• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should schools have the authority to dictate student's hair styles?

Should schools have the authority to dictate student's hair styles?


  • Total voters
    59
Hair styles are a form or self expression. The courts have ruled time and time again that public schools are not necessarily free speech zones and that students do not have unlimited freedom of self expression.

In short, if the self expression is disruptive, it can and should be regulated. It does not matter if it is hair styles, speech, T-shirts, distributing leaflets etc.

Yes. Now, explain to me a boy having long hair is disruptive and how this bull**** falls anywhere within the school's lawful mandate to educate children.
 
Should schools have the authority to dictate student's hair styles?

Public schools.

When I went to school there was a range of acceptable hair styling. Schools didn't mind young people expressing themselves but they thought extremes were disruptive to the system as a whole. It puts too much focus on styles and fads, rather than the purpose of education.

They sort of left that option of what was unacceptable up to the Dean or Principle. If I remember, no hat's or outlandish clips in class, unnatural hair coloring, girls with half head shaved (Mohawks) and boys had to pony tail it up when in Shop classes and Phys Ed for safety purposes.
 
I keep seeing people say it's ok to disallow "disruptive" hair styles, but no one seems to be able to give an example of what "disruptive" is.
Large enough to block the view of other students?

But they could just sit in the back then.


A giant Mohawk with steel spikes on the tips of the hair? Maybe. But only if they try to harm other students with it. And that might fall under some "no weapons/knives" rule or whatever.
 
Yes. Now, explain to me a boy having long hair is disruptive and how this bull**** falls anywhere within the school's lawful mandate to educate children.
Sigh, Its really pretty simple

It depends on the hair, the student and the local situation. Basically, I am not in a position to second guess the teachers as to what is, or is not disruptive in a local school.

If the teachers on site- you know the ones who are actually there, say the hairstyle was disruptive, then it works for me. If they say it was not disruptive, then that works for me as well. .
 
If the teachers on site- you know the ones who are actually there, say the hairstyle was disruptive, then it works for me. If they say it was not disruptive, then that works for me as well. .

Hm. You do know that teachers are people, too, right? Teachers, who are human, have bias just like other people. To give them that much power? No. They should teach my student, not tell him that his hair is disruptive.
 
Yes.


So long as taxpayer money is paying for the school, the school should legally be able to dictate if a haircut is unacceptable or a distraction, potential violence starter because that is a public entity and falls under very strict legal settings and codes.
 
Last edited:
If it's distracting or vulgar yes.
crazy-hair-8.jpg

crazy-hairstyles-27.jpg
 
Hm. You do know that teachers are people, too, right? Teachers, who are human, have bias just like other people.

Yes, humans- even progressive humans, have biasis. But, that is life and I need to accept it.

I have not liked every decision made by all the teachers that I have been in contact with. This goes double for the union teachers in California whose selection of class reading assignments seemed to always promote progressive themes, including their union.

But, I am also not willing to issue blanket bans regarding how teachers keep discipline in their classrooms. If I want to micromanage how discipline is maintained in the classrooms of my children or select the reading assignments, I need to be a teacher. I have not done that.

Instead, I aknowledge the professionalism of the teachers and accept the reading assignments, even if I would not have picked them. Likewise, if a teacher or school district says green mowhawks are disruptive, I dont try to second guess them. If they say they are OK, then I acccept that there will be green mowhawks at the school, and that this wont impact my children.
 
Having taught public school for 33 years - my policy was to always place the emphasis on what is IN a students head rather than what is ON it.
 
School rules beyond compliance with laws are based on community standards, aren't they? If a policy needs to be changed, concerns should be addressed to the school board by parents, students, and the school's reps. And whatever those policies are should be followed unless they need to be clarified or changed again.
 
School rules beyond compliance with laws are based on community standards, aren't they? If a policy needs to be changed, concerns should be addressed to the school board by parents, students, and the school's reps. And whatever those policies are should be followed unless they need to be clarified or changed again.

I'm pretty sure the point is that this shouldn't be the case just because a student is in school. It should be based on whether or not a hair style is distracting from learning, not on what the community wants the children to look like. That isn't the community's place. That violates a child's freedom, especially if the parent has no issue with the child's hairstyle and it is not dangerous. For school, it should also not be offensive or distracting because that would detract from learning. But the standards for these must be from a reasonable person viewpoint, not simply "well that doesn't look right so it would distract me".
 
Yes.


So long as taxpayer money is paying for the school, the school should legally be able to dictate if a haircut is unacceptable or a distraction, potential violence starter because that is a public entity and falls under very strict legal settings and codes.
Student's parents pay taxes, too. Back to square one.
 
I'm pretty sure the point is that this shouldn't be the case just because a student is in school. It should be based on whether or not a hair style is distracting from learning, not on what the community wants the children to look like. That isn't the community's place. That violates a child's freedom, especially if the parent has no issue with the child's hairstyle and it is not dangerous. For school, it should also not be offensive or distracting because that would detract from learning. But the standards for these must be from a reasonable person viewpoint, not simply "well that doesn't look right so it would distract me".

The school is part of the community, and the community pays for the school. The same children who attend the school are residents of the community, and it's their parents, grandparents, and neighbors who financially support it (as well as support it in other ways). The reasonable parents, teachers, and administrators should meet with the school board to hammer out policies that they can agree are acceptable...understanding, of course, that no matter what the rules are, there will always be somebody who challenges them.
 
And good grief, hasn't anybody commenting here been active in the PTA/PTO and etc.?
 
Should schools have the authority to dictate student's hair styles?

Public schools.

As a rule: the more an authority tries to control legal behavior, the more unconventional behavior becomes in a free society. Why push the boundaries if no one will care?
 
The school is part of the community, and the community pays for the school. The same children who attend the school are residents of the community, and it's their parents, grandparents, and neighbors who financially support it (as well as support it in other ways). The reasonable parents, teachers, and administrators should meet with the school board to hammer out policies that they can agree are acceptable...understanding, of course, that no matter what the rules are, there will always be somebody who challenges them.

Which doesn't have anything to do with whether the children have a right to wear their hair a certain way. The community has no right for instance to say that boys cannot have long hair or that girls cannot shave their heads just because the community feels these things are unacceptable within their community.
 
Student's parents pay taxes, too. Back to square one.


That is entirely irrelevant legally speaking. A public school falls under very strict Federal and State legal proceedings that dictate very clearly that the school has and very much requires to function absolute authoritative ability to dictate student appearance for safety reasons if nothing else.



What the idiotic parents think about such policies is entirely irrelevant. Have you met most parents? God forbid they have any say over much anything at a public school policy wise.
 
That is entirely irrelevant legally speaking. A public school falls under very strict Federal and State legal proceedings that dictate very clearly that the school has and very much requires to function absolute authoritative ability to dictate student appearance for safety reasons if nothing else.

Tell me how hot pink hair is a safety issue. Or a Mohawk.
 
Tell me how hot pink hair is a safety issue. Or a Mohawk.

a mohawk could jab someone in the eye.. :mrgreen:

To answer the OP: no, schools should not have the authority to dictate student's hair styles. Schools and government(s) seem to be attempting to replace parenting. That could lead to a dangerous and unfortunate precedent. Society needs better parents, not less parenting.
 
Tell me how hot pink hair is a safety issue. Or a Mohawk.



In many schools in America, if you come in with hot pink hair you can expect to be going to the hospital with perhaps a few broken ribs later that day.



Many posts in this thread are exactly indicative of why you need strong Federally mandated policy in public schools. The idea that all parents are good is simply not true. Many of the parents are not good parents or point in fact aren't even parents, they're guardians of said children. Some are openly criminals that barely parent at all. People in this thread are basing their views on a very rigid, middle to upper class preconception of how all parents "ought to be". The reality is far different. Simply a great thread to demonstrate how truly terrifyingly dangerous and irrational the general populace is in respect to their on the ground knowledge of how something like pink hair and or a haircut could possibly create violence. People literally have no idea.
 
In many schools in America, if you come in with hot pink hair you can expect to be going to the hospital with perhaps a few broken ribs later that day.



Many posts in this thread are exactly indicative of why you need strong Federally mandated policy in public schools. The idea that all parents are good is simply not true. Many of the parents are not good parents or point in fact aren't even parents, they're guardians of said children. Some are openly criminals that barely parent at all. People in this thread are basing their views on a very rigid, middle to upper class preconception of how all parents "ought to be". The reality is far different. Simply a great thread to demonstrate how truly terrifyingly dangerous and irrational the general populace is in respect to their on the ground knowledge of how something like pink hair and or a haircut could possibly create violence. People literally have no idea.

:lol: Dude. Do you even have kids in school? Kids have had pink hair since the 80s. This is nothing new, and I can't imagine someone with pink hair getting beat up. I have to think that maybe you don't have kids, or might live in one tiny little corner of Kansas that this might actually happen.

And bad parenting? Been around since, shoot, Adam and Eve. I mean, Cain slew Abel. :shrug: You kind of **** up as a parent if one sibling kills the other. So just stop with all the hyperbole. Unless you think that a Federally mandated government might have saved Abel.

You are always going to have bad kids. But hair color or style has absolutely nothing to do with that. I'm pretty sure Cain didn't have pink hair, after all, and he was a murderer.
 
In many schools in America, if you come in with hot pink hair you can expect to be going to the hospital with perhaps a few broken ribs later that day.

Many posts in this thread are exactly indicative of why you need strong Federally mandated policy in public schools. The idea that all parents are good is simply not true. Many of the parents are not good parents or point in fact aren't even parents, they're guardians of said children. Some are openly criminals that barely parent at all. People in this thread are basing their views on a very rigid, middle to upper class preconception of how all parents "ought to be". The reality is far different. Simply a great thread to demonstrate how truly terrifyingly dangerous and irrational the general populace is in respect to their on the ground knowledge of how something like pink hair and or a haircut could possibly create violence. People literally have no idea.

Where in the heck do you live in America? That hasn't been true in a while. In fact, it would be very bad and a huge deal if a student ended up in the hospital for having pink hair in school, no matter who put them there. Even male students aren't likely to end up with broken bones just for having pink hair.
 
Should schools have the authority to dictate student's hair styles?

Public schools.

You have to have some standards otherwise you invite all kinds of disease.
 
Back
Top Bottom