Student barred from graduation over hair
Time to end black hairstyle discrimination
DeAndre Arnold, an 18-year-old high school senior in Mont Belvieu, Texas, was given a lousy set of options: Cut the locs he’s been growing since seventh grade in keeping with his dad’s Trinidadian tradition, or be suspended and barred from graduation ceremonies.
I can think of a handful of reasons a school would need to interrupt a child’s senior year of learning, forever mar his high school experience and ban him from the capstone celebration of all he has worked toward and achieved for the past four years. Long hair isn’t one of them.
His mom, Sandy Arnold, told local news outlets she cornrows her son’s hair and helps him tie it up and away from his ears, eyes and collar so it doesn’t violate the student handbook, which reads: “Male students’ hair will not extend, at any time, below the eyebrows, or below the earlobes. Male students’ hair must not extend below the top of a T-shirt collar or be gathered or worn in a style that would allow the hair to extend below the top of a T-shirt collar, below the eyebrows, or below the earlobes when let down.”
Shortly before winter break, the school issued the ultimatum, citing the handbook. Sandy Arnold told Houston TV station KPRC recently that she withdrew her son from the school.
DeAndre Hopkins, a wide receiver for the Houston Texans, tweeted his support Jan. 22: “Never cut your locks Deandre Arnold.”
A change.org petition urges the school to reconsider its policy: “We, the people, near and far are demanding that the school system reassess your decision and change an antiquated and offensive policy that should no longer be applicable to Deandre Arnold or any student hereafter or going forward.”
The NAACP released a statement on Jan. 28: “The suspension placed on Texas high school student Deandre Arnold due to his dreadlocks is extremely troubling. There is a stigma often associated with the natural hair of black and brown people that needs to change. Banning ethnic hairstyles is rooted in racial insensitivity and upholds the notion of white supremacy.”
School officials say it’s simply a matter of respecting the student handbook.
“Every school district in the nation has a dress code,” district Superintendent Greg Poole told a local news station. “I don’t think you can go to school in your underwear.”
But are those dress codes written and invoked in the service of learning? Are they fairly and equally enforced? Were they written with input from a culturally diverse set of gatekeepers? Were they written with an eye toward a culturally diverse student body?
Going to school in your underwear would violate social norms, fail to protect your body from natural elements, put you at risk for an indecent exposure arrest and introduce the meeting of body parts and desk parts that really ought not meet. I can see how those things would disrupt learning.
Long hair does nothing of the sort. That analogy is a red herring. But schools fall back on that sort of “don’t blame me; rules are rules” shrug time and time again when they’re punishing kids for their hairstyles and wardrobes. Here’s an idea.
One of the things I discovered while reading the national coverage of DeAndre Arnold’s story is that California just signed a law banning discrimination against natural hair in workplaces and schools. Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the legislation, called the CROWN Act, in July and it took effect Jan. 1 (CROWN stands for Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair).
“In a society in which hair has historically been one of many determining factors of a person’s race, and whether they were a second-class citizen, hair today remains a proxy for race,” the legislation reads. “Therefore, hair discrimination targeting hairstyles associated with race is racial discrimination.” It states the following: “The history of our nation is riddled with laws and societal norms that equated ‘blackness,’ and the associated physical traits, for example, dark skin, kinky and curly hair to a badge of inferiority, sometimes subject to separate and unequal treatment.
“This idea also permeated societal understanding of professionalism. Professionalism was, and still is, closely linked to European features and mannerisms, which entails that those who do not naturally fall into Eurocentric norms must alter their appearances, sometimes drastically and permanently, in order to be deemed professional.
“Despite the great strides American society and laws have made to reverse the racist ideology that Black traits are inferior, hair remains a rampant source of racial discrimination with serious economic and health consequences, especially for Black individuals.”
It amends the state’s educational code to protect certain hairstyles from discrimination, including braids, locs and twists.
New York and New Jersey adopted similar legislation shortly after California, according to thecrownact.com, a website dedicated to raising awareness and education about the legislation.
Twenty additional states are considering adopting CROWN Acts.
Do this. Protect your residents from having their lives and learning and earning potential and dignity disrupted by arcane, small-minded mandates. Make your schools and workplaces safer, more inclusive spaces. With apologies to Gandhi: Be the change you wish to see in dress code policy.
It’s time.
Join the Heidi Stevens Balancing Act Facebook group, where she continues the conversation around her columns and hosts occasional live chats.
hstevens@chicago tribune.com Twitter @heidistevens13