If this Texas student doesn't cut his dreadlocks, he won't get to walk at graduation.

The school should change the stupid rule however rules are rules even when they are stupid. When I was in school our hair could not touch our collar, we had to be clean shaven daily, and our shirts had to be tucked in. I got in trouble more than once for breaking these rules especially the one about shaving. They were all stupid rules but I had to follow them.

 

Went to public HS in the late 80's and had to cut my hair before I could graduate. I went into the AP's office and cut it off right in front of him.

Yes, it was a mullet. But it was the 80's!

 

I turn into a raging bleeding heart liberal when it comes to dress codes. **** em. At school and at work. F.u.c.k. them.

 

Rules don't get changed if their stupidity goes unchallenged.

 

It's culturally insensitive and hair has no impact on learning as evidenced by girls hair length. Also, this Super who is enforcing this "racist" policy has had his own run in with the law and no doubt exercised some white privilege with his own son's alleged DUI. Look it up, guys has a shady past oh and East Texas is a haven for backwards, out of touch, insensitive, and downright racist, attitudes.

 

Rules are rules except when the rule is not enforced consistently.

This guys hair was the same length the whole year.

 

I agree. Not only is it a stupid rule if they planned to enforce it they should have from day 1.

 

The thing that gets me the most about this is he's had the hair since the start of high school it's a part of his family culture.

 

I definitely agree that the rule is stupid, especially if it's true that the rule was recently instated this year. The kid should be grandfathered in at worst. I wouldn't say it's a racist policy unless there's evidence that a certain race is targeted. But with a sample size of one, you can't conclude that.

 

Agreed.

 

I would have to get a haircut to conform to their rules .... so would my son.

This is so antiquated .... like 1950 rules. Reminds me of blue laws.

FFS its 2020.

 

There were other kids of other races at the school who were also told to cut their hair.

 

I think there are two approaches to naming racism here, which is the source of disagreement. The first is looking for personal racial animus and is looking for signals of intent to discriminate, and is insensate to unintended side-effects. The second is looking for institutional racism, doesn't care about intent, and is alert for discriminatory outcomes. Another way to couch it is that former looks at potential perpetrators and the latter looks at potential victims. So posters who say rules are rules are just seeing there is no evidence of discriminatory intent. And posters who say the rule itself is racist are seeing how the effect on the Trinidadian is hurtful even if no one intended it.

 

If that's true, then it's even harder to claim the policy is racist or even enforced discriminately. I couldn't find any sources that supported your claim.

Also, after reading the CNN article, the policy has been in place for 30+ years. It's only been an issue for him now. As for why, I can't say. But the student has been aware of the handbook and policy, so he should feel fortunate that he's skated by for so long unnoticed.

The rule itself can be seen as insensitive to certain cultures for imposing the "clean cut conservative" look that these rural communities prefer. Racism claims require stronger evidence in my opinion.

 

I read their dress code .... I couldn't go there , my son couldn't go there .... my daughter couldn't go there.

Stupid people being stupid.

 

Contrary to the rules-are-rules folk, I say an unenforced rule is not a rule at all. If one day the sheriff discovers an old law that makes it illegal to put squirrels down your pants for the purposes of gambling, it'd be capricious to just suddenly start arresting people for it. Or say you turn a blind eye for decades to let 12 million illegal immigrants come into the country because your business community wants the cheap labor, and then turn around and wax indignant that they're here. Or say you only catch red-light runners 0.001% of the time and one day decide to install cameras that will catch all of them. If you're going to have a rule, enforce it all the time. Because if you let it slip, people will start counting on your non-enforcement and you'll have to go and get a mandate from the governed all over again to get it back.

That's fine, just trying to help people understand one another.

 

There are plenty of rules that are subjectively enforced by interpretation or timing. It's due to a lack of enforcers to the general population. Now some rules are antiquated and no longer make sense, but they get challenged. Hair policies in schools are starting to turn around, but they are still fairly common across the nation. Just because he's never been cited for this violation until now doesn't give him a free pass.

 

I went to high school in the seventies (Class of 76) and my sister was three years older (Class on 73). Our school had a dress code that included loosely followed hair and clothing rules (eg, girls could not wear jeans). My sister was the class brain and yearbook editor and was chosen to be valedictorian. Her last day of class. the yearbook class had a fieldtrip /party. So my sister wore a pair of dressy jeans (with fancy embroidery... rare when my family bought anything fancy). She was pulled from class, sent to the office, and sent home (couldn't go on the class fieldtrip).

She completely rewrote her valedictorian speech, changing from the typical "not the end but the beginning" to one focused on personal rights/freedoms and women's rights. The principal must have cringed the whole speech. The school counselor (a young woman) later told her it was the best speech she ever heard.

The next fall they changed the dress code and allowed girls to wear jeans.

 

Good for him, hope the college money keeps flowing in.