685
submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

A Black Texas high school student who was suspended because his loc hairstyle violated the district’s dress code was suspended again upon his return to school Monday, an attorney for the family told CNN.

Darryl George has been suspended for more than two weeks because his loc hairstyle violates the Barbers Hill Independent School District dress and grooming code, according to his family.

The code states that “male students’ hair will not extend, at any time, below the eyebrows or below the ear lobes,” CNN previously reported.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] krayj@sh.itjust.works 43 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Dress code standards for hair and appearance are pretty dumb... but even as they are written in this school district, I don't understand how this kid's hair violates it.

The code says the hair can't extend below the eyebrows or below the ear lobes...and this kid's hair is above his eyebrows and above his ear lobes. I'm looking at the student's front, side, and back photos that are attached to the linked news article. What is the problem?

[-] xkforce@lemmy.world 60 points 1 year ago

The "problem" is hes black and the school wanted to punish him for that. But they dont want to just come out and say it just like they didnt want to show their faces back in the days of the klan.

[-] PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago

The actual dress code written in the article is:

Male students’ hair must not extend below the top of a t-shirt collar or be gathered or worn in a style that would allow the hair to extend below the top of a t-shirt collar, below the eyebrows, or below the ear lobes when let down.

It’s basically “no long hair, regardless of how it is styled.”

[-] Kichae@kbin.social 23 points 1 year ago

Land of the free, home of the "long hair is only for girls".

[-] zzzzz@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 year ago

This view is rooted in 1 Corinthians 11:14-15 "Does not nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace for him, but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering".

I have no point to make beyond pointing that out as trivia.

[-] Kichae@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago

Modern depictions of Jesus in shambles.

[-] Trebach@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

Paul said a lot of things in his letters that only could have possibly made sense in the time and place of the person/city he was writing to. Yet almost 2000 years later, people are still taking it as an absolute truth.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Paul flat out contradicts the Bible at points. Doesn't he say to refuse food to people in your commune if they aren't working?

His sexism doesn't make sense either. There is a very heavy implication in having the women who followed Jesus maintain their faith and belief when even the disciples did not. Maybe it's unintentional, but it very clearly suggests that the women are far more pious and holy. Paul has no business saying they have no dominion over him.

[-] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago
[-] zzzzz@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

Right? I wonder how Paul thought about that?

[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 4 points 1 year ago

More like Racist School District is Racist As Fuck. Texas passed a law making this shit illegal, primarily because of this exact School District!

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago

If you have to tell people how free they are, they're not.

[-] MiltownClowns@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

Not quite. He is not really wearing a style that would allow the hair to extend below the collar, brows, or lobes because he can't just take out his hair style. Its not a pony tail to be removed and distract all the boys like in the movies, its been documented to be in place for at least 8 days. And even if he did his hair could stick straight out or stright up. Seems like the dress code was written for white people hair and instead of using any sort of common sense to not enforce or even just change the code the school is doubling down on murky rules in the national eye. If it walks like a racist, talks like a racist, and deprives black people of an education because of their hair its probably a racist.

[-] Imotali@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

We need to start living by the "see a racist/Nazi, punch a racist/Nazi" standard.

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Common sense would help if it was an oversight. It's not.

[-] Wrench@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

So, no male Sihk students are allowed, unless there's a religious exemption.

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

You think this backwater bunch of racists gives a fuck about religions that aren't their particular flavor of Christian?

[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

below the ear lobes when let down.

You know, I was coming in here to make a joke about how when the article says

male students’ hair will not extend, at any time, below the eyebrows or below the ear lobes

they would say that "any time" also applies when he takes a shower at home, but the code literally says that. Yikes.

[-] ech@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

That's such fucking bullshit. Might as well demand a buzzcut and be done with it.

[-] uuseernaamee@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

As far as I can tell, the "problem" is that the dresscode states that the student's hair can't extend below his eyebrows or ear lobes "at any time". So, hypothetically, if this student took his hair down out of the braids, it would be longer than the dresscode allowed.

This, of course, is fucking stupid reasoning. The school probably just doesn't like this hairstyle - because racism - and is choosing to use an overly literal reading of the rule to try to force the student to change it.

[-] n2burns@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

From the interview, his mother says it's because if he let his hair down it might "extend below the eyebrows or below the ear lobes". I think it's a poorly written policy, because in my interpretation, he would only be in violation if he let his hair down, but he's in compliance as long as he never does that at school. And even then, would for example, an afro violate that? It sounds like they should have included in the policy “male students’ hair will must be no longer than 3" at any point" but again, that's a poorly written policy, waiting for holes to be punched in it.

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago

It's well written for its intended purpose.

[-] CeruleanRuin@lemmings.world 5 points 1 year ago

I'm assuming that his hair was slightly different from when this picture was taken. Not that it matters even a little bit. Codes like this are written for the purpose of giving authorities an excuse to persecute. Wouldn't be surprising if they ignored plenty of violations from "upstanding" (read: white) students.

this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2023
685 points (97.6% liked)

News

23367 readers
1723 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS