isn't racist" and "here come the victims again" is clearly an attitude that stems from the repetition of this cycle again and again.

 

[Daingurse]

That's a fucked up school. Don't know how my sister and mom put up with all the bs attached to maintaining black hair. Waaay too much time, money and effort for my ass.

If I was a female, I'd be rocking the afro out of laziness and spite.

 

[NinjaBoiX]

Not a G/A/F moment

What is this G/A/F thing? I don't get it.

 

[akira28]

This attitude that "there's always one guy who'll say it isn't racist" and "here come the victims again" is clearly an attitude that stems from the repetition of this cycle again and again.

The guy who says both of those? ....you need to buy him a soda because...he's special.

 

[Devolution]

So how is it one concludes with certainty that a policy like this,which will certainly affect one group disproportionately over another, as has been established, was motivated by race?

I think I have an idea as to why this always happens in these threads. Something having to do with race pops up (bad policy, or what have you) and the word racism get's thrown around. Some people mention in to be intended, others merely inherent, but at the end of the day the word 'racism' has become nebulous. It means different things to different people.

I'm learning from this thread that 'racism' to some (according to some guy speaking for all minorities ever) means "anything bad that has to do with race". Or that's how I interpreted their definition. To others, it has a specific connotation of willfully intending to discriminate based on race (ie bigotry). And to others it's probably somewhere in between.

This is what causes the problem. I, for example, thought of racism as only those actions and institutions which intentionally discriminated, while a number of people here seem to see it as any action or institution which happens to discriminate, regardless of intent.

I'm not defending the 'racism-defenders'. Of course there are numerous examples of bad policy disproportionately affecting minorities, both intentionally (i'm thinking the criminalization of marijuana) and unintentionally. However, until 'racism' is clearly defined for all parties involved, this conversations will continue to be unproductive, with people on one side who know the 'true' meaning of racism upset with people on the other side defensive about the fact that they could be participating in something 'racist' and not even know it. I pride myself on how I personally approach issues of equality, so the cognitive dissonance I would experience to learn that I'm now "racist" would be significant.

Maybe we need a new word, or maybe we just need an education. This attitude that "there's always one guy who'll say it isn't racist" and "here come the victims again" is clearly an attitude that stems from the repetition of this cycle again and again.

Racism isn't fucking nebulous when the hairstyles banned are those natural to fucking black people.

 

[thespot84]

Racism isn't fucking nebulous when the hairstyles banned are those natural to fucking black people.

So you're convinced it was willfully intended to discriminate against black people?

EDIT: The only thing I'm convinced of is that you read the first sentence of my post and nothing else.

 

[Devolution]

So you're convinced it was willfully intended to discriminate against black people?

Since when does racism have to be willful to be discriminatory towards a group? What do you think institutionalized racism or carry overs from shit times is? Do you think those people actually think "yeah fucking these black people" or do you think it's implicit ignorance that's never been challenged?

 

[Infinite]

So you're convinced it was willfully intended to discriminate against black people?

Intent =! Impact

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

So is this one person or two?

English is not my first language and I tend to trip when it comes to these pronouns since my language works differently.

But thanks for going all grammar nazi on me, that's the kind of quality posting this forum is known for.

 

[thespot84]

Someone show me where I said that this didn't have a disproportionate impact on black black people. Please.

You people are inventing someone to argue with. You're certainly not arguing with me.

 

[Infinite]

Someone show me where I said that this didn't have a disproportionate impact on black black people. Please.

You people are inventing someone to argue with. You're certainly not arguing with me.

I mean most if not all of you said has no place in this discussion to begin with.

 

[Derwind]

English is not my first language and I tend to trip when it comes to these pronouns since my language works differently.

But thanks for going all grammar nazi on me, that's the kind of quality posting this forum is known for.

Grammar nazi? I was genuinely confused, I thought maybe you were talking about two different people. :/

Um..... sorry... I guess.

 

[javac]

I used to have a teacher with dreadlocks. He was alright. Hated Maths however.

 

[Deified Data]

Yeah, why can't these Africans just simply keep their hair ungrown and cut?

Or seek private charter schools that don't actively discriminate against their hair, besides.

I'd have more sympathy if this were a public school. We can argue over whether or not the policy is stupid (it is), but not so much that the parents should have read the policy before sending their kid to school with a banned hairstyle.

 

[Devolution]

Or seek private charter schools that don't actively discriminate against their hair, besides.

I'd have more sympathy if this were a public school. We can argue over whether or not the policy is stupid (it is), but not so much that the parents should have read the policy before sending their kid to school with a banned hairstyle.

For a lot of people public school is nothing more than glorified day care where the kids don't even get textbooks. Not exactly sure you want to pin your argument on that.

 

[thespot84]

I mean most if not all of you said has no place in this discussion to begin with.

What was the discussion again? Someone harping on the fact that black people's hair is different? We established that on the first page.

I'm merely addressing the fact that every one of these threads devolves into "Was racist!" vs "Wasn't racist!" and that this argument is stupid because we haven't even agreed on terminology.

"Since when does racism have to be willful to be discriminatory towards a group?"

This seems backwards. I'm thinking: "Since when does discrimination have to be willful to be racism?" Do you see the difference? There's a lot of absolutes being thrown around here, and I'm just looking to define all these words that everyone likes using.

Or seek private charter schools that don't actively discriminate against their hair, besides.

I'd have more sympathy if this were a public school. We can argue over whether or not the policy is stupid (it is), but not so much that the parents should have read the policy before sending their kid to school with a banned hairstyle.

Except for the fact that charter schools take state money.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

Grammar nazi? I was genuinely confused, I thought maybe you were talking about two different people. :/

Um..... sorry... I guess.

Aw nevermind... I should apologise instead.

Tired and cranky often go hand to hand when it comes to me.

 

[Suairyu]

My school had a no dreads policy (among other policies), but made exceptions for afro-Caribbean students due to the natural genetic makeup of their hair. What an absolutely awful decision by the school.

As for the people thinking the decision is fine or it isn't about race: do you think black-specialist hairdressers are not needed as well?

Or seek private charter schools that don't actively discriminate against their hair, besides.

I'd have more sympathy if this were a public school. We can argue over whether or not the policy is stupid (it is), but not so much that the parents should have read the policy before sending their kid to school with a banned hairstyle.

Maybe it's different in America, but at least in the UK and large parts of Europe, being a private anything (school, business, whatever) doesn't allow you to create and enforce racially discriminatory rules. Notions of equality don't disappear just because it's not government-run.

edit - guys stop arguing over "racist". Just call it racially discriminatory and move on with the discussion. Debating if its actual actual racism or not doesn't do anything to further the discourse or understanding.