Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is dumb and not a real problem. Why don’t State legislators fix real problems and not try to regulate appearance?

Because this is the point. We are talking about this and distracted from the grift and corruption of our elected officials. And the MAGA’s get some red meat in the process. It’s a twofer!

Maga isn't concerned about this, though. The left is promoting it as a victim story.

Maga aren’t concerned with the oppression of black culture? You don’t say!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Supreme Court hasn't ruled if a student's hairstyle is protected speech under the 1st Amendment. This also raises a clear racial discrimination claim. I hope it gets to the Supreme Court, where one Justice wears a dreadlock-adjacent hairstyle, and other Justices claim to be free speech absolutists.

Tinker vs Des Moines seemed to protect political speech. I think they'd have to make the claim that dreadlocks are political. I don't think that claim would be easy to defend, or even the claim that it's ethnic, given how many white people also wear dreadlocks-- it seems like a grooming preference and not an ethnic one.

Given how many whites eat at Chinese restaurants , Indian restaurants, Mexican restaurants, etc., I don’t think Chinese, Indian, and Mexican food/cuisine is ethnic (following your logic).

And btw, I hate to break this to you, but Africa is significantly more conservative than the US and dreadlocks are considered edgy, and often banned at schools.

African Americans are no longer in Africa. AADOS are no longer in Africa through absolutely no choice of their own.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Supreme Court hasn't ruled if a student's hairstyle is protected speech under the 1st Amendment. This also raises a clear racial discrimination claim. I hope it gets to the Supreme Court, where one Justice wears a dreadlock-adjacent hairstyle, and other Justices claim to be free speech absolutists.

Tinker vs Des Moines seemed to protect political speech. I think they'd have to make the claim that dreadlocks are political. I don't think that claim would be easy to defend, or even the claim that it's ethnic, given how many white people also wear dreadlocks-- it seems like a grooming preference and not an ethnic one.

Given how many whites eat at Chinese restaurants , Indian restaurants, Mexican restaurants, etc., I don’t think Chinese, Indian, and Mexican food/cuisine is ethnic (following your logic).

And btw, I hate to break this to you, but Africa is significantly more conservative than the US and dreadlocks are considered edgy, and often banned at schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Supreme Court hasn't ruled if a student's hairstyle is protected speech under the 1st Amendment. This also raises a clear racial discrimination claim. I hope it gets to the Supreme Court, where one Justice wears a dreadlock-adjacent hairstyle, and other Justices claim to be free speech absolutists.

Tinker vs Des Moines seemed to protect political speech. I think they'd have to make the claim that dreadlocks are political. I don't think that claim would be easy to defend, or even the claim that it's ethnic, given how many white people also wear dreadlocks-- it seems like a grooming preference and not an ethnic one.

Given how many whites eat at Chinese restaurants , Indian restaurants, Mexican restaurants, etc., I don’t think Chinese, Indian, and Mexican food/cuisine is ethnic (following your logic).

This isn't a good analogy. Black people eat at those restaurants too. But dreadlocks are a hairstyle, like a braid. They don't have a distinct ethnic origin.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Supreme Court hasn't ruled if a student's hairstyle is protected speech under the 1st Amendment. This also raises a clear racial discrimination claim. I hope it gets to the Supreme Court, where one Justice wears a dreadlock-adjacent hairstyle, and other Justices claim to be free speech absolutists.

Tinker vs Des Moines seemed to protect political speech. I think they'd have to make the claim that dreadlocks are political. I don't think that claim would be easy to defend, or even the claim that it's ethnic, given how many white people also wear dreadlocks-- it seems like a grooming preference and not an ethnic one.

Given how many whites eat at Chinese restaurants , Indian restaurants, Mexican restaurants, etc., I don’t think Chinese, Indian, and Mexican food/cuisine is ethnic (following your logic).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is dumb and not a real problem. Why don’t State legislators fix real problems and not try to regulate appearance?

Because this is the point. We are talking about this and distracted from the grift and corruption of our elected officials. And the MAGA’s get some red meat in the process. It’s a twofer!

Maga isn't concerned about this, though. The left is promoting it as a victim story.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know what the OP was referring to either until this popped up on my news feed. Really Texas?

A Black student’s family sues Texas officials over his suspension for his hairstyle
https://apnews.com/article/e79ede512923b672a275abf054e2407b

I would think this code disproportionately affects non-black students. Generally speaking, black hair is very curly and grows up and out, while people with straight hair have it grow down. You're more likely to have hair grow past eyebrows and ears with straight hair vs very curly hair.

This is not how human beings decide their hairstyles ffs. Your hair is not disproportionately long to the US population because it's straight. God the stupid.

+1

This is a policy to punish Black students.

Here’s the kid’s hair:


So disruptive.

Growing up, my hair was long and wild, even when it had just been brushed. My brother had a regular Afro. My white mother told me in high school that I could go to Europe with her only if I promised to keep my hair “tied up”. Was she “punishing” me?

She's your mother and so she can punish you. She has the power to tell you how you look and act.

A school district is an arm of the government. It is only allowed to limit your freedom in ways necessary to the function of educating students.

If I choose to present myself in a way that’s distracting other students, I’m certainly interfering with other students getting educated.

Anonymous wrote:The Supreme Court hasn't ruled if a student's hairstyle is protected speech under the 1st Amendment. This also raises a clear racial discrimination claim. I hope it gets to the Supreme Court, where one Justice wears a dreadlock-adjacent hairstyle, and other Justices claim to be free speech absolutists.

Tinker vs Des Moines seemed to protect political speech. I think they'd have to make the claim that dreadlocks are political. I don't think that claim would be easy to defend, or even the claim that it's ethnic, given how many white people also wear dreadlocks-- it seems like a grooming preference and not an ethnic one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this going to be a new "cause du jour?"
Why is this in politics and not in the schools forum?

If you don’t know why, then you aren’t intelligent enough to be productive contributor and beneficiary of this sub forum. Just a thought.

I hate when people come on here and say things like this. This is DC Urban Moms. We mostly live in the DMV.

It’s clear what news stations you listen to, because this has been in the news for weeks now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know what the OP was referring to either until this popped up on my news feed. Really Texas?

A Black student’s family sues Texas officials over his suspension for his hairstyle
https://apnews.com/article/e79ede512923b672a275abf054e2407b

I would think this code disproportionately affects non-black students. Generally speaking, black hair is very curly and grows up and out, while people with straight hair have it grow down. You're more likely to have hair grow past eyebrows and ears with straight hair vs very curly hair.

This is not how human beings decide their hairstyles ffs. Your hair is not disproportionately long to the US population because it's straight. God the stupid.

+1

This is a policy to punish Black students.

Here’s the kid’s hair:


So disruptive.

Growing up, my hair was long and wild, even when it had just been brushed. My brother had a regular Afro. My white mother told me in high school that I could go to Europe with her only if I promised to keep my hair “tied up”. Was she “punishing” me?

She's your mother and so she can punish you. She has the power to tell you how you look and act.

A school district is an arm of the government. It is only allowed to limit your freedom in ways necessary to the function of educating students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know what the OP was referring to either until this popped up on my news feed. Really Texas?

A Black student’s family sues Texas officials over his suspension for his hairstyle
https://apnews.com/article/e79ede512923b672a275abf054e2407b

I would think this code disproportionately affects non-black students. Generally speaking, black hair is very curly and grows up and out, while people with straight hair have it grow down. You're more likely to have hair grow past eyebrows and ears with straight hair vs very curly hair.

This is not how human beings decide their hairstyles ffs. Your hair is not disproportionately long to the US population because it's straight. God the stupid.

+1

This is a policy to punish Black students.

Here’s the kid’s hair:


So disruptive.

Growing up, my hair was long and wild, even when it had just been brushed. My brother had a regular Afro. My white mother told me in high school that I could go to Europe with her only if I promised to keep my hair “tied up”. Was she “punishing” me?

Possibly.That you describe your own hair as “wild” is enough to suggest that you might want to ask yourself how — or if — that contributes to your image of yourself.

A more relevant question here, though, would be if any of your teachers or administrators banned you from attending public school because of your hair. Or banned your brother if someone decided that IF his “regular Afro” were straightened, it WOULD be against the district-wide rules, and therefore he would be forced into “alternative” education.

It’s interesting how many people seem fine with school district-wide arbitrary rules about OTHER people’s hair. Same old same old. SMH — and my hair.