NationStates Jolt Archive

When I was a kid, there was a rule about male hair length, but it was never that your hair was too short (http://www.590klbj.com/News/Story.aspx?ID=68139). How times have changed, I suppose.

7th grader Derek Jackson says he is back in his normal classes today following his placement in in-school-suspension for having a haircut that was too short; something the school says was both a violation of the school dress-code and a distraction.

Derek's mother, Amanda, says she met with Bailey Middle School Principal Dr. Julia Fletcher, and Dr. Fletcher told her that the issue was "not worth the fight".

Here's the dastardly haircut in question.
http://www.590klbj.com/EI/T/Pics/Channels/KLBJ-AM/haircut.jpg

Now, unless there's something like the words "Kill Whitey" carved into the back of the haircut and we just don't see it, I don't see what the problem is with this haircut, and certainly don't see how it warrants an in-school suspension.

...too short? How is that against the rules?
Hell, why is too long against the school rules?

Holy crap...the savage (An assistant principal with a penchant for quasi-fascist dress code enforcement) would have loved the male students to have hair cuts like that when I was in high school.

I don't get the point...

and why do we guys have to keep our hair short anyway?

kids used to get a week's suspension if they got their hair cut less than a #2 on the clippers at my school. and at my primary school kids would be sent home to wash their hair if they put gel or wax in it. there was one particular purge at my school involving brown leather shoelaces (the kind you used to get on Kickers). they were very popular but the deputy-head took offence to them and confiscated them off everyone at the end of the day one time. he got a bit of bother about that one.

Hell, why is too long against the school rules?

Many schools want to instill a "professional" attitude amongst their students, and in the professional sector, long hair on men is considered somewhat unprofessional, as are tattoos and excessive piercings.

surely Kansas wins this award every day?

why do we guys have to keep our hair short anyway?

its handy if you get into a fight/have lice/come into close with aircraft, why schools would find that useful however is beyond me

its handy if you get into a fight/have lice/come into close with aircraft, why schools would find that useful however is beyond me
And of course, why this would be worthy of an in-school suspension still boggles me. Certainly can't accuse this kid of being a skinhead, after all.

Many schools want to instill a "professional" attitude amongst their students, and in the professional sector, long hair on men is considered somewhat unprofessional, as are tattoos and excessive piercings.

Meh, I'm just a kid. I'll have long hair till I get a job, then I'll get it cut.

Certainly can't accuse this kid of being a skinhead, after all.

these are teachers, odds are they equate it to being in the black panthers or something *has flashback to when I had to shave my blue Mohawk off* :mad:

I wonder what kind of punishment a cancer kid would get?


As to the article; racially motivated?

Hey, why not just shave the administrator's head?

I wonder what kind of punishment a cancer kid would get?

quite allot of time off school one would hope :p

That hair style is disruptive is it? Seems rather to be one that should get barely a glance. I wouldn't be surprised at all if this is in fact a racial thing.

I wonder what kind of punishment a cancer kid would get?


As to the article; racially motivated?

A couple of commenters at the blog where I found the story are from the area, and say racism is a major problem at the school in question. My guess is that there's more to that side of the story than the news piece got into.

That hair style is disruptive is it? Seems rather to be one that should get barely a glance. I wouldn't be surprised at all if this is in fact a racial thing.

I imagine this is just another example of a "zero tolerance" rule gone awry. And I don't think it's a racial thing as you might think it is.

Perhaps the rule was actually enacted to prevent "skin heads"?

I imagine this is just another example of a "zero tolerance" rule gone awry. And I don't think it's a racial thing as you might think it is.

Perhaps the rule was actually enacted to prevent "skin heads"?

That's what I'm thinking. Schools have never seemed to realize that the whole Zero Tolerance thing just doesn't work so well in practice.

Wow, there's actually morons out there that have rules on how long/short your hair can be? Nice...what's next? You have to have a certain color of eyes or it's a violation? You can only breathe a certain amount of times or you're violating a rule?

*takes three breaths of air*
Oh nooooo! I broke a rule <.<

When I was a kid, there was a rule about male hair length, but it was never that your hair was too short (http://www.590klbj.com/News/Story.aspx?ID=68139). How times have changed, I suppose.


Here's the dastardly haircut in question.
http://www.590klbj.com/EI/T/Pics/Channels/KLBJ-AM/haircut.jpg

Now, unless there's something like the words "Kill Whitey" carved into the back of the haircut and we just don't see it, I don't see what the problem is with this haircut, and certainly don't see how it warrants an in-school suspension.

Looks like a good haircut to me.

For those of you with young boys, in summer a short haircut is a good idea.

I imagine this is just another example of a "zero tolerance" rule gone awry. And I don't think it's a racial thing as you might think it is.

Perhaps the rule was actually enacted to prevent "skin heads"?

Anything is possible but his hair isn't even that short to begin with. Zero tolerance is being twisted into something stupid beyond imagination with the very real possibility of racism. Certainly no one at the high school I went to would have cared about this foolishness.

My bet is the kid is a little punk and the hair issue was simply a way to put a leash on him if you will. If you read the article, you will find that this kid has had run ins with the school in the past as well. So I doubt this is simply an issue just over the hair.

Of course, we now have the National Association for the Advancement of Corrupt People involved who as usual has turned this into a race issue because to the race pimps as the NAACP--everything that involves a black person is a race issue.

Damn hippy teachers! :p

My bet is the kid is a little punk and the hair issue was simply a way to put a leash on him if you will. If you read the article, you will find that this kid has had run ins with the school in the past as well. So I doubt this is simply an issue just over the hair.

Of course, we now have the National Association for the Advancement of Corrupt People involved who as usual has turned this into a race issue because to the race pimps as the NAACP--everything that involves a black person is a race issue.

You know what? You had me at least following what you were saying, right up till your second paragraph.

Next time, leave out the wacko conspiricy like stuff. It would make your arguments a easier to discuss.

Anything is possible but his hair isn't even that short to begin with. Zero tolerance is being twisted into something stupid beyond imagination with the very real possibility of racism. Certainly no one at the high school I went to would have cared about this foolishness.

Racism huh? So school administrators there believe--in your view--that blacks are inherently inferior? Or maybe instead we have a little punk that needs to be taken down a few notches.

You know what? You had me at least following what you were saying, right up till your second paragraph.

Next time, leave out the wacko conspiricy like stuff. It would make your arguments a easier to discuss.

There is nothing in the second paragraph that is a wacko conspiracy. The NAACP is as usual making this into a race issue which is their usual tactic.

There is nothing in the second paragraph that is a wacko conspiracy. The NAACP is as usual making this into a race issue which is their usual tactic.

considering they are a group that wishes to address racial issues that is hardly surprising. it is in their mandate to investigate the possibility of racial motivations in situations like this. just because they are conducting an investigation does not mean that they necessarily believe that race was a motivating factor in the suspension.

Racism huh? So school administrators there believe--in your view--that blacks are inherently inferior? Or maybe instead we have a little punk that needs to be taken down a few notches.

I wouldn't be surprised if they thought they were protecting the students from some kind of gang thing. As if the haircut proves such an affiliation. It is hard to come up with another explanation as that haircut is anything but "disruptive".

Racism huh? So school administrators there believe--in your view--that blacks are inherently inferior? Or maybe instead we have a little punk that needs to be taken down a few notches.

If he's such a punk, I'm sure that he could have been suspended on something besides a haircut. The way it's phrased in the article, the principal may have a history of similar disproportionate punishment that may indicate racism.

It is hard to come up with another explanation as that haircut is anything but "disruptive".
I don't know, looking at the picture I am experiencing a certain desire to stroke his nearly-bare head. It looks so bristly . . . and inviting.

I don't get the point...

and why do we guys have to keep our hair short anyway?

We're lazy and long hair takes more care and more fuss.

That is offensive? :eek:

I don't know, looking at the picture I am experiencing a certain desire to stroke his nearly-bare head. It looks so bristly . . . and inviting.

I would admit that without that hair to cushion, my knuckles could wreck havoc should I wish to give him a noogie. :D

I would admit that without that hair to cushion, my knuckles could wreck havoc should I wish to give him a noogie. :D
You see? He needs to be quarantined from the rest of student body, not to protect them from him, but to protect him from the flock of lunatics that would descend upon him in an instant.
It would be like Dawn of the Dead, only much more perplexing.

We're lazy and long hair takes more care and more fuss.
Agreed.

(Which reminds me to get a haircut... to save on shampoo and grooming time.)

I imagine this is just another example of a "zero tolerance" rule gone awry. And I don't think it's a racial thing as you might think it is.

Perhaps the rule was actually enacted to prevent "skin heads"?

It seems that the school systems are using the "zero tolerance" so they do not have to make a decision. One perfect example in the US is the elementary school girl that saw a classmate having problems breathing, and let her use her asthma inhaler. She was suspended under the "zero tolerance" because she passed drugs to another student.

My oldest son was being bullied in the elementary school, and we had filed multiple complaints with the pricipal. We finally told the principal that our son is a red belt in Tae Kwon Do, and that if that kid touched him, our son had our permission to use his skills to defend himself. We were then told that our son would be suspended, because they have a zero tolerance against fighting. We pointed to the principal that the system has a zero tolerance against bullying, but that kid is still in the school, and, if anything happened, we were going to file juvenile petitions against the other kid for assaulting our son. Of course, the threat of having the sheriff involved took care of the situation.

Judging from the quotes given by the NAACP member leading the investigation, their investigation into possible racism sounds more like an accusation of outright racism. I'm not sure I trust them anymore than I trust the administrator.

Guys...this isn't that complicated.

The handbook holds the dress code. Under the dress code, he can't shave his head. He signed that he read the handbook and included dress code (I assume this, or he would have had many more issues). He is therefore responsibile for every rule in there.

He shaved his head.

He broke the dress code, and earned his punishment.

If the handbook said that the punishment for shaving your head is an ISS, then he gets ISS. And the courts will always back a school and their handbook.


This isn't racist, it isn't "zero tolerance" (which isn't even close to being applicable here...zero tolerance has nothing to do with dress code). It was a student breaking a rule and being punished.

I'd post but I'm too distracted by that boy's mesmerizing pate.

It seems that the school systems are using the "zero tolerance" so they do not have to make a decision. One perfect example in the US is the elementary school girl that saw a classmate having problems breathing, and let her use her asthma inhaler. She was suspended under the "zero tolerance" because she passed drugs to another student.Idiot. NEVER use some one elses medication. EVER.
The school isn't the idiot, the little girl is. You don't share perscription medicine

My oldest son was being bullied in the elementary school, and we had filed multiple complaints with the pricipal. We finally told the principal that our son is a red belt in Tae Kwon Do, and that if that kid touched him, our son had our permission to use his skills to defend himself. Your permission doesn't mean shit on school property.
We were then told that our son would be suspended, because they have a zero tolerance against fighting. We pointed to the principal that the system has a zero tolerance against bullying, but that kid is still in the school, and, if anything happened, we were going to file juvenile petitions against the other kid for assaulting our son. Of course, the threat of having the sheriff involved took care of the situation. You still have to work within the system. Just because you say "you can beat the shit out of him" doesn't make it true. Same in the real world. Someone can curse him out, he still can't attack.

Guys...this isn't that complicated.

The handbook holds the dress code. Under the dress code, he can't shave his head. He signed that he read the handbook and included dress code (I assume this, or he would have had many more issues). He is therefore responsibile for every rule in there.

He shaved his head.

He broke the dress code, and earned his punishment.

If the handbook said that the punishment for shaving your head is an ISS, then he gets ISS. And the courts will always back a school and their handbook.


This isn't racist, it isn't "zero tolerance" (which isn't even close to being applicable here...zero tolerance has nothing to do with dress code). It was a student breaking a rule and being punished.

And yet the NAACP saw fit to get involved anyway...

Nothing good can come of this, I see the smoke of another idiotic racism firestorm brewing on the horizon.

And yet the NAACP saw fit to get involved anyway...

Nothing good can come of this, I see the smoke of another idiotic racism firestorm brewing on the horizon.

they won't win. Courts have ALWAYS upheld school handbooks. They aren't about to break that now for one group saying "OMG RACIZT!!1!"

they won't win. Courts have ALWAYS upheld school handbooks. They aren't about to break that now for one group saying "OMG RACIZT!!1!"

I hope you're right.

I hope you're right.
there hasn't been a single court case that has gone against a school as long as the rule is in the handbook. To do so would strip schools of their authority

they won't win. Courts have ALWAYS upheld school handbooks. They aren't about to break that now for one group saying "OMG RACIZT!!1!"

As long as the ruling includes that they are upholding their policy even if it is among the stupidest policies they have ever seen.

As long as the ruling includes that they are upholding their policy even if it is among the stupidest policies they have ever seen.

They usually don't even speak about the policy. It isn't their place to.

The school created the policy for a reason. Maybe you don't know the full story behind it and it isn't that stupid. Or maybe it is. *shrug*

As long as the ruling includes that they are upholding their policy even if it is among the stupidest policies they have ever seen.

I don't see it as any more idiotic than school uniforms, really.

quite allot of time off school one would hope :p

a - - - - - - - - - - - - - - lot

I don't see it as any more idiotic than school uniforms, really.

I don't agree with uniforms either but I can understand the position that kids wearing certain outfits can be "distracting" and that since a school is a place of learning that they can limit such distractions. How a buzz cut equals this in any way mystifies me. On the idiocy scale I'd have to say this case outranks school uniforms.

Guys...this isn't that complicated.

The handbook holds the dress code. Under the dress code, he can't shave his head. He signed that he read the handbook and included dress code (I assume this, or he would have had many more issues). He is therefore responsibile for every rule in there.

He shaved his head.

He broke the dress code, and earned his punishment.

If the handbook said that the punishment for shaving your head is an ISS, then he gets ISS. And the courts will always back a school and their handbook.


That's all well and nice but, seriously, what school necessity is served by restricting students from shaving their heads? Also note that, while the policy is not outright racist, black male students are probably much more likely to want to shave their heads than any other students.

Idiot. NEVER use some one elses medication. EVER.
The school isn't the idiot, the little girl is. You don't share perscription medicine

Actually, if the case being referred to is the one I've read about, it was a boy sharing his inhaler with his girlfriend. She had left hers at home, but both students were aware that they both used albuterol for their asthma (and that you'd have to take a great deal of it for it to be a danger).

That's all well and nice but, seriously, what school necessity is served by restricting students from shaving their heads? Also note that, while the policy is not outright racist, black male students are probably much more likely to want to shave their heads than any other students.aside from skin heads.
What reason do schools ban any number of things? Slap bracelets in the 90's, livestrong bracelets, pokemon cards...they all seem innocent, but provide distraction.



Actually, if the case being referred to is the one I've read about, it was a boy sharing his inhaler with his girlfriend. She had left hers at home, but both students were aware that they both used albuterol for their asthma (and that you'd have to take a great deal of it for it to be a danger).he said elementary school. And even then, it isn't a good practice to get into the habit of doing and is still illegal...not just by school policy, but by federal drug law too. The school nurse is required to have an extra inhaler for all students for such a situation. Go to the nurse and get it. If you can't make it that far, you are way past the point where albuterol will help.

I don't agree with uniforms either but I can understand the position that kids wearing certain outfits can be "distracting" and that since a school is a place of learning that they can limit such distractions. How a buzz cut equals this in any way mystifies me. On the idiocy scale I'd have to say this case outranks school uniforms.

On my end both a shaved head and something like, say, blue hair both cry "look at me!" and are, therefore, distracting. That's just me, though.

That's all well and nice but, seriously, what school necessity is served by restricting students from shaving their heads? Also note that, while the policy is not outright racist, black male students are probably much more likely to want to shave their heads than any other students.

Still doesn't make the policy wrong. Extremely idiotic, yes, but well within their rights to rule and enforce.

On my end both a shaved head and something like, say, blue hair both cry "look at me!" and are, therefore, distracting. That's just me, though.


There is a HUGE difference between the length of your hair, and the colors of it. Yes, coloring hair can be a huge distraction, depending on what colors you use for your hair. Not to mention, the styles it can be in. (spike, mohawk, etc...)

But yeah, someone shaved their head.. Big flipping deal! People shave their heads everyday, why the hell make a rule on how short/long you can have it?

There is a HUGE difference between the length of your hair, and the colors of it. Yes, coloring hair can be a huge distraction, depending on what colors you use for your hair. Not to mention, the styles it can be in. (spike, mohawk, etc...)

But yeah, someone shaved their head.. Big flipping deal! People shave their heads everyday, why the hell make a rule on how short/long you can have it?

Because when someone does it solely to attract attention, it becomes a disruption, regardless of whether they dyed their hair or shaved it all.

That's the caveat, some kids do it solely to get attention.

Because when someone does it solely to attract attention, it becomes a disruption, regardless of whether they dyed their hair or shaved it all.

That's the caveat, some kids do it solely to get attention.

Well, in the case of someone like Britney Spears, then yes, it's definitely easy to see that it's a cry for attention. However, that doesn't mean that there should be a rule against it. The rules aren't supposed to be there to stamp out cries for attention...that's what school councilers are for. The rules are supposed to be there if in some reason, it poses as a danger to yourself or someone else...or, like the no cleavage rule, it's deemed inappropriate. Now how is a shaved head inappropriate?

When I was a kid, there was a rule about male hair length, but it was never that your hair was too short (http://www.590klbj.com/News/Story.aspx?ID=68139). How times have changed, I suppose.


Here's the dastardly haircut in question.
http://www.590klbj.com/EI/T/Pics/Channels/KLBJ-AM/haircut.jpg

Now, unless there's something like the words "Kill Whitey" carved into the back of the haircut and we just don't see it, I don't see what the problem is with this haircut, and certainly don't see how it warrants an in-school suspension.
There's _got_ to be more to this story. Please tell me that's so. When I wrestled in high school, we all cut our hair like this. So did the swimmers. It's hardly distracting.

Well, in the case of someone like Britney Spears, then yes, it's definitely easy to see that it's a cry for attention. However, that doesn't mean that there should be a rule against it. The rules aren't supposed to be there to stamp out cries for attention...that's what school councilers are for. The rules are supposed to be there if in some reason, it poses as a danger to yourself or someone else...or, like the no cleavage rule, it's deemed inappropriate. Now how is a shaved head inappropriate?

They're also in place to promote a healthy learning environment, which means eliminating distractions.

They're also in place to promote a healthy learning environment, which means eliminating distractions.

that doesn't mean throwing out all of these rules that SOME people might consider cries for attention. Like I said, there IS a reason councilers are there. If it's felt that it's a cry for attention, THEY should be doing their job and talking to the person. Stamping out rules doesn't help that healthy environment, because then you're condemning people just because of a look they went for. It's better to talk to them and get an understanding instead of condemning them for it by giving him ISS or suspension.

Extremely idiotic, yes, but well within their rights to rule and enforce.
is it idiotic?
Does anyone here know why the rule was put into place? Maybe, just maybe, there is good reason for it.

maybe not, but I'd rather know what I'm talking about before calling it stupid.

that doesn't mean throwing out all of these rules that SOME people might consider cries for attention. Like I said, there IS a reason councilers are there. If it's felt that it's a cry for attention, THEY should be doing their job and talking to the person. Stamping out rules doesn't help that healthy environment, because then you're condemning people just because of a look they went for. It's better to talk to them and get an understanding instead of condemning them for it by giving him ISS or suspension.

And I fully agree, but it still doesn't change the fact that a school would be fully within its rights to do just that.

And I fully agree, but it still doesn't change the fact that a school would be fully within its rights to do just that.

I don't disagree either. If it was clearly a rule in their system that HE signed saying he knew of it...then this is his problem, not the school's. So yes, they were in their rights. I'm just saying it isn't right they have a rule like that in the first place. But if students agree to it by signing a contract or whatever, there's not a damn thing that can be done.

The appropriate punishment for such stupidity is having his head shaved. And wear a shirt that says "skinhead" at all times.

aside from skin heads.

....who will likely provide other reasons to punish them.

What reason do schools ban any number of things? Slap bracelets in the 90's, livestrong bracelets, pokemon cards...they all seem innocent, but provide distraction.

Are you seriously comparing a very, very common haircut to toys? Yes, slap bracelets, pokemon cards, etc. can provide a distraction. But having a very common haircut - especially among the black community - won't provide any more distraction than any student getting a new haircut unless the administrators make a big deal out it.

he said elementary school. And even then, it isn't a good practice to get into the habit of doing and is still illegal...not just by school policy, but by federal drug law too. The school nurse is required to have an extra inhaler for all students for such a situation. Go to the nurse and get it. If you can't make it that far, you are way past the point where albuterol will help.

In the case that I was reading, the school nurse didn't have any such thing and was trying to get the student just to relax because her attack would then go away (according to the nurse).

That's the point, though. This was a special case - a very specific case - in which it was pretty clear that the student did nothing wrong. But because of "no tolerance" policies that make everything into a slippery slope argument, the student was punished.

So, what, is he suspended until his hair grows back, or what?

They're also in place to promote a healthy learning environment, which means eliminating distractions.
Sounds like this is an extension of a 'no extremes' kind of rule. If the boys (maybe girls too) really had a pair, they'd all show up with shaved heads.

There's _got_ to be more to this story. Please tell me that's so. When I wrestled in high school, we all cut our hair like this. So did the swimmers. It's hardly distracting.

I agree, but so far no one else has provided any more context. Sarkhaan made some claims about the school dress code, but didn't back it up.

I would say a lame joke. But some people might view it as slightly racist.

I don't get the point...

and why do we guys have to keep our hair short anyway?

Didn't you read the Bible?:

Amendment XI: Thou shalt not rip off my son's hairstyle.

....who will likely provide other reasons to punish them.Even if they do nothing else on school grounds, the shaven head of a skin head can provide significant distraction to those students who would be, for lack of a better word, targets.

Would it be better for the school to say "Whites can't shave their heads", or "No student can shave their head"?

And even then, the school doesn't particularly have to justify its policies to the world, or even really to the students. Those are the policies as they stand. If a student has an issue, they have a few options: Break the rule and get punished, or try to actually change it. I don't necessarily agree with the rule, but then, I don't have to. The school acted appropriatly by punishing the boy for breaking a rule dictated in the dress code.



Are you seriously comparing a very, very common haircut to toys? Yes, slap bracelets, pokemon cards, etc. can provide a distraction. But having a very common haircut - especially among the black community - won't provide any more distraction than any student getting a new haircut unless the administrators make a big deal out it.
A very common haircut, a very common accessory, a very common toy. Livestrong bracelets display cancer awareness and the like. They can still be a distraction.

Perhaps it did create a distraction, as I stated with the skin head argument. There aren't always alternative methods to ensure that students don't feel intimidated.


In the case that I was reading, the school nurse didn't have any such thing and was trying to get the student just to relax because her attack would then go away (according to the nurse). Failure of the nurse, and an issue to look at. That doesn't make it a good idea to share drugs. Dosages differ, strength of the drug, etc.

That's the point, though. This was a special case - a very specific case - in which it was pretty clear that the student did nothing wrong. But because of "no tolerance" policies that make everything into a slippery slope argument, the student was punished.
Personally? I wouldn't have punished it. Legally, the school was not outside their rights. It may sound stupid, but schools don't always have all of these facts to go off of the moment a decision has to be made. All they see is one student using anothers inhaler.
I agree, but so far no one else has provided any more context. Sarkhaan made some claims about the school dress code, but didn't back it up.

7th grader Derek Jackson says he is back in his normal classes today following his placement in in-school-suspension for having a haircut that was too short; something the school says was both a violation of the school dress-code and a distraction.

Damn this is just plain stupid. Reminds me of my old teacher who personally accompanied a student to get his hair cut...:p

Heh, not the first time it's happened and I doubt it'll be the last. When I was in primary school (probably about 8/9 years old at the time) a kid got suspended for the same thing. Wasn't supposed to be allowed back until his hair grew but a lot of parents kicked up a fuss and they let him come back. He wasn't someone who was often in trouble, just a stupid rule that apparently none of us knew about.

Heh, not the first time it's happened and I doubt it'll be the last. When I was in primary school (probably about 8/9 years old at the time) a kid got suspended for the same thing. Wasn't supposed to be allowed back until his hair grew but a lot of parents kicked up a fuss and they let him come back. He wasn't someone who was often in trouble, just a stupid rule that apparently none of us knew about.

They don't throw rules that you don't know about. You're always given some kind of contract or something to that degree that gives you the rules, and by signing it (or even acknowledging that they're even there), you agree to the fact that YES, the rule is there, and you're going to abide by it or face the consequence.

Also, if you're not sure, ask. It doesn't take much effort to go up to an administrative official and go "Is shaving your head against the dress code?" If they think you're not being serious, then show them the article.

Heh, not the first time it's happened and I doubt it'll be the last. When I was in primary school (probably about 8/9 years old at the time) a kid got suspended for the same thing. Wasn't supposed to be allowed back until his hair grew but a lot of parents kicked up a fuss and they let him come back. He wasn't someone who was often in trouble, just a stupid rule that apparently none of us knew about.
You know that first day of school when they give you the handbook, and then a slip of paper stating that you read it?

Yeah. the rule is in there. Along with every other enforcable school policy. If students don't know about the rule, it is their own fault. The school has, on record, a signed statement that every student has read the policies of the school (and yes, if you refuse to sign it, they do not have to allow you into school.)

7th grader Derek Jackson says he is back in his normal classes today following his placement in in-school-suspension for having a haircut that was too short; something the school says was both a violation of the school dress-code and a distraction.
Let's see, how can I tell this is bullshit.

http://www.590klbj.com/EI/T/Pics/Channels/KLBJ-AM/haircut.jpg

HE'S BLACK! Black males either have some level of fro (including cornrows), or hair of a length fraction of an inch or less.

They don't throw rules that you don't know about. You're always given some kind of contract or something to that degree that gives you the rules, and by signing it (or even acknowledging that they're even there), you agree to the fact that YES, the rule is there, and you're going to abide by it or face the consequence.

Also, if you're not sure, ask. It doesn't take much effort to go up to an administrative official and go "Is shaving your head against the dress code?" If they think you're not being serious, then show them the article.
In case you didn't notice...I was 8 at the time. I didn't sign anything when I started the school...I was four and a half...I could barely even spell my own name.

You know that first day of school when they give you the handbook, and then a slip of paper stating that you read it?
Nope. I was too young to read that many words. All I was given on the first day of school was a "Roger Red Hat" book :p

I wish people would read my posts before they reply :(

When I was a kid, there was a rule about male hair length, but it was never that your hair was too short (http://www.590klbj.com/News/Story.aspx?ID=68139). How times have changed, I suppose.


Here's the dastardly haircut in question.
http://www.590klbj.com/EI/T/Pics/Channels/KLBJ-AM/haircut.jpg

Now, unless there's something like the words "Kill Whitey" carved into the back of the haircut and we just don't see it, I don't see what the problem is with this haircut, and certainly don't see how it warrants an in-school suspension.

That's just crazy.

In case you didn't notice...I was 8 at the time. I didn't sign anything when I started the school...I was four and a half...I could barely even spell my own name.


Nope. I was too young to read that many words. All I was given on the first day of school was a "Roger Red Hat" book :p

I wish people would read my posts before they reply :(

In which case the book went home with you and your parents signed it stating that they read it and would monitor you to make sure you followed it.

concept is the same.

In which case the book went home with you and your parents signed it stating that they read it and would monitor you to make sure you followed it.

concept is the same.
My Mum informs me that the kids have never been sent home with rules to be signed. *shrugs* Perhaps it's different in UK?

Either way, new rules were introduced all the time when the headteacher saw someone breaking something he decided should be a rule.

When I was a kid, there was a rule about male hair length, but it was never that your hair was too short (http://www.590klbj.com/News/Story.aspx?ID=68139). How times have changed, I suppose.


Here's the dastardly haircut in question.
http://www.590klbj.com/EI/T/Pics/Channels/KLBJ-AM/haircut.jpg

Now, unless there's something like the words "Kill Whitey" carved into the back of the haircut and we just don't see it, I don't see what the problem is with this haircut, and certainly don't see how it warrants an in-school suspension.

:headbang:

And people wonder why the education of this country sucks. This is nuts and warrents a thread of this type.

My Mum informs me that the kids have never been sent home with rules to be signed. *shrugs* Perhaps it's different in UK?

Either way, new rules were introduced all the time when the headteacher saw someone breaking something he decided should be a rule.
aaaaaaaahh.....you're in the UK...okay

I know nothing of the UK system...my bad.

In US schools, rules in the handbook are non-negotiable. They override any laws that may be in place, and judges will find in favor of them.

Rules can be instituted during the year, and will often be upheld (citing respecting administrators authority), but those new rules will be widely publicised (they are generally in direct response to something that happened or has been happening, such as a ban on a new toy or the like)

aaaaaaaahh.....you're in the UK...okay

I know nothing of the UK system...my bad.

In US schools, rules in the handbook are non-negotiable. They override any laws that may be in place, and judges will find in favor of them.

Rules can be instituted during the year, and will often be upheld (citing respecting administrators authority), but those new rules will be widely publicised (they are generally in direct response to something that happened or has been happening, such as a ban on a new toy or the like)
*points at "location"* ;) (yeah I'm up late, I see the confusion :p)

I don't remember many rules being that publicised - they were only mentioned when they were broken. Plus, the headteacher seemed to make a lot of on-the-spot decisions about rules (and he was a scary bastard so none of the kids dared argue back). The lad who shaved his hair had no idea he'd done anything wrong, neither did his parents. They just wanted to have to go to the hairdresser less often :P What good would suspending a child of 8 years old do? The whole thing was just stupid.

*points at "location"* ;) (yeah I'm up late, I see the confusion :p)

I don't remember many rules being that publicised - they were only mentioned when they were broken. Plus, the headteacher seemed to make a lot of on-the-spot decisions about rules (and he was a scary bastard so none of the kids dared argue back). The lad who shaved his hair had no idea he'd done anything wrong, neither did his parents. They just wanted to have to go to the hairdresser less often :P What good would suspending a child of 8 years old do? The whole thing was just stupid.

I'm appearently having a night of extreme inability to read...:(

I'm appearently having a night of extreme inability to read...:(

.. and you're majoring in English?

.. and you're majoring in English?

I'm on my one week break between spring and summer semesters. Cut me some slack!

I'm on my one week break between spring and summer semesters. Cut me some slack!

At least you got a break. My fiance didn't get one :(

I'm on my one week break between spring and summer semesters. Cut me some slack!

Dad isn't paying for your education just so you can be an idiot on breaks! I'm telling him what you're up to!

And quite frankly, I wonder how this "Too short for school" School would handle your mohawk. The hair you do have is longer that the boy's in this situation..

At least you got a break. My fiance didn't get one :(
she has my sympathy.
Dad isn't paying for your education just so you can be an idiot on breaks! I'm telling him what you're up to!*locks ruffy in closet*

And quite frankly, I wonder how this "Too short for school" School would handle your mohawk. The hair you do have is longer that the boy's in this situation..
Well, no mohawk right now. I'm not so sure my boss would appreciate it. Although, one of my coworkers does have blue hair...hmm.....

*locks ruffy in closet*

*sets carpet on fire*
Well, no mohawk right now. I'm not so sure my boss would appreciate it. Although, one of my coworkers does have blue hair...hmm.....

I'll get the scissors.