Hair!

A Hairy Issue - I thought we were beyond this.

I thought this sort of thing was out of the dark ages of modern western civilization. A 5-year-old kindergarten student was apparently punished for his family's religious beliefs¹. In Needville Texas the Needville Independent School District (NISD) have forced an American Indian kindergarten student into "isolated In-School Suspension"¹. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Texas is saying it is for the student practising his family's religious beliefs and heritage -- and indeed it is -- but it centres around the school dress code and the young boy wanting to keep the long hair that is a part of his American Indian Heritage.

(image to right from American Civil Liberties Union of Texas)

The boy's -- AA² -- Father is of American Indian heritage and follows American Indian religious beliefs and he and his son belive that one's hair should only be cut for "life-changing-occasions, such as the death of a loved one."¹ believing that hair is a sacred symbol of their own lives. The boy's hair has never been cut.

The School District has a dress code which requires boys to have short hair and their response to a successful appeal that the NISD can not force the boy to cut his hair is that he keep it in a single tight braid tucked out of sight down the back of his shirt at all times. He must also re-prove his religious sincerity to NISD officials every school year.

The parents requested exemption from that area of the dress code over 8 months before school and it wasn't until a week before school that it was granted after appealing the initial denial.

I gather that "Independant School District" does not mean the school is a private one or religious one but the normal public school for the area. I might understand that a school that is a religious institution might have some restrictions, but this seems out of place in our day-and-age.

Perhaps it is because I come from a generation when hair length was at the heart of things. When I was in kindergarten many of the boys had brush cuts and others had different short styles. But it was also the time when the Beatles became popular and long hair was made famous or infamous by the "Hippies". Gradually long hair became more and more acceptable and by the time I reached Grade 7 and Junior High School they had changed dress codes to allow for much that wasn't allowed the year before. But this was 1971. That was the first year that jeans were allowed in our school -- of course not any jeans with "rivets". Girls still were not allowed to wear pants in school which was awkward in -30º - -40ºF weather with girls changing in the halls.

But boys by the time I reached grade 12 sometimes had hair that was a foot or more long! That was in 1975-76 when I graduated. I guess there weren't the problems with gangs and such... I have heard that they are trying to combat hairstyle as a distraction in the school system.

(image to left of 6-year-old with Mohawk from USATODAY.com)

Distraction at least is what they are claiming in the case of a boy in Parma, Ohio shown here. The Principal of the school, "Linda Geyer" says that the boy's hairdo was "disrupting the educational program."³There is a school uniform at that school and the boy wears it, but they have given him a third infraction of the school dress code and suspended him from his kindergarten class.

In this case it is a matter of freedom of expression rather than religious freedom, but for some I think they would be very similar. In USATODAY,com there is an article pointing out yet anothr case of a 7-year-old sporting a "Mohawk" -- "a 3-inch spike of hair running down the middle of his scalp."⁴

In another article -- again from USATODAY.com⁵ -- where they describe coveralls for students breaking the dress code to wear, they have a link to the Dress Code for "Gonzales Independent School District"⁶.

Tuesday, 15 July 2008
GONZALES DRESS CODE
The District’s dress code is established to teach grooming and hygiene, prevent disruption, and minimize safety hazards. The district prohibits pictures, emblems, or writings on clothing that are lewd, offensive, vulgar, obscene, that advertise tobacco products, alcoholic beverages of any kind, drugs, or any other substance prohibited under school policy. It prohibits any dress or grooming that, in the principal’s judgment, may reasonably be expected to interfere with normal school operations. The dress code applies anytime a student is on campus during a normal school day and anytime a student is involved in an event or extra-curricular activity that represents Gonzales ISD. Co-Curricular and extra-curricular uniforms will be specified by the sponsors of organizations and approved to meet GISD Standard of Excellency by the campus Principal. Violations of the dress code; see student code of conduct for consequences. Students and parents may determine a student’s personal dress and grooming standards, provided that they comply with the following:
1. No student on school property or at any school activity shall wear, possess, use, distribute, display or sell any clothing, jewelry, emblem, badge, symbols, sign or other things, which are evidence of membership or affiliation in any gang.
2. Hair must be neat and clean. Boys’ hair must not extend below the bottom of the collar of a dress shirt, below the bottom of the ear, or over the eyes.
3. Any hairstyle, which by its appearance causes a disruption of any kind, as determined by a school administrator, is unacceptable.
4. Males must be clean-shaven if facial hair is noticeable. Sideburns cannot extend below the bottom of the ear.
5. Shorts, skorts, dresses, and skirts should be to the knee and appropriate for the school setting. Decency when sitting shall be a prime factor in determining appropriateness for the school setting.
6. Miniskirts, leggins, tight shorts, tights, cut-offs, wind shorts and biker shorts may not be worn; including jean shorts that are tight and rolled up.
7. All shirts will have a collar and sleeves. All shirts will be free of words and/or pictures and may have a logo of not larger than a 2 inch square. NO t-shirts are allowed except for Gonzales Apache spirit shirts which may be worn any day of the week. All shirts worn by males must be tucked in. Shirts worn by females must be tucked in if they are longer than the bottom of the hip.
8. All clothing that shows undergarments is unacceptable, including clothing with conspicuously low necklines and/or low backs.
9. Sagging pants (pants worn below the waist) will not be allowed. Belts will be worn in grades 5-12 for all male students. Pants must be hemmed and not frayed. Nylon, athletic, or wind pants are not acceptable. Boxer or spandex shorts are not acceptable as outer wear and must not be visible.
10. Oversized clothing or coats may not be worn. Sweaters, sweat shirts, and jackets must not fall below the back pockets.
11. Clothing such as undergarments, muscle shirts, halter-tops, cropped shirts, tank tops, spaghetti straps, and clothing that shows a bare midriff or cleavage are not acceptable.
12. Students shall not be permitted to wear hats, caps, sunglasses, sweatbands, or other disrupting apparel in any building on campus during school hours.
13. Garments that have spikes (bracelets, necklaces, belts, etc.) are not permitted.
14. Males may not wear earrings. Females may wear earrings. No other body piercing jewelry of any kind will be accepted.
15. Bare feet and metal taps are not acceptable.
16. Cleats may not be worn in any school building. Shoes with built-in skates or wheels (Healies) are not permitted in any building unless the wheels have been removed.
17. Clothing that displays violence, obscenity, tobacco products, alcoholic beverages, drugs, or any other substance prohibited under policy FNCF (L), is prohibited.
18. Any other attire that disrupts the educational process as determined by a school administrator is prohibited.
19. The school, advisor, or sponsor of any specific activity or function may impose additional guidelines.
20. Additional dress code guidelines are required by S.A.F.E. They may be obtained from the campus principal.
21. Inappropriate tattoos will be covered at all times as determined by school administrator.
22. House shoes, distracting, or unsafe shower shoes (beach type) will not be allowed.
23. No cargo pants allowed.

Perhaps much is understandable and most would agree is reasonable -- though of course coming from a T-shirt and jeans generation... some seems excessive. I would have problems with my own personal T-shirts and cargo pants that I wear and probably the track pants I wear normally while I am losing weight and my waist is changing so much. I have a few pair of pants with belt loops...

I can only imagine what they would do with groups such as the devout Sikh or people of other religious groups who have set religious rules about dress and hair that do not fit this set of rules. I guess they would feel these people belong in separate schools? Perhaps even in their own separate parts of the city or town so as not to disrupt things?

I don't know... I look at the picture of the boy's Mohawk, and I did have a better picture of the boy with the braided Native American hair, and if this is disruptive to the educational program... those must be very poor programs. There had better not be anything controversial in any newspaper the children might read or newscast they might see.

Later!
~ Darrell

144

¹ "ACLU Sues School District For Punishing Kindergarten Student Because of Family's Religious Beliefs" Posted Oct 2, 2008 (updated Oct 9, 2008) American Civil Liberties Union of Texas.

² AA will be used to identify the boy in this article.

³ "School suspends kindergarten student over Mohawk haircut" Posted by Mike Carney, (Photo by Peggy Turbett, The Plain Dealer via AP) February 27, 2008; ON DEADLINE -- USATODAY.com.

⁴ "FLA. school boots little boy over Mohawk haircut" Posted by Mike Carney April 24, 2008; ON DEADLINE -- USA TODAY.com.

⁵ "School district will force dress-code violators to wear blue jumpsuits" Posted by Mike Carney July 30, 2008; ON DEADLINE -- USATODAY.com.

⁶ "Gonzales Independent School District -- Dress Code 2008-2009" 15 July 2008; Gonsales Independent School District.

Tunnel Vision - Even Blinder

In a Hoodie -- Tunnel Vision -- Hiding in a Mobile Cave

You see them all over, mostly worn by young people, though often too by people who are acting young or at least acting like they have little responsibility. The hooded sweatshirt is a very functional garment which can keep you cozy on a coolish evening or dampish day. The hood could be worn up or down and could be worn over other clothes or under them for a very functional layered outfit.

Working you can peel off a layer at a time while you get hot through strenuous work and then don again when you stop and start to cool down. I think they are great to wear under rain gear and I see many workers with the hoods up under their hardhats. The Hoodie¹ can be practical. (image to right - image from Wikipedia)¹

But... I see so many young people on warm clear days wearing them with the hoods up. I am fairly sure it isn't to protect from the UV light from the Sun for they wear the hoods indoors in malls as well... I wonder if they wear the hoods up in class too?

Perhaps the hoods might be keeping the wearer warm, but I gather for a large part it is a matter of being at least slightly incognito.

Perhaps not all who wear hoodies are hoods looking for trouble, but a lot of people looking for trouble like the hoodie and baseball cap combination to hide their identity from security cameras and witnesses if they are doing not so legal things -- like: shop lifting, "tagging", trespassing, loitering, lighting illegal fireworks, and many other things.

Three and a half years ago a shopping centre in Kent in the UK "outlawed" "hooded tops" along with baseball caps and swearing at  Bluewater shopping centre.² They had a zero-tolerance approach. The ban was not appreciated of course by some and applauded by others such as Tony Blair and John Prescott.

(image of young people in hooded sweatshirts with baseball caps from BBC News)²

I'm not sure about the banning of apparel like that. For the most part kids are just following their roll models. When I went from Elementary School to Junior High School (from grade 6 into grade 7 -- 12-years-old to 13-years-old) there was something new... a dress code. In public school in Alberta we don't have uniforms, but there were some regulations in Jr High. One of the things I remember was that there was a ban on jeans! Well actually the year I started Jr High they relaxed things and they allowed jeans as long as they didn't have rivets. That was a relief because almost all my pants were actually work pants that were jeans. They were green, but they were jeans.

Now they said the issue was with the rivets hurting the desks, but I didn't quite buy that. Another rule was that girls were not allowed to wear pants (slacks) in school. That didn't directly effect me except I found it a bit embarrassing in winter. That was because nearly all the girls would be switching out of the pants they had worn through the snow and  subzero temperature on the way to school in the hallways in front of the lockers. Thirteen-year-old boys could be easily embarrassed. The rules seem very silly now...

Now the rules tend to be more towards modesty and keeping the clothes modestly decent.

I think that I could understand rules about wearing hoods and hats in school... but I am old school and when I was young it was considered improper for men to wear hats indoors so it still feels odd for me to wear a hat indoors.

Still... I look at the people wearing the hoods and it seems a bit like those glasses that are so popular that I wrote about recently in "The Gnomestead Stump: Blinders - To See or Not to See"³. The hoods like those glasses with the wide temples cut down the peripheral vision so that a person can mostly only see what is straight forward. (image to right - image from iOffer)

Like I said there -- perhaps some people just need a way to focus on the world in front of them, like the "...sidewalk ahead with fewer distractions. just like the draft horses of the past..."³

Later!
~ Darrell

140

__________
¹ "Hoodie" Wikipedia

² "Mall bans shoppers' hooded tops" May 14, 2005 BBC News - South East news: Week in review

³ "Blinders - To See or Not to See" Darrell Wade Penner Sept 6, 2008 The Gnomestead Stump.

Thunder in the Distance - It wasn't Zeus on Mt Olympus

Freedoms of Expressions Clash at Official Start of Olympic Spirit Train

It was mostly cloud Sunday afternoon -- September 21st, 2008 -- and though the Sun only showed occasionally, it wasn't rainy and it was very pleasantly warm for the assemblage who turned out for the launch of the "Olympic Spirit Train"¹. (image to left of 2010 Winter Olympic Locomotive -- image from Canadian Pacific) I didn't go to the event at the Port Moody West Coast Express Station, but I sure ended up experiencing it²

I was a bit buried in some work -- I have other projects on the go -- and hadn't realized that the Olympic Spirit Train was launching from just blocks away from The Gnomestead.³ I began to hear the sound of "tom toms" in the distance and at first thought the Air Cadet band had come to practise at the local schoolyard. The music continued and got louder and I realized that it must be coming from some sort of celebration which I figured was at the local Rocky Point Park -- they have an outdoor stage there. The music started to expand to include other cultures than Aboriginal American and was okay in the background and I sort of enjoyed the ethnic diversity we have here. But then I heard a different sort of chant and drum. That chanting and ranting that we have begun to hear again and again with all sorts of gathering where protesters have gathered -- whatever the protest or statement being made.

(Spirit Train Landscape -- Image from Canadian Pacific)

I must admit that the forms the chants take became boring to me years ago regardless of the words they put to them, but I recognize that the pattern and chanting helps to unify the protesters into a cohesive group. That is something important -- especially if you expect opposition of some sort.

I couldn't make out the words, but with the music sounding like there was some sort of "cultural mosaic" celebration I could only guess that the celebration was being protested by "Right-To-Life" people or perhaps it was a group protesting for or against gay rights. They seem to use the same sounding chants.

The chants being loud enough for me to hear from blocks away -- between 3 and 6 depending on where the event was -- became very annoying. Isn't it interesting how sound can be more annoying depending on content? Music you like at one volume in the distance is okay but music or chanting you don't like is annoying. The volume of the music began to increase too. It started to actually be louder than the music I had playing at the Gnomestead so I had to shut my windows for the remainder of the afternoon.

(Protest banners blocking CP Spirit Train Stage - image to right from No2010.com)⁷.

I found out later, on the 5-o'clock news, that it was the Olympic 'Spirit Train' send off celebration and that there was a fracas there with Anti 2010 Olympic protesters trying to interrupt the proceedings.

The protesters were protesting the Olympic Games' impact on the environment, the homeless, and on aboriginal rights.² There were around 3 dozen protesters.² Police arrested two people in connection with the protest. PM Police Sgt Phil Reid said he experted the protesters would be charged with assault.⁴ From the reports they say that the protesters where shouting "Homes, not Games!"⁴ and shouting down the scheduled entertainment for more than an hour. The performers turned up the volume but were unable to proceed.⁴

According to one of the protester's shouts:

The Province⁴

"I think the idea is to make some f---in' noise here," shouted Garth Mullins, a fixture at anti-Olympic protests. "They're trying to drown us out, so let's drown them out."

(image to left taken by Dawn Paley of protesters from The Dominion)⁸

The protesters positioned two large banners so it was difficult for the audience to see the show and tempers flared when spectators tried to see the entertainment despite the banners and protesters. Colin Hansen, BC minister responsible for the Olympics; federal minister James Moore and four other guest speakers cancelled their speeches.⁴ One of the acts which was interfered with that was performing on stage was an aboriginal band. Cree musician Dallas Arcand sang and beat on a drum while his music was drowned out by screaming and banging on pots by the protesters.⁵

The protest did move from in front of the stage to the Canadian Pacific corporate tent next to a table where families were collecting autographed postcards.⁴ Eventually the protesters moved on to the Port Moody police station where the arrested protesters had been taken. The Globe and Mail⁶ reported 40 protesters were present.⁶  The Dominion's Dawn Paley⁸ puts the number of protesters at 50 while the No2010.com website places the number at up to 75 protesters. With the Canadian Press estimate of around 36 and from what it looked like on TV I would personally say that the number was between 36 and 50.

(image to right taken by Dawn Paley of protesters being arrested from The Dominion)⁸

There are a number of different sides to the whole episode. There is the side of the Olympic promoters and the people who were putting on the whole send off for the Olympic Spirit Train. There is the side of the Protesters who very much want their message to be heard on the injustices they see being done to the homeless or those who might become homeless and the aboriginal people, and the damage that they see being done to the environment. There is the side of the politician who does not want to see discord in the community. There is the side of the police who are there to keep the peace and the law... hopefully the two coincide. There is the side of the public who have come to be entertained at a family event and celebration open to the public. There is the side of the entertainers who are their to express themselves in their art. There is the side of the people in the neighbourhood who expect to live in a peaceful community and the businesses in the neighbourhood who expect the same.

It is not peaceful to sit at my desk in my room and listen to this protest war. The argument with the volume control over who can be loudest is not confined to those for or against the Olympics. While the protesters were heard to say that the protests did not bother or scare their children that they brought -- their children were brought to the event expecting to be taking part in their parent's protest. The children at the event were there with their parents expecting to be entertained at a show and they were -- from what I saw on camera and what parents and reporters said -- scared, afraid, or at least bothered by what was going on.

(No 2010 banner from no2010.com)

Perhaps the protesters nearly outnumbered the spectators? (Gord hill speaking on behalf of the "Olympics Resistance Network")⁸ Perhaps the police presence was too much with three separate police contingents? Regardless, there was too much something.

The event was attended by uniformed and undercover officers from:⁸ the Canadian Pacific Police Service, the Port Moody Police Department, and the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority Police Service. The Dominion Paper⁸ also reported a large group of private security guards from Vancouver 2010 Integrated Security. While I am not sure of numbers, I do note that the train is on CP property and their train and thus responsibility of their CP Police Service; the venue for the event being the Port Moody West Coast Express Station Park and Ride lot means that Translink is also responsible and thus the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority Police Service; and the whole station is in the City of Port Moody so it is fairly obvious that the Port Moody Police Department be there.

(image to left, Spirit Train - image from Canadian Pacific)

I am sure that a quiet protest at the entrance to the event with the banners and placards would have announced to everyone the issue without problem. But I am also sure that there was a desire for confrontation that would be enough to make news headlines and national television news coverage on the part of protesters. It was pointed out that a number of the faces among the protesters are regulars at many different sorts of protests and seem to be keys in organizing them. I recognize the faces without them being pointed out.

I do believe in freedom of expression -- which I believe is a part of freedom of speech -- but I think that there is a problem where what people are considering a "freedom of expression" is instead infringing on other's freedom of expression, and on other's rights to peacefully appreciate that freedom of expression.

People do have a right to peacefully protest and make their voice heard -- but stretching things just a slight bit farther to illustrate a point -- would they have the right to disrupt a movie in a theatre or a show on stage to make their point?

(image to right of Vancouver 2010 Mascot Wallpaper from Vancouver 2010)

I agree with some of the points of the protesters, but not the protest. I agree that there are also many benefits that come with hosting the Olympics as well. I do think that we could be getting greater benefit from the games and we could be creating fewer problems with them as well. But I don't think the protesters are helping with the way they are protesting.

I think that the protesters of the games lost much credibility before with some of their protests -- I think they may have lost a lot of support with their "demonstration" on the 21st.

Later!
~ Darrell

139

__________
¹ "Vancouver 2010 Mascots Sumi, Quatchi and Miga join the CP Spirit Train Experience" Breanne Geigel Sept 8, 2008; Canada Pacific

² "Departure of Olympic 'Spirit Train' met with protesters in B.C." Sep 21, 2008; The Canadian Press

³ If you hadn't gathered, "The Gnomestead" is the location from which I write and live.

⁴ "Protest mars Olympics fun" Ian Austin Sept 22, 2008; The Province

⁵ "Spirit Train spreads Games excitement" Allison Cross Sept 21, 2008; The Vancouver Sun

⁶ "Olympic spirit train makes debut in B.C." In Brief Sept 22, 2008; The Globe and Mail

⁷ "Banners Blocking CP Spirit Train Stage" No 2010 Olympics on Stolen Native Land -- Resist The 2010 Corporate Circus no2010.com

⁸ "Protesters Disrupt "Spirit Train" Sendoff" Dawn Paley Sept 21, 2008; The Dominion Paper.

My Speech is Freer than Your Speech!

Does One Person's Right to Speak Supersede Another's Right to Hear?

I do believe in the right to free speech, though I am not American and my rights come from different roots than the American Constitution. Still I have started wondering at the expression of the right to be heard as used by some groups in our society.

I might disagree with some policies put forward by government or by crown corporations. I might dislike fare increases by public transit. On the other hand, I might agree with some of them. I do know that when I go to a public hearing to hear what the politicians and other groups have to say, I want to actually hear what they have to say and watch their presentation. I want to know what the various politicians have to say and what the assorted boards which are making policy are up to. I want to see their arguments to defend their positions.

But, now at civic meetings and such I see protesters coming in as organized hecklers -- shouting over the speakers and everyone else with every intent to disrupt the meeting it seems. It seems for the simple reason that they disagree and they want their message to be heard. They are asserting their right to free speech... but I think perhaps this is not what is meant by freedom of speech.

I think that the protesters have every right to speak out and every right to protest, but I somehow think there is something wrong with their preventing others from speaking out whether board member or simple citizen.

I am seeing more and more of this sort of thing. There are too many times when the protests are outshouting the presentation and I do not think the fault is that of the organizers for not providing louder sound systems. I am sure that protesting voices are heard even if at organized protests. We are allowed to do that here. There are other places where they don't have the freedom to organize a protest event.

I might not agree with what someone is saying at a presentation, but I do agree they have the right to say it -- say it and be heard.

Later!
~ Darrell

123.