Anti-"Distraction" Dress Codes
An eighth-grader was taken out of class Tuesday because of her hair coloring, KMBC-TV in Kansas City reported.
An administrator at Bueker Middle School said the girl's red highlights were distracting to other students.
But it goes on.
"Doing this is taking away from people's individuality," student Kristen McCorkle said.
The 14-year-old, who is a straight-A student, said the school's assistant principal told her she had to go to in-school suspension and that she would be there until her hair is fixed.
"I didn't think that any of this would happen," the eighth-grader said.
She said she understands that some hairstyles can be distracting, but she doesn't think hers is.
"Like colors that are totally out of the norm, blue, or green, or purple. But I think red is more normal and I don't think that many people would disagree with me," she said.
So, "individuality" is really only important when it's expressed through "normal" colors, Ms. McCorkle?
Okay, so I'm picking on a kid again. `
But seriously, this kind of thing is so dumb. I don't think uniforms are a bad idea as long as they are school-funded. In fact, I kind of think they're a good idea, though I never went to the kind of school that had them, because then no one gets made fun of because they don't have the hot new (expensive) hip clothes.
The problem is that most public schools won't go with a uniform because of the horror it strikes in teenagers, but prefer instead to go with a dress code that is based on making sure no one is ever "distracted". What's defined as distracting is anything that veers off the well-worn path of white middle-class "respectability".
I think I've blogged about this before, but my high school would send girls home for wearing those "distracting" tank tops when it was 85+ degrees!
Things like "jerseys" or "sagging pants" were also "distracting".
Not distracting? American Eagle polo shirt tucked into only moderately baggy cargo shorts.
Hat tip to Quaker Agitator.