Megan Oakes
Ms. Wolters
English 10 H
9/16/14
Hair: A School or Personal Choice? The issue of whether hairstyles are a choice to be made by the school or by students is an issue that has been a fierce topic of debate lately. More and more people are stating that they are not opposed to hair dye, long hair, or other unique hair styles. Many youths are embracing their roots, and are starting to wear their hair in traditional ways. However, many schools are stuck in antiqued mentalites, banning students from having any color of hair that is considered “unnatural” or from having hair that is longer than a mandated length. Some schools are even going so far as to remove students for wearing their hair in ways that are customary among their religions. Hair is a form of expression and should be treated as such. Both public and private schools must allow students to wear their hair in any manner that they choose, as long as it is not disrupting students from their work.
…show more content…
This means that if hair is considered a form of free speech, or expression, that it is unconstitutional to ban students from styling their hair in certain ways that make a statement. According to the famous court case, Tinker vs. Des Moines, clothing that conveys a message is considered a protected form of speech. This ruling was made in the ‘70s, when students wore black armbands to protest the Vietnam war and were told that they could not wear them to school (billofrightsinstitute.org). Now, as hair dye, long hair, and traditional hair styles become more socially acceptable, they are often seen as a harmless way of making a statement. The first, second, fourth, seventh, and eighth circuit courts have all ruled that hair is a form of expression in school, striking down rules about both hair length and color.
The students always picked on my hair because it was nappy or because it was too greasy. So I always felt that if I started wearing weaves that individuals would stop making fun of my hair. I’ve always thought to myself why hair, skin, or clothes has to define who we are as a
Issues involving the apparel enforcements, including sexism, repressed self- identity, and punishment issues will be discussed within this paper. Literature Review The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the creation of laws offensive to religious groups and ensures their ability to freely practice, grants the freedom of speech, comply the freedom of the press, and allows the right to assemble peacefully. Adopted on December 15, 1791, it has served the United States of America for over one hundred years. Freedom of expression is a controversial topic when applied to the school dress code.
In the 1960s, some Americans were against sending troops to Vietnam because of the many lives risked; others were against sending troops because of the money it would cost. In 1965, a group of Des Moines high school students met up and agreed to wear black armbands that following week to protest against the Vietnam War. Rumors got around to school principles. School Principals passed a rule forbidding armbands to be worn at school to prevent disruption in the classrooms. In December, five students wore armbands ignoring the school’s new rule. They were asked to take off the armbands, and they refused resulting in suspension ("Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist"). Then the parents of those complained that the first amendment rights of those students were violated. This case went all the way to the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled that students still have their rights of freedom of speech and expression in school in a 7-2 vote in favor of Tinker (“TINKER v. DES MOINES INDEPENDENT COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT”).
We, all, have the opportunity to voice our opinion on subjects that matter to us. The First Amendment grants us freedom of speech and expression. However, this was not provided to all students in 1968. During this time, there were three students in Des Moines, Iowa, who wore black armbands to school. These armbands were a symbol of protest against the United States involvement in the Vietnam War. After the Des Moines School District heard about this plan, they instituted a policy banning the wearing of armbands, leading to the suspension of students. A lawsuit has been filed against the Des Moines School District, stating how this principal goes against the students’ First Amendment rights. Thus, in the Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District case, Justice Abe Fortes determined the policy to ban armbands is against the students’ First Amendment rights. Yet, Justice Hugo Black dissented with this decision, determining the principal is permissible under the First Amendment.
School dress code is controversial, sometimes being the cause of inner-school violence. The censorship of this raises issues when students complain that their personal rights to express themselves after schools limit what they can or cannot wear. School dress code are the guide lines that schools set that define what is acceptable to wear to school. An example of student dress code censorship was the case involving a thirteen year-old student in Williamstown displaying his political opinion about former President Bush (Nguyen). Because the shirt contained drug references and words calling the president a "crook", an "AWOL, draft dodger" and a "lying drunk driver," he was told to go home after refusing to take it off (Nguyen). This case went to two different courts, a US District Court, and the Second Circuit Court. The US District Court agreed with the school's opinion because they believed the images on Guille's shirt were not appropriate for a school atmosphere (Nguyen). Meanwhile, the Second Circuit Court ruled that the school should not have censored the shirt because even thou...
In the 1969 case of Tinker vs Des Moines, one of the most well-known student rights cases it has considered, the US Supreme Court ruled that students had a constitutional right to wear a black armband to school to protest
Many students lose self esteem when they can’t express themselves. Therefore students should not be required to wear uniforms. This is necessary because most students would like to show their style and technique. In addition, uniforms limit the freedom of expression for students in school. Furthermore, uniforms are expensive and parents may not be able to afford clothing that can be worn at school and home. Finally, students should not be forced to wear
Speech rights have changed or been expanded through a series of 20th and 21st century court decisions to include political speech, campaign financing, pornography, and school speech. In Tinker v Des Moines (1969) the Supreme Court ruled that students "do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate." The ruling stated that school officials had violated freedom of speech by suspending some students who wore black armbands to protest the war in Vietnam. It was considered to be a display of symbolic speech. The Tinker standard has been applied in numerous decisions through the years. In another decision, Hazelwood School District v Kuhlmeir (1988), the Supreme Court ruled that the high school
Proponents of school uniforms agree that students’ school uniforms are not a violation of their First Amendment of the U.S. constitution right. In the case of Canady v. Bossier Parish School Board, the Fifth Circuit upheld that “students remain free to wear what they want after school hours. Students may still express their views through other mediums during the school day” (Canady v. Bossier Parish School Board). Advocates for school uniforms argue that school is for learning, and that self-expression is for after-school hours. Some people will say that there is room for self-expression such that students’ can use hairstyles and accessories to start forming their individuality. However, proponents of school uniforms need to
High school is typically a time when kids begin to distinguish themselves from one another. Students begin to develop their own sense of personal style, desperately trying to both fit in and stand out simultaneously. Being self-conscious and often lacking the confidence needed to assert themselves, teens are forced to use clothing and outward appearance as the means to manifest this individuality. Thus, students should not be forced to wear uniforms to school. Standard uniforms are unproven deterrents to student violence; are a "Band-Aid" to cover up the real problems faced by children and teens; and they violate students' right of self-expression, depriving them of their search for identity.
America’s school systems seem to have many issues concerning students receiving a quality education without distraction. A current debate argues weather a dress code policy is efficient or takes away from student’s expression. Administrators at schools should regulate a dress code policy because the system improves discipline and student’s attention, reduces social conflict and peer pressure related to appearance, and dress code provides a more serious learning environment.
At the beginning of the 20th century almost no parent or faculty had any concerns with how students dressed to attend school. Nowadays, though, this is a giant concern among students, parents, and school board officials. Many arguments have been made over the matter saying uniforms should be required and enforced in schools. But, uniforms should not be required as they ultimately eliminate freedom of expression, promote conformity over individuality, may have a detrimental effect on students self image, emphasize the socioeconomic divisions they are supposed to eliminate, and lastly, school uniforms in public schools undermine the promise of a free education by adding an extra expense for families.
The most common argument against school uniforms is that they take away the students right to self-expression. Yes, school uniforms limit what the students have to wear, but students can still have their own ways of self-expression. Students can still express their style of choice with their hair and what accessories they wear. Their shoe choice is also a form of self-expression. Students can make the uniforms their own style without breaking the dress code. School is a place to learn. Outside of school, self- expression is limitless. Some parents also believe that it could interfere with students' natural behavior to experiment with different identities. Having uniforms in schools helps erase the defined line of the social classes. Typically, popular kids in the higher social classes wear the trendiest clothing...
I believe all people have the right to express themselves. However, with rights come responsibility, a concept most people ignore. Having a "right" is to be free to express one's self. Consequentially, having a "responsibility" is doing it constructively, in such a way as to not violate policies, laws, and others' rights. There is a definite difference between a dress code and a school uniform. I support enforcing a school dress code, but is implementing a school uniform necessary? No matter how students dress, they will still pass judgments on their peers, uniforms do not necessarily save money, and children are forced to conform to the same standards. While in school, teachers have a responsibility to teach and students have the responsibility to learn. Both have the right to exist in their environment without harassment and the right to express their individuality. Some people have found some expressions crude, obnoxious, and distracting. To combat the problem, the idea of mandating school uniforms was introduced. This notion of making everyone appear "uniformed" in order to cut down on violence and negativity in school, is absolutely mislaid.
Dress codes and uniforms have been deemed legal by the United States Supreme Court. As long as the dress code or uniform regulations pass a four-pronged test. Opposition for school uniforms holds fast to preserving the sanctity of freedom of speech. The supreme court ultimately has decided that dress codes and uniforms do not violate the freedom of speech. In Harold W. Mitchell and John C. Knechtle’s study of the first amendment rights and dress code, they note that in 1968 in Ginsberg v. New York the supreme court ruled that “[t]he state has power to control the conduct of children that reaches beyond its scope of authority over adults (491).” Mitchell and Knechtle go further into explaining the 4 pronged rule the supreme court uses to judge if a rule is against the freedom of