Time to let Black boys grow out their hair
When it comes to justice and protection for marginalized people, Texas hasn’t been doing the best job of things in the past few years. But like a stopped clock twice a day, the state occasionally gets things right.
Legally protecting ethnic hairstyles against discrimination is one of those things. Over the past few years, Black activists and legislators around the country have been advocating for the Crown Act — it stands for “creating a respectful and open world for natural hair” — which prohibits discrimination against ethnic textures or protective hairstyles, such as braids, locs or twists. This year, Texas became the 24th state to enact a version of the legislation. It amends the state education code to say “any student dress or grooming policy adopted by a school district, including a student dress or grooming policy for any extracurricular activity, may not discriminate against a hair texture or protective hairstyle commonly or historically associated with race.” (Similar language in the law prohibits such discrimination in employment and housing.)
The law took effect Sept. 1. But because, well, it’s Texas, a school district has already incurred a civil rights lawsuit for alleged hair discrimination and the Texas’ Crown Act’s first major challenge. Darryl George, a junior at Barbers Hill High School, about 30 miles east of Houston, was suspended from school the same week the Crown Act became law. The school said that his locs (short for dreadlocks) violated its Dress and Grooming Code, which says: “Male students’ hair will not extend, at any time, below the eyebrows or below the ear lobes. 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 ear lobes when let down.”
George’s locs were braided and sometimes worn in a ponytail. According to reports, his mother said his hair did extend beyond his eyebrows when let down.
The school issued various warnings to George that he had to cut his hair. When he refused, he received an in-school suspension. The school district has asked a court to clarify whether their grooming rules are in violation of the Crown Act, which does not specifically mention hair length. George’s mother, who said her son has been threatened with being placed in an alternative disciplinary school, has filed a civil discrimination lawsuit against the school district.
Proponents of the Crown law, including Adjoa B. Asamoah, the lead legal strategist and co-creator of the Crown Coalition, have said that cases such as this demonstrate that the Crown Act needs to become national law. Efforts to create a national Crown Act have gotten stuck at the Senate level. But perhaps more needs to be done to tease out the gendered nuances of ethnic hair discrimination, with explicit references to hair length, not just styles and textures. And I might add, making it illegal to put a minor through the humiliation of having his hair cut off against his will.
It’s perhaps necessary to ground a hair discussion, especially in the Black community, properly. There’s a reason many of us talk about our “hair journeys.” While people can have all sorts of reasons for choosing locs, braids, twists or any other natural hairstyle, plenty of them choose to wear locs as a strong symbol of identity, connection to their ancestors or as a visible symbol of the years-long commitment it takes to grow out and care for their locs, and by extension themselves. The length is a marker of that journey, and, for some, the spiritual energy accumulated along the way. In George’s case, his braided locs include strands from his father and grandfather. His family says they will not cut the hair.
It’s why many of us reacted so angrily a few years ago to the viral video of a young Black wrestler in New Jersey who had his dreadlocks forcibly cut off by a white official before he was allowed to participate in a match. Forced cutting of hair is dehumanizing and humiliating to anyone. But to a child, that is an especially traumatic experience and should be banned unless the child and parents give consent.
The Crown Act movement’s messaging and imagery have focused a lot on the effects that hairstyle and texture discrimination has on Black girls and women. That Texas’ first Crown Act challenge centers on a Black boy and hair length is significant. Black boys often face harsher school discipline and punishments than white boys, which leads to lower learning outcomes.
This country is already going through social convulsions over gender and how male and female children should identify and present themselves. In that context, perhaps Crown Act advocates and legislatures should go to more lengths, literally, to protect the right of Black boys to embark on their rightful loc journeys. They should not have to choose between their hair and the fear, stress and anxiety of having their educational journey derailed by discrimination. The long and short of it is that this is what Black boys and men deserve.