Girly hair nets student €3500

brosps

jesus had long hair and he wasn't that bad at all

starflake

I was in a certain school for girls in KK and there was one teacher that actually used to follow us around during the leaving forcing us to button up our shirts to the very last. they were totally ridiculous about uniform. I was a good student and I wanted a good leaving cert. My focus was not on my uniform but they really did have an obsession about the uniform thing. They used to make us remove nail varnish before school if we had any on. I was 19 doing my leaving cert and i felt so pissed off with that carry on I geniunely wanted to do a good leaving and get on with it... I did not need hastle like that. My younger sister is now in Transition year in the same school and the male (new) principle stands at the gate in the morning with a packet of baby wipes for them to wash off make up. my sister wears very little completely non offensive like and he made her remove her make up in front of him one morning at 5 to 9... totally ridiculous IMO.... so i can kind of see where the young lad was coming from. HE could have just tied back his hair though

Stephen

connundrum wrote: »

No. They're stupidass rules belonging to an institution and if you don't agree with them - you shouldn't be there in the first place.

Said institution is funded by tax revenues and should not be allowed to have any discriminatory rules on that basis.

ChocolateSauce

Maybe that will teach the ignorant and sexist discriminators who run that school.

I wonder if a girl went in with very short hair would they order her to grow it?

And anyone who says it is ok to discriminate against students based on sex and appearance in a state-funded school should pull their heads out of their arses and get their arses out of the 50's and into the 21 century.

anonymous_joe

Beards weren't allowed in my old school, and if you had long hair, it had to be in a pony tail.

Oh and any piercings, etc had to be removed during school.

It always seemed silly to me, and it's good to see an award like this. Will hopefully allow more people to look the way they want.

chalad07

Jesus, people have little to be doing when something like this becomes an "issue".

starflake

Yeah.... We're on boards... We... er don't have alot to be doing... obviously

Somnus

The principle in my school didnt like long hair either. He used to tell me and my friend to cut it, made the odd threat about calling home,sending us home etc if we didnt. He never followed it up though. Eventually he just said it had to be tied back and neat, which was grand because I always had it tied back and clean anyway. Still made the odd comment about it but that was it.

He did stop my friend from doing his English mock for having a beard though :P
He was much stricter on that.

CiaranC

chalad07 wrote: »

Jesus, people have little to be doing when something like this becomes an "issue".

It was the gob****es running the school that made it an issue.

ukraine_orange

I went to a school like that. My hair wasn't even that long, it just covered my ears. I was asked in the middle of assembly to cut my hair because it "violated school rules".

This was the same school where the teachers went around with rulers and measured the girl's skirts and heels.

Thankfully, I left after two years.

Piste

Phsyche wrote: »

He probably left it hanging down unkept to bother the school so much.
Another thing, peer pressure.
Why is someone of a male persuasion tying their hair into a ponytail in Ireland is always thought of as a schmuck?

Because guys tend not to look after their hair, and those that do tend to look way too girly, so it rarely looks good.

RaverRo808 wrote: »

The leaving certs aload of gick,a test that lasts two hours a subject after learning two years of useless information,I belive we all should do it,for the purpose of having it on a CV or for the points,but what purpose does it serve in day to day living,in my view,none

Two hours? TWO HOURS?! What I wouldn't give to have a two hour long exam! No cramped hand after my 3 HOURS AND TWENTY minutes of English. Pah.

gurramok

Dr.Poca wrote: »

He did stop my friend from doing his English mock for having a beard though :P
He was much stricter on that.

Principal obviously not a fan of puberty then or is a Philishave implant

L.R. Weizel

connundrum wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2009/0217/1224241280174.html

I know that there have been a few cases like this over the years and I always come back to the point - if its a rule, don't break it.

I don't particularly like wearing a tie in work, but I do. I didn't particularly want to remove my ear and tongue ring for work, but I did. Because I wanted to work in this company, I conformed to their dress code.

You wanna go to school, cut your Goddamn girly hair!

End.

Oh yes. We should just let corporations and psychopathic bigots in charge of schools do as they please and never question it.

Compromise is an important part of life. Meaning we should compromise entirely, and our workplaces should not in the slightest.

I'd be interested to see how you'd feel if this person with "girl hair" was actually a transsexual with some physical indication to orientation. Would that be a "special case" or would your abhorrant ethics still apply here?

If the unions where in any way strong, it should be no problem having purple hair in an office job, let alone "girly" hair on guys(pure sexism). We need to stop judging people on appearance - that's what's shallow, not having an alternative one as some people seem to think.

gurramok

Piste wrote: »

Because guys tend not to look after their hair, and those that do tend to look way too girly, so it rarely looks good.

Define girly?

Is Justin Lee Collins girly with his beard?
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-sunday-night-project

L.R. Weizel

homerjay2005 wrote: »

just heard his mother on the radio. came across as a snob with no respect for the schools wishes.

I'm sorry but this is like what conservatives say when they bitch about how activists have no respect for their wishes, i.e. homophobia.

The school has a dress code which included hair, it's the whole basis of wearing a uniform!

This is flat out sexism either way. Why should I consider you any better than a sexist if you're for implementing this policy? I don't have much respect for you.

I just don't get why people rally against institutional rules. The rules are set in stone, they may be stupidass rules but they are the rules of the institution. You don't want to abide by the rules - move on.

Move on where exactly? Just accept you're forced into something?

Not the same outcome as above because the school had some degree of cop on, but still equally fair.

It's not equally fair since it's discriminates against people who actually identify with that hair style/colouring as opposed to those who are not. Why do people not understand this.

This is wrong because it's sexist, but it's wrong because it's bigotted on other levels too.

The school in question didn't have any written rules regarding length of hair.

I don't think it matters, really. Telling someone you're going to punch them if they do their thing before they do it doesn't make it an awful lot better. People need to get out of the mindset that rules are automatically right. It ruins online messageboards particularly, not just schools.

they are perfectly entitles to have uniforms and dress codes. I imagine the majority do. Yes a lot of the rules are stupid, but when you enroll in the school you accept those rules.

But if the majority of schools do, then you are essentially forced to. Why is this fair?

it just annoys me when they aren't equally applied to everyone.

But any rules with regard appaerance and personal expression, you're automatically discriminating against certain people that are much more drawn to a certain appearance, or do not feel comfortable with what you'd call a "normal" appearance. Yes, there's some we can't avoid - maybe some people are more comfortable naked(though this could be a standard that changes in the future, you never know), but you can't hold it against simple things like hair, even unnatural hair colour.

You can't judge people by their appearance, but that's mostly because people are such **** awful judges. You can't make an absolutist division between personality and appearance with everyone.

I dislike people like you when you "rally" against rules because they're not applied fairly and evenly, as if you're giving yourself a little pat on the bat for only opposing them on issues of sexuality equality, and not going any further.

No. They're stupidass rules belonging to an institution and if you don't agree with them - you shouldn't be there in the first place.

So in other words people should have to miss out on school because they don't agree with the policies? That sounds GREAT.

Keeping up to date with fashion costs way more if you are a teenager trying to fit in.

Uniforms only reinforce the "fitting in" mentality to begin with. It should be a school's duty to tackle issues like this instead of running away under the carpet like a scared child. Uniforms are a terrible alternative to tackling the real problem.

Because guys tend not to look after their hair, and those that do tend to look way too girly, so it rarely looks good.

Generalisation, and "good" is subjective.

That's not a real decision. In fact, your reasoning is fallacious. It's a False Dichotomy since you're basically forcing people to go to school or not go to school.

Amongst your poor atempts at reason are also appeals to tradition and appeal to force.

connundrum

L.R. Weizel wrote: »

Oh yes. We should just let corporations and psychopathic bigots in charge of schools do as they please and never question it.

The alternate would be let the schooling population and general workforce do as they please and never be questioned about it?

L.R. Weizel wrote: »

Compromise is an important part of life. Meaning we should compromise entirely, and our workplaces should not in the slightest.

With regards to the workplace, the employer pays you and adequate wage for a service you provide in a manner which fits the company image - why should the company compromise? It is your choice as to whether you work for the company or not.

As a matter of interest, I'd like to know what people think is too long with regards to hair length for boys? Should there be any restriction on it at all?

What if the restriction was 9" in length - thats fairly long imo, but you can be guaranteed that there'd be another case like this where a boy reckons his 13" length hair should be accepted. You could take this further and further, and where does it stop?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

connundrum wrote: »

The alternate would be let the schooling population and general workforce do as they please and never be questioned about it?

If the workforce and general population are achieveing and doing their jobs competantly, what, exactly, is the problem?

With regards to the workplace, the employer pays you and adequate wage for a service you provide in a manner which fits the company image - why should the company compromise? It is your choice as to whether you work for the company or not.

As a matter of interest, I'd like to know what people think is too long with regards to hair length for boys? Should there be any restriction on it at all?

What if the restriction was 9" in length - thats fairly long imo, but you can be guaranteed that there'd be another case like this where a boy reckons his 13" length hair should be accepted. You could take this further and further, and where does it stop?

It stops when people stop trying to categorise and label people. Some things, my friend, you just cannot control and you just have to accept it. Other people being one of those things.

Isn't it lovely to live in a free country:D?

ChocolateSauce

So insane. By the time I was in 6th year, by beard was very pronounced and my hair was down to my lower back (now it's even further), and they didn't care what way I wore it all.

Nodin

connundrum wrote: »

As a matter of interest, I'd like to know what people think is too long with regards to hair length for boys? Should there be any restriction on it at all?

What if the restriction was 9" in length - thats fairly long imo, but you can be guaranteed that there'd be another case like this where a boy reckons his 13" length hair should be accepted. You could take this further and further, and where does it stop?

Who gives a rats ass where it stops? It doesn't matter. Its their school work the school should be concentrating on, not some aribtrary 'dress code' some gobshyte pulled out of his arse. Enforcement, money and time spent on this is effectively pissed down the tubes. They're kids - they aren't in the shaggin army, Gardai or the Foriegn legion.

What group of adults take time out of a busy schedule to hire a barber to measure a kids hair? Seriously.....Did no one say anything about priorities here?

Nodin

connundrum wrote: »

The alternate would be let the schooling population and general workforce do as they please and never be questioned about it?

The Plebs, expressing themselves as individuals?

DEAR BABY JAYSUS NO!!!!!!!!!

Sure cats and dogs would be at it in the streets!!!!!111!!!!

evercloserunion

The staff responsible for the gross mishandling of this situation are a liability to the State and to the taxpayer, they should be sacked.

RandolphEsq

Nodin wrote: »

Who gives a rats ass where it stops? It doesn't matter. Its their school work the school should be concentrating on, not some aribtrary 'dress code' some gobshyte pulled out of his arse. Enforcement, money and time spent on this is effectively pissed down the tubes. They're kids - they aren't in the shaggin army, Gardai or the Foriegn legion.

What group of adults take time out of a busy schedule to hire a barber to measure a kids hair? Seriously.....Did no one say anything about priorities here?

The whole point of the dress code is to instill discipline and obedience into the students. They are children and need to be given boundaries and rules however OTT they may sound as an adult. Give them an inch and they take a mile. Growing hair can be a form of rebellion and disorder. It is all for the benefit of the children in the long run

Nodin

BrightEyes wrote: »

The whole point of the dress code is to instill discipline and obedience into the students. They are children and need to be given boundaries and rules however OTT they may sound as an adult. Give them an inch and they take a mile. Growing hair can be a form of rebellion and disorder. It is all for the benefit of the children in the long run

Turning up on time, keeping the bheal dunta in the class, doing the work, taking responsibility for completing projects, study, working towards success in exams - thats rules, boundaries and discipline enough.

DublinWriter

BrightEyes wrote: »

Give them an inch and they take a mile. Growing hair can be a form of rebellion and disorder.

Oh please, I'd rather them grow their hair than knick cars or mug old people.

BrightEyes wrote: »

It is all for the benefit of the children in the long run

Is it really.

Isn't it curious how it's mainly countries that were ex-British colonies that still impose school uniforms in their state-run schools?

ukraine_orange

I went to a school with extremely strict rules. I then moved to another school which had no rules at all.

The school with the heavy rules was ridiculous. It was like studying in an army camp. You had to write with a certain type of pen, your shirt had to be tucked in even if your jumper covered the ends of the shirt, your shoes had to be a certain type, and your hair could be no longer than a few inches. You had to wear your schoolbag over two shoulders, and it couldn't be a bright color. Girls were allowed ONE piercing, guys weren't, and any tattoos and you were expelled. Actually, now that I think of it, a girl in my sister's year was expelled because she worked in a strip-club. A teacher from the school went to that strip-club with his girlfriend, and the student was expelled. It was bizarre. I was out of school grounds after school had finished when I was approached by one of the teachers and I was threatened with a week's worth of detention because I wasn't wearing the school shoes [I was going into town so I changed my shoes]. I told him where to go, but never heard from him from then on because he knew he was out of line.

The school with no rules was much better. As much as I hated the people (most of them, anyway), it was far more relaxed. We only had to wear a black jumper with the school crest, and then you could wear whatever the hell you wanted, provided it didn't offend other people. You could drink your drink in class, you could have piercings, you could have tattoos, you could ask to leave school if you were sick. People didn't abuse that system because it was so... free, if that's the right word to describe it. I had to use it a few times, and I was very grateful because of it.

In the long run, I preferred the school with no rules. I'm a better person with thicker skin. It was a very good life lesson, you had to figure out where the boundary was and how to deal with it when it's crossed.

Ireland's school discipline "rules" are a joke.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

BrightEyes wrote: »

The whole point of the dress code is to instill discipline and obedience into the students. They are children and need to be given boundaries and rules however OTT they may sound as an adult. Give them an inch and they take a mile. Growing hair can be a form of rebellion and disorder. It is all for the benefit of the children in the long run

Why is it so hard to understand that it is the treating of children, children's wishes and children's opinions like sh1t that makes them trun around and rebel in the first place? It's this attitude that creates the next generation of scumbags and then has the same morons complaining that we've got too many scumbags on the streets.

stovelid

He shouldn't get a payout.

He should be reinstated with an apology though.

The uniform arguments are bogus. I agree with them insofar as some kids don't get victimized in poorer areas for having worse /unfashionable clothes as the others, but instilling discipline? Geddoutofit.

evercloserunion

BrightEyes wrote: »

The whole point of the dress code is to instill discipline and obedience into the students. They are children and need to be given boundaries and rules however OTT they may sound as an adult. Give them an inch and they take a mile. Growing hair can be a form of rebellion and disorder. It is all for the benefit of the children in the long run

Is it though? I have always thought that uniforms had a useful role in schools in that they instill a sense of unity and equality and mask other differences between children that may damage that aim. It sounds absurd to us but dress sense, especially when indicative of the class or financial status of the family, can be a source of much hostility and division in a school.

It is for this reason that uniforms are important and not to instill discipline and obedience. What you wear really isn't going to make you any more obedient; that is the job not of your clothes but of your teachers and parents. Some of the worst scumbags in the country go to school every day in perfect little uniforms, while a lot of students who don't wear uniforms or who do a half-assed job of it (like me when I was in school) turn out okay.

To be honest I find this alarmism about growing your hair long being a sign of disorder and rebellion hilarious and I didn't know anyone thought like that anymore. Long hair amongst guys is so common and, in general, so accepted nowadays that it really isn't rebellious at all. There's nothing dangerous, original or unique about it. It's just a look, it doesn't make you any better or worse of a person, it doesn't affect your personality or your work ethic or anything like that.

I agree that children should have boundaries, but justifying an unnecessary and arbitrary boundary on the grounds that some boundaries must exist is flawed reasoning and can lead to some bizarre results.

L.R. Weizel

The whole point of the dress code is to instill discipline and obedience into the students. They are children and need to be given boundaries and rules however OTT they may sound as an adult. Give them an inch and they take a mile. Growing hair can be a form of rebellion and disorder. It is all for the benefit of the children in the long run

I am sorry, but there are valid philosophies based on perhaps exactly the opposite of your idea, that order needs to be balanced with disorder or else it's harmful. Discordianism is based on this concept.

The way you talk honestly makes me sick. They're children, not slaves. There is a definite problem with a lack of critical thinking and exactly for the reasons you describe, I dispise uniform.

Why does growing your hair have to be a form of rebellion? What kind of idiot really believes that. And what's wrong with some degree of rebellion to begin with? Young adults should question the world around them. It is not just bigotry to presume that growing your hair long is a sign of rebellion(sexist), but it's also bigotry to presume individuals who may be somewhat rebellious are incapable of working respectfully. I am highly rebellious and this has seldom been an issue for me through work and college. It is terrible stereotyping. Just because I have strong social views does not mean I am going to shove them in my employer's face, if I'm in a workplace I'm going to want to keep the peace - but it is still my goal to work towards a world where we do not let capitalists control how people should look and act.

All you're doing is forcing your philosophy on others and causing almost irrepairable harm. There's a reason many Irish people are so gullible and apathetic and this has a lot to do with it. Individuality should be encouraged, not stamped upon. You honestly make me sick to my stomach.

Is it though? I have always thought that uniforms had a useful role in schools in that they instill a sense of unity and equality and mask other differences between children that may damage that aim. It sounds absurd to us but dress sense, especially when indicative of the class or financial status of the family, can be a source of much hostility and division in a school.

It is for this reason that uniforms are important and not to instill discipline and obedience.

Imagine if this philosophy was used to tackle gay rights. Okay guys, best way to do this is, just don't be gay. Keep it completely to yourself.

What a bull**** idea. Solving problems of bigotry by removing diversity... what kind of person seriously endorses this? Maybe some mean well, but I don't believe anyone truly socially intelligent should believe this. It's a terrible solution.

L.R. Weizel

The alternate would be let the schooling population and general workforce do as they please and never be questioned about it?

If you are incapable of finding a balance and absolutely must polarise this issue, then perhaps the idea of a mature debate is not for you. There are many other threads in this forum more suited to your level of "skill".

With regards to the workplace, the employer pays you and adequate wage for a service you provide in a manner which fits the company image - why should the company compromise?

For the issue of human rights. If one employer does it, they all do, since they can get away with it. It becomes difficult to find employment without completely compromising yourself.

It is your choice as to whether you work for the company or not.

Again, False Dichotomy, Appeal to Consequences - this isn't a matter of opinion, this line of reasoning is wrong. You cannot participate in a logical debate if you continue to ignore these ideas.

What if the restriction was 9" in length - thats fairly long imo, but you can be guaranteed that there'd be another case like this where a boy reckons his 13" length hair should be accepted. You could take this further and further, and where does it stop?

Why should there be a difference between what's allowed for boys and girls?

You are, by definition, a sexist. And sexists do not deserve respect.

Why should it matter so much to the employer? You have no concept of utility.