Mop-Top Mayhem in Mesquite

By my observation, it seems that some are under the mistaken impression that it is our Constitution and Bill of Rights that give us our freedom. No, they only protect it from physical and psychological oppression. But we understandably augment these freedoms, to ensure a more functional society. But we cannot forget our inherent liberty because sometimes society is wrong and we have to buck and kick against those constraints to prevent eventual tyranny. This means taking even lighter infractions with the utmost seriousness. Such is the case in Mesquite, Texas.

It is there that a four year old boy, Taylor Pugh, is being withheld from his Pre-K class because he has grown his hair long. This violates the district dress code which claims that it is distracting to the learning environment. Before commenting, I would like to state that having read several articles on these events I find it unclear whether it is the child or the parents who refuse the hair cut (though it is clear, the boy likes it uncut). Either way, since he is so young, it falls to the parents for the final decision, and ultimately they are the ones being critiqued. Two issues demand analysis regarding this affair: the validity of dress codes, and personal freedom.

Dress codes do serve a purpose. I was subject to one myself as a student in a Catholic high school. However, that was a private institution and the dress code was a part of the education style, a point of discipline and formality gearing us for the perceived rigors of college, and not an effort to mold us according to mainstream notions of appearance. Agree or disagree with the intent, it was a private school and so personal rights were never violated; attending was a choice. The Mesquite school in question is public. In public schools, a dress code has been thought to benefit the student body. The problem of gang colors is often given as the reason. Some public schools use simple uniforms and this immediately hinders overt shows of economic and social status, which could potentially shield children from some of the cruelty they inflict on each other. Limiting sexually suggestive clothing seems reasonable if for no other reason than preventing minors from becoming targets for sexual predators. So those are a few scenarios for which I can tolerate a dress code – I wouldn’t demand it myself; I merely concede that there are reasons for implementation. Of course I haven’t even scratched the growing occurrence of LGBT students butting heads with school administrations regarding their clothing, but we’ll leave that aside since the student currently being persecuted is only four years of age, and his hair length is probably not a gender statement, which is not to imply that it even would be if he were older. Yet gender equality does come into play when talking about individual liberty.

The showdown in Mesquite consists of a young boy with long hair who for several months has been sent to the library, isolated from his class with a tutor, and a mother who refuses to cut those contested locks. First, I have to say, I don’t see what is distracting about long hair (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/13/education/13hair.html). In a country still grappling with equality of all forms on a daily basis, shouldn’t we allow that if a girl can wear long hair to school, so can a boy? Hell, at one time it was fashionable for gentlemen of “polite society” to wear powdered wigs. I find that infinitely more distracting. You also might notice from the photo that Taylor’s is not an extreme hair style – though the linked article shows it in a pony tail in an effort to mitigate the administration’s ire. In fact, the school board’s idea of a compromise was to braid the boy’s hair and pin it up in back. Again, I find that infinitely more distracting (and the parents refused this option because of time constraints – braiding it every morning – and because having tried the braids, Taylor found them painful). Lastly, I see this dispute as one of personal freedom. Dress codes may have their function, but the body, the unadorned natural body, is the last stronghold of an individual’s liberty. Why does the military shave recruits’ heads? To break down their identity so they can be re-configured into a model soldier. Militarizing and homogenizing the student body is not a good plan for preserving our glorious Republic. We have agreed to limit our freedoms so that they do not hurt the freedoms of others, but Taylor is hurting no one and as for that “distraction,” how about the “distraction” of ostracizing a young child because of his appearance (isn’t there a law against that? Aren’t we supposed to be teaching kids tolerance?), and then subjecting the entire school to the national scrutiny of news coverage by engaging in a stand-off with protective parents?

Standards of dress and grooming vary wildly by geography and time period. You could say they are a part of humanity’s cultural evolution or down right arbitrary. Given this truth, and the inalienable right of individual freedom, it hardly seems the place of a public school board to dictate what those standards should be, beyond safety concerns. Furthermore, it is the right of every parent to raise their own child without outside influence (provided they don’t harm or neglect the child). Fortunately, Taylor is young enough that his education won’t be sacrificed in any significant way, but still, he is quoted as saying that he misses his friends. I condemn the school for depriving him his rightful (and legally mandatory) education over such a paltry issue and praise his parents for taking on this fight. These are the kinds of citizens that make a democracy. It may seem small, and of course they aren’t Rosa Parks or Cesar Chavez, but the small fights still contribute to our national integrity.