What problem do schools have with boys' hair being too short?

political analyst

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-39301894

The Northern Ireland Children's Commissioner has said the policy of isolating school pupils is "wrong".
Koulla Yiasouma was commenting on the case of a schoolboy who was punished over a haircut his school said portrayed the wrong image.
Henry Miskimmin was removed from class for two days for getting what his mother called a "short-back-and-sides" haircut of which she approved.
Enniskillen Royal Grammar School said it was an internal school matter.

I could understand schools banning male pupils from having their hair too long, i.e. unkempt appearance on the part of men.

But why do some schools have a problem with boys' hair being too short?

political analyst

Boneybogman wrote: »

It's not the republic, so I don't give a ****.

But some schools in the Republic do have that rule.

Shpudnik

There's bald lads in my year. What do you suggest there?

Atoms for Peace

How the hell is that short? Any longer and he'd be a smelly long haired commie.

Teyla Emmagan

"Short back and sides" my arse.

If the student is a well behaved pupil with good attendance and a good attitude, it shouldn't matter if his hair is a buzz cut or if he has luxurious locks down past his shoulders.

political analyst

Shpudnik wrote: »

There's bald lads in my year. What do you suggest there?

I was implicitly referring to boys who have their hair cut too short. Seriously, can people not read between the lines?

political analyst

Omackeral wrote: »

If the student is a well behaved pupil with good attendance and a good attitude, it shouldn't matter if his hair is a buzz cut or if he has luxurious locks down past his shoulders.

You're missing the point - why do some schools against boys having their hair cut too short?

Here's a case that arose in the Republic.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/education/schoolboys-get-cut-from-exams-over-hair-5555.html

The J Stands for Jay

They don't allow it too long, they don't allow it too short. What do they want, some sort of Skrillex hairstyle?

This is the 'offending' haircut. That's neither too long or too short by any stretch of the imagination! It's just the haircut most young lads have nowadays.

I got suspended from secondary school in 2004 because my mother was shaving my head and accidently cut a big bald patch in my head so she had to even it out and I ended up bald. The brother who ran the school suspended me because of my short hair.......

Westernyelp

political analyst wrote:

I could understand schools banning male pupils from having their hair too long, i.e. unkempt appearance on the part of men.

What problem do you have with longer hair? Probably similar reasoning

political analyst

political analyst wrote: »

You're missing the point - why do some schools against boys having their hair cut too short?

How am I missing the point? I think it's a stupid rule altogether. I don't agree with it at all. Plus this kid's hair isn't even short really!

Sleeper12

I remember when the Irish star newspaper started in the mid 80s they did a report on a boy in secondary school in Dublin. He got sent home because his hair was too long. Parents were told that he could come back till he had a haircut. He went to the barbers and got a one all over. A skinhead was the name used back in the day. He got suspended for 3 weeks till it grew back a little.

Hair length in boys school is a control thing.

political analyst

Omackeral wrote: »

How am I missing the point? I think it's a stupid rule altogether. I don't agree with it at all. Plus this kid's hair isn't even short really!

You're missing the point because you didn't answer the question that I asked.

political analyst

Westernyelp wrote: »

What problem do you have with longer hair? Probably similar reasoning

It's not a question of whether I have a problem with longer hair. I was simply understanding schools' ban on boys having long hair.

osarusan

The school will probably change their policy or make an exception now that they look silly in the media.

political analyst

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I remember when the Irish star newspaper started in the mid 80s they did a report on a boy in secondary school in Dublin. He got sent home because his hair was too long. Parents were told that he could come back till he had a haircut. He went to the barbers and got a one all over. A skinhead was the name used back in the day. He got suspended for 3 weeks till it grew back a little.

Hair length in boys school is a control thing.

So the reason for boys' schools insisting that pupils are not shaven-headed is that prosaic?

Reati

political analyst wrote: »

It's not a question of whether I have a problem with longer hair. I was simply understanding schools' ban on boys having long hair.

How can you understand stand a ban on long hair and not understand it on short hair and claim the question isn't related to your own bias.

I had long hair is school. No one cared as I was a good student. Lads had short and skint heads. No one cared as long as they were good students.

I only saw people have issues if they were bad students to be honest.

Burial.

Once summer I got blonde highlights in my hair...towards the end of summer holidays they were still noticeably there but natural hair colour was growing out again. First day back the principal gave me an ultimatum of shave the hair down to a 1 or get the hair coloured back to my natural colour. Cue me getting out the mother's L'Oreal because I was told "you're worth it" and I didn't want to look like a traveller. Of course the colouring came out sh*te and my mother had a canary but I learned to be self-sufficient I guess.

political analyst

political analyst wrote: »

You're missing the point because you didn't answer the question that I asked.

The question is ''Why do they have a problem?'' My answer is I don't know. I think it's a stupid rule.

wally1990

Looks like nothing has changed from my school days where the schools gave out about stupid stuff like length of the hair or hair colour .

I mean give me a break.

They are there to provide education to kids , not to police their fashion and haircut trends

Yes a uniform is a requirement and must be worn but there is nothing wrong with this lads hair

Get back to important things like teaching and providing this lad with an education

*rolls eyes*

political analyst

Reati wrote: »

How can you understand stand a ban on long hair and not understand it on short hair and claim the question isn't related to your own bias.

I had long hair is school. No one cared as I was a good student. Lads had short and skint heads. No one cared as long as they were good students.

I only saw people have issues if they were bad students to be honest.

Because having long hair was historically regarded as not being manly.

Being shaven-headed is manly.

Atoms for Peace

Maybe the school is afraid of pro-French sympathies? :pac:

The name "Croppy" used in Ireland in the 1790s was a reference to the closely cropped hair associated with the anti-powdered wig (and therefore, anti-aristocrat) French revolutionaries of the period. Men with their hair cropped were automatically suspected of sympathies with the pro-French underground organisation the Society of United Irishmen, and were seized by the British administration and its allies for interrogation and often subjected to torture by flogging, picketing and half-hanging. The contemporary torture known as pitchcapping, or in Irish An Caip Bh was specifically invented to intimidate Croppies. United Irish activists retaliated by cropping the hair of loyalists to reduce the reliability of this method of identifying their sympathisers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croppy

Snotty

As said above, it's about control and power over the students, very little else, school staff have 100's of hormone fuelled kids and a way to a impose authority on them is to create rules on things that actually have no relevance at all. I'm not condeming this, I can only imange the nightmare of working in a school


Side story,
Back in the 80's a friend of mine shaved his head one weekend, which of course was not allowed. In school Monday morning and the head priest pulled him by the ear to the top of the class, "Whats the meaning of this haircut Mr Kelly",,,, "Father... I.... I... I got it shaved off for children in need, we raised 50 pounds". Priest got all confused and walked out.

political analyst

political analyst wrote: »

Because having long hair was historically regarded as not being manly.

Being shaven-headed is manly.

Ever heard of vikings, barbarians, samurai, medieval warriors?

Mrs OBumble

Teens need to rebel. Schools give them poxy meaningless rules to rebel against, so they aren't forced into doing dangerous stuff because all the safe stuff is allowed. 'Twas ever thus.

Kid's hair will grow back. He will learn that you gotta follow the rules, or get them changed democratically. His education will not be unduly disrupted much on the scale of things. He will not become famous (and thus unemployable) in the community for all the wrong reasons - unless his parents make a balls of handling the situation.

There's this weird fetish for authority in the schools in Ireland, it seems without a strict dress code that society will collapse and we will have gangs of anarchic youths roaming the wastleland.. yet you go to a few european countries where they don't have single sex schools, uniforms, or even continuous 9-4 school periods and not only has society survived, but it seems the young people are much better adjusted and have much lower levels of anti-social behaviour

freshpopcorn

I never had an issue with any uniform policy at school. I didn't agree with them but I knew what I was allowed/wasn't allowed. In my experience it was only the trouble makers who broke the uniform policies.

Hotblack Desiato

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Teens need to rebel. Schools give them poxy meaningless rules to rebel against, so they aren't forced into doing dangerous stuff because all the safe stuff is allowed. 'Twas ever thus.

I suppose the kids in ET schools and other schools without these sort of stupid rules are all off taking drugs, or something? :rolleyes:

All 'poxy meaningless rules' do is diminish respect for authority.

Kid's hair will grow back. He will learn that you gotta follow the rules, or get them changed democratically.

Schools are not democracies - especially the ones where the ultimate authority is a bishop.

His education will not be unduly disrupted much on the scale of things.

You have to laugh at principals who are prepared to suspend pupils for ridiculous nonsense like this, yet lose their sh!t if parents want to go on holiday at a less extortionate cost and take their kid out of school for a few days. A few days off school is either not disruptive at all, or massively disruptive, depending on whether it was the principal's decision or not.

He will not become famous (and thus unemployable) in the community for all the wrong reasons - unless his parents make a balls of handling the situation.

Wow. I wouldn't want to visit that sort of 'community', much less live there. The valley of the squinting windows lives on, I suppose...

freshpopcorn

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Teens need to rebel. Schools give them poxy meaningless rules to rebel against, so they aren't forced into doing dangerous stuff because all the safe stuff is allowed. 'Twas ever thus.

They should rebel like most of us and go running in the wheat fields.