Apparently a short mohawk is considered a violation of “proper grooming” and it “interferes with the conduct of education.” Yes, this is what school administrators in Parma, Ohio are wasting their time on.
Michelle Barile, the mother of 6-year-old Bryan Ruda, said nothing in the Parma Community School handbook prohibits the haircut, characterized by closely shaved sides with a strip of prominent hair on top. The school said the hair was a distraction for other students.I’d love to know what other hairstyles qualify as distracting; that has been used in many instances to challenge ethnic/kinky hairstyles that weren’t pressed/relaxed.“I understand they have a dress code. I understand he has a uniform. But this is total discrimination,” she said. “They can’t tell me how I can cut his hair.”
An administrator at the suburban Cleveland charter school first warned Barile last fall that the haircut wasn’t acceptable. The school later sent another warning to her reiterating the ban.
…Rather than request a hearing to appeal the suspension, Barile said she’ll enroll him at another school. Changing the hairstyle is not an option, she said.
36 Responses to “Ohio: six-year-old’s mohawk earns suspension from school”
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Control freaks.
My son had a mohawk in fourth grade. Did the school descend into total chaos? Not that I remember.
~asha
Jesus, I had a pink mohawk for three years while running the circulation department of my library. Never seemed to be a problem.
“My son had a mohawk in fourth grade. Did the school descend into total chaos? Not that I remember.”
“Jesus, I had a pink mohawk for three years while running the circulation department of my library. Never seemed to be a problem.”
…and yet, George Bush, Dick Cheney, 9/11, Iraq, Katrina, etc.
Coincidence? I think not…
This is a sign that Greg Oden is the marker of the coming apocalypse. The former Ohio St. center and #1 draft pick for the Portland Trail Blazers has publicly said that he is voting for Obama and has recently grown a mohawk. I guess mohawks are a sign of endorsing Obama.
I’d be curious to see if this case gets complicated if it goes to court. Usually, the courts find that the student’s freedom of speech is curtailed inside the school, but this is how his mother cuts his hair. How much control does the school have over how the parents dress their child?
No, it’s not, and yes, they can. They can tell her how to dress her child, too. There’s a dress code. Yes, dress codes might be stupid, but she probably should have thought about the stupidity of the dress codes in the first place before enrolling her child there.I’m so embarrassed by my state so often.
Tyro, there’s a big difference between requiring something within school and requiring something that affects a student’s freedom of expression outside of school. A haircut is something that can’t be changed after school or on the weekend.
This is a charter school, right? Not general public and you have to apply to get in?
I’d guess Tyro is absolutely correct, except that dress codes are not especially stupid.
except that dress codes are not especially stupid
Most dress codes are full of women-are-too-distracting bullshit, though. They tend to be all about covering up so that the menz can learn, not about reasonable restrictions.
For example, does it make any different to /anyone/ whether my shirt straps are one or three fingers wide? Honestly?
Except Catholics, of course.
“For example, does it make any different to /anyone/ whether my shirt straps are one or three fingers wide? Honestly?”
Yes. It’s about impressionable adolescent boys.
Straps 3-fingers-wide? Meh…
Straps 1-finger-wide? Sprooiiinnnnggggg!…
:)
I’d say it has an awful lot to do with what it says in the handbook. We had a similar issue in a school where I taught–two sister dyed their hair school colors for a soccer game, and the (flat-out wrong, pulling-rules-out-of-her-ass) head of school decided that was somehow against some rule that wasn’t actually written anywhere. In a small school it was surprisingly huge drama, and both girls felt totally betrayed.
If the school decides it’s a distraction, it’s something that can be changed in the handbook that takes effect for the next school year. When the parents are presented with a contract, the school is under an obligation to disclose all the conditions of the contract.
Granted I was a little older, but I had a similar hairstyle in middle school, and my civics teacher used it to illustrate what sort of freedom of expression is perfectly acceptable inside of a school.
Oh my god MikeEss. That was utterly disgusting. it’s not cute, it’s not funny, and even if it’s true, adolescent boys pop boners looking a linoleum. No one wants to ban *that*, now do they? I have to agree; a lot of dress code issues are sexist.
except that dress codes are not especially stupid
Most dress codes are incredibly fucking stupid, what are you talking about? Not a one exists for any other reason than to keep some whiny pain in the ass from pissing and moaning about something that, in the grand scheme of things, means exactly jack shit or to remind them that are being told what to wear to shut their fucking holes unless they want to feel the back of someone’s hand. And that’s before the stuff Moi mentioned, doing whatever it takes so’s teenage boys and middle-aged male teachers, fer instance, don’t spring a boner because they see a little teenaged thigh.
Just to reiterate the point: this is a charter school, so its administration is separate from that of the rest of the school district; this is school-based asshattery, not imposed by the district administrators.
Not to excuse it or to claim that there aren’t actual public districts that engage in this manner of foolishness. But in this case it’s a point against the school, not all the “administrators in Parma, Ohio.”
This kind of reminds me of when I was back in sixth grade at a regular public school. I kind of developed a bit early (I had C cups at age 12) and I wore a tank top to school in the summer like all the other girls, the shirt was no different than what they were allowed to wear. As soon as I walked in I got dragged off to the principle’s office and made to wear a big baggy shirt being told I’d be “too much of a distraction for the boys.”
Who gets distracted by something that trivial enough to be detrimental? Seriously.
And, if you find it something so objectionable (like, say, a Mohawk) and you have enough self discipline to ignore and focus on, iunno, your schoolwork, think you’ll turn out for the worse? Hell no. You would have learned this thing called maturity and how to prioritize. (Which is more important: passing Algebra or freaking out about how short this girl’s skirt is?)
Seriously, I get so much crap from my high school about things like this. You know what I do when I see a person in something “objectionable” in the middle of class? Nothing. I am there to learn things. Do they really think that kids are like “OMG I canut wrk n0w that i c thiz distracting haircut/ shirt/ etc.”
Give us some fucking credit, America.
PS And for the whole guys-wearing-pants-too-far-down, It’s annoying, yes. But nothing to freak out about. When they trip and fall on their nose, they’ll learn to wear a belt. Just chill.*
*Not directed to the viewers of Pandagon.
Man, one of the only reasons that I would want a child is so I could give it a fro-hawk and dress it up in wild clothing. *kicks rocks*
You’d think that after a couple thousand years of civilization we would have learned that nothing stops a teenager (boy or girl) from thinking about sex, so ridiculous dress codes don’t do much except make it easier for administrators to pick on students.
If you’re going to have a strict dress code, go all the way and have uniforms. If you want your students to have a specific hairstyle, write that into the handbook. No back-and-forth over tiny degrees of what is and isn’t acceptable that lets administrators power-trip the students.
I went to a private school with a fairly strict dress code and a kid there had a mohawk. He wet it down during the school days so it just looked like he had very close cropped hair on the sides, and longer slicked back hair on top. Outside of school he wore it up.
Not a big deal at all.
nevermind dress codes being absofuckinlutely stupid — they also promote and ENFORCE racism, sexism, classism, homophobia, etc. and also prepares children for allowing their fucking minds and consciences shrivel as adults.
no-one has ever given me a rational reason as to why dress codes would make sense that did not directly have to do with classism (usually), racism, sexism, or whatever else.
it would be a little nice to show support for the grossly underpaid and under appreciated teachers and administrators who staff our public schools.
If the handbook and/or code of conduct bans hair or clothing styles that are disruptive to the educational process, those bans can and should be enforced.
American children have a right to a free public education; however there is not a constitutionally protected right for children to be sporting mohawks.
The SCOTUS has consistently upheld dress codes requiring public school children to wear uniforms (not just conform to a dress code) and there has been indicia that schools with uniforms have less disciplinary problems, and have higher academic achievement.
moreover, it seems silly to claim that the first amendment freedoms that are so fundamental to our society were put in place to protect childrens’ rights to wear ‘non traditional’ hairstyles
it would be a little nice to show support for the grossly underpaid and under appreciated teachers and administrators who staff our public schools.
If the handbook and/or code of conduct bans hair or clothing styles that are disruptive to the educational process, those bans can and should be enforced.
American children have a right to a free public education; however there is not a constitutionally protected right for children to be sporting mohawks.
The SCOTUS has consistently upheld dress codes requiring public school children to wear uniforms (not just conform to a dress code) and there has been indicia that schools with uniforms have less disciplinary problems, and have higher academic achievement.
moreover, it seems silly to claim that the first amendment freedoms that are so fundamental to our society were put in place to protect childrens’ rights to wear ‘non traditional’ hairstyles
Ah, yes, dress codes that tell girls they can’t have perfectly decent shirts or show a little leg because MALES will have sexual reactions to them. It’s never too early to start training women to be ashamed of their bodies and to blame themselves when they are the victims of sexual harassment or sexual assault.
Heaven forbid it become etiquette to ignore the involuntary reactions of the male organ but expect men to control themselves when it comes to actual behavior.
No, let’s keep forbidding chesty girls (who are often robust in other ways and really can’t stand to overdress in the heat) tank tops and other sleeveless shirts. Let’s keep active gals from wearing practical shorts and instead make them vulnerable in skirts too long for ease running.
If we stop making the victims of sex crimes responsible for stopping them, we might, oh no! bring on an era of feminism. /snark
On the contrary, dress codes do serve a purpose. They give schools a good level of cover-your-own ass plausible deniability, useful for avoiding culpability when students are bullied, harassed and assaulted for instance. Any of you with school-age children and access to a handbook of the rules and regulations for their school should easily be able to find the weasel words and phrases they use that can cover practically anything they want to stop students from wearing/saying/doing. It also allows them to identify “problem” students; namely the ones who don’t like to conform or blindly obey instructions from authority.
Notice I didn’t say it was a legitimate or noble purpose.
My son’s middle school has a moderately strict dress code. They wear polos of limited colors and have a few different color choices for pants/shorts/skirts. Of course the shorts and skirts can’t be too short and I would imagine that all hell would break loose if a guy tried to wear a skirt …
My loves it, though. He is an engineer in training, or at least inherited the engineer fashion gene. He loves being able to just throw on something in the morning and know that he won’t be a misfit because of his clothes.
All of you against dress codes, just remember us engineers, we need the boring dress codes;-)
Amanda,
I’ve seen that argument also used by courts: that a hairstyle/color is too trivial to invoke freedom of expression protection.
However, consider that another issue involved is a child’s right to an education. If suspension is involved, then that is removing them from their education. Surely the standard required for removing a child from their education (even temporarily) should be high, shouldn’t it? Shouldn’t it require demonstration that their behavior/expression actually is severely disruptive to others’ education?
So my question is, if a hairstyle is too trivial for freedom of expression protection, why is it significant enough to warrant violation of a student’s right to their education?
I can see uniforms or limited-palatte being a good thing; it cuts out the designer-label arms race that can be an annoyance to the unfashionable or a serious financial burden to the family. But the situation where a hairstyle - ANY hairstyle - can be a sufficient distraction to merit suspension is simply beyond me. Maybe a Winehouse-sized beehive which blocks kids’ view…otherwise, what the hell??
This administrator is unable to feel in control if certain standards are not met, including stupid aesthetic standards. And is willing to punish others for his/her inability. In other words, a BAD administrator.
The mother is smart - don’t bother to try to fight the school; get the kid out of there, pronto. There will be other stupidities perpetrated at that school & no point in waiting around to see how stupid it can get.
Dress codes at our public school district are there to provide a proper learning environment. Strippers are not conducive to teenage learning. Hot pants have a very distracting effect. Rude T-shirts are less than helpful. Mohawks, feh, only at charter schools
And the “Authority Uber Alles” crowd has spoken: “Shut up and get back to being good little slaves.”
Well, let’s all go home, then, there’s nothing more we can do here.
How about dreads? The filthy unwashed hair with the stench? Skinheads anyone? We try to keep the disturbances to a minimum. Kids are distractable anyway. Goofy hair is usually not a problem. But the board reserves the right to remove it.
Public schools are there for you. Get involved. Make changes. See what the taxes are used for. You may be surprised.
Our district only has questions about gang-banger hairstyles. We don’t have them here and really don’t need them. We have enough with the white-supremicist wanna-bes.
keep your rules off my body, anyone?
oh wait i forgot feminism only applies in theory. @_@
My 7-year-old had a fauxhawk this winter. His teachers told him they liked it.
“Most dress codes are full of women-are-too-distracting bullshit, though.”
Haha, yep. What’s funny is that they only enforce that if the girl isn’t hot or is a fatass like myself.
And yes, dress codes are completely fuckin’ asinine, unless you’re a mind-control obsessed jesus freak/Republican. Dress codes are one step away from fascism.