School's ban on boy's cornrows is 'indirect racial discrimination'

No. It's not racist. And it's not discrimination either if they don't allow anyone to wear that styIe. Schools are allowed to set dress code.

LJS9502_basic

The school only allowed a conservative "short back and sides" hair****for boys amid concerns that other **** could encourage "gang culture"

Does that mean people can have mohawks and other hairstyles in school?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="grape_of_wrath"]

According to the british Race Relations Act? Yes. It's a textbook example of indirect discrimination. the question is whether that discrimination is justified or not.

grape_of_wrath

Dress code is something a school can set. And considering we haven't seen the entire dress code but just a piece...it's a little ill informed to make any such distinction. It's not discrimination if it's a dress code applicable to everyone. Using that logic it would be discrimination to ban metal band T-shirts.

LJS9502_basic

If it would be a dress code that is only pertaining to black students- than it would, obviously, be direct discrimination. Indirect discrimination can be permissible and proper if it is reasonable (and enforcing a dress code, could be easily construed as such in most circumstances).

The only thing that matters when deciding if something is indirect discrimination is the factual effect in the real world. If black students are disproportionally affected by this act- and I assume they are - than it's indirect racial discrimination. there is no bearing to what the motivations of the school are.

If white students are disproportionally affected by a ban on metal Tshirts- than that's indirect discrimination, as well.

The whole question is in the level of the justification to the discrimination.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

Dress code is something a school can set. And considering we haven't seen the entire dress code but just a piece...it's a little ill informed to make any such distinction. It's not discrimination if it's a dress code applicable to everyone. Using that logic it would be discrimination to ban metal band T-shirts.

grape_of_wrath

If it would be a dress code that is only pertaining to black students- than it would, obviously, be direct discrimination. Indirect discrimination can be permissible and proper if it is reasonable (and enforcing a dress code, could be easily construed as such in most circumstances).

The only thing that matters when deciding if something is indirect discrimination is the factual effect in the real world. If black students are disproportionally affected by this act- and I assume they are - than it's indirect racial discrimination. there is no bearing to what the motivations of the school are.

If white students are disproportionally affected by a ban on metal Tshirts- than that's indirect discrimination, as well.

The whole question is in the level of the justification to the discrimination.

I understand fully why the school did this and I actually think the finding is a joke.

If a private school doesn't want their students looking a certain way, then by all means they can stop them. It's like how employers can decide not to hire someone based on their tattoos or hairstyle. My school had the exct same policy (and actually had the same name) and the only reason they "bent" a rule was for religious reasons.

And again you are make an opinion without looking at the entirety of the dress code. Which means the opinion is not formed on the basis of the facts.

My "opinion" is based on former House of Lords caselaws precedents and the Race Relations Act. I did not come near the specific facts, I gave you a normative legal definition and stated that it is dependant on whether black students are disproportionally affected by this act done by the school. This is the only point where I let a personal opinion be made- I said (in essence): According to personal experience, I assume that the act does indeed adversely affect black students in a disproportionate manner.

The cornrows styIe is undoubtedly one part of the dress code....and does pertain to everyone. FYI....I have seen other "races" wearing cornrows so even on that basis it takes the discrimination out.

For the 3rd (maybe 4rth?) time- all indirect discrimination, per the Race Relations Act , is relating to is affecting one ethnic group of people more than others in a disproportionate manner.

It's no longer used by one group. As for T-shirts.....using your logic a dress code cannot exist since some "group" might be more prone to wear the opposite. And in a private institution.....that just doesn't exist. If you don't want to follow the dress code...one is under no obligation to attend.

I will quote what I wrote before- "Indirect discrimination can be permissible and proper if it is reasonable (and enforcing a dress code, could be easily construed as such in most circumstances)." Indirect discrimination is not necessarily a bad thing.

LJS9502_basic

Good stuff glad the kid won, hope the school lost a large sum in legal fees/penalties, the world is headed to a police state, it already is, but you get the "illusion" of free will and freedom. I think its stupid and pathetic, a school turned away a kid, because of his haircut. First this, then they'll start turning away people from the super market if your wearing the wrong t shirt.

The hairstyle was important to the boy's cultural identity, said his family

No it isn't.

Racism at its best. the school wants its pupils to look respectable, and to teach them how to fit in with society, and they get taken to court because of that. It is nothing to do with his ***ing culture.

His cultural identity is that he is British, because his parents came from another part of the world does not exempt him from the rules. Disgusting.

Gang Culture?? really?

[quote=""]The hairstyle was important to the boy's cultural identity, said his familyOverlord93

No it isn't.

Racism at its best. the school wants its pupils to look respectable, and to teach them how to fit in with society, and they get taken to court because of that. It is nothing to do with his ***ing culture.

His cultural identity is that he is British, because his parents came from another part of the world does not exempt him from the rules. Disgusting.

It would be different if they didn't say this

The school only allowed a conservative "short back and sides" hair****for boys amid concerns that other **** could encourage "gang culture"

This school is only looking at it from one side. Going against conformity=anarchy.

Not really racist.

[QUOTE="STAR_Admiral"]this kid better learn to follow dress code and hair code if he wants to land a decent job in the future. no law school, med school, pharm school, etc is gonna accept him if he comes to the interview in cornrows. Unless he wants to be a hairdresser or something for the rest of his life. Uniform policy is good. It prepares students for the real world of employment. Marth6781

[QUOTE="Overlord93"]

[quote=""]The hairstyle was important to the boy's cultural identity, said his familyBranKetra

No it isn't.

Racism at its best. the school wants its pupils to look respectable, and to teach them how to fit in with society, and they get taken to court because of that. It is nothing to do with his ***ing culture.

His cultural identity is that he is British, because his parents came from another part of the world does not exempt him from the rules. Disgusting.

It would be different if they didn't say this

The school only allowed a conservative "short back and sides" hair****for boys amid concerns that other **** could encourage "gang culture"

This school is only looking at it from one side. Going against conformity=anarchy.

Some schools in England wont allow a number 1 cut, despite it being a culturally significant haircut for a lot of english people. I don't see any court cases?

A lot of schools in england have a stricter dress code and teaching, and a lot of the time parents choose schools specifically for those reasons. These are old fashioned and highly sought after schools. This is a catholic school ffs. I went to a religious school, they weren't discriminative because they forced students to learn about chritianity.

Some schools in England wont allow a number 1 cut, despite it being a culturally significant haircut for a lot of english people. I don't see any court cases?

Overlord93

If the school just maintained that they expect their students to dress a certain way, they probably would have won. It's when they went into the gang BS that it started looking like some racial problem.

[QUOTE="BranKetra"]

It would be different if they didn't say this

[QUOTE=""]
The school only allowed a conservative "short back and sides" hair****for boys amid concerns that other **** could encourage "gang culture"Overlord93

This school is only looking at it from one side. Going against conformity=anarchy.

Some schools in England wont allow a number 1 cut, despite it being a culturally significant haircut for a lot of english people. I don't see any court cases?

Besides that, a number 1 cut can be seen all over in different cultures. It didn't really start in one, did it? Cornrows, on the other hand, is an African thing. To my knowledge.

Nonetheless, I don't see how having hair like that inspires gang culture.BranKetra

[QUOTE="BranKetra"]Nonetheless, I don't see how having hair like that inspires gang culture.Overlord93

If so, that looks like a white person who is dressed like a black gangster. In other words, that doesn't really help your argument. In fact, I'd say it does the opposite.

[QUOTE="Overlord93"]

[QUOTE="BranKetra"]Nonetheless, I don't see how having hair like that inspires gang culture.BranKetra

If so, that looks like a white person who is dressed like a black gangster. In other words, that doesn't really help your argument. In fact, I'd say it does the opposite.

A chav is based more on the way they act than the way they dress, I think it stands for "Council House and violent". It just seems that most of the chavs dress like gangsters. They can be called Townies or Neds as well.

hesel

That still leaves the question: How do cornrows inspire gang culture?BranKetra

Same reason you can't wear nikes to school...the same reason why a company won't employ you if you have a tatoo.Overlord93

Seems right to ban it, it was in the school policy to havea certain haircut not sure why it would be considered racist, this kid could have anything other than short hair and the school would have done the same. In my school they banned hoodies as they were causing fights between the "moshers" and the "chavs". Having everyone dressed and look similar puts everyone on the same level initially, and can prevent gangs and people being bullied. If someone is dressed like a tramp then people will bully them for being poor, wearing the same uniform puts everyone on the same level.

[QUOTE="BranKetra"]That still leaves the question: How do cornrows inspire gang culture?Overlord93

Same reason you can't wear nikes to school...the same reason why a company won't employ you if you have a tatoo.Overlord93

[QUOTE="BranKetra"]Nonetheless, I don't see how having hair like that inspires gang culture.Overlord93

Only schools that have uniforms are private schools.. And you can wear nikes at school in public.. It makes you look like a chav? Its a atheltic shoe for crying out loud.. Nothing is wrong with wearing one.. Furthermore companies do hire people with tattooes just as long as its not plainly visible and covered up.. And furthermore "it is teaching children a way to live life" to me is overly negative.. I don't want life to be about a bunch of mindless drones talking alike, looking the same, thinking alike..

[QUOTE="Overlord93"]

[QUOTE="BranKetra"]Nonetheless, I don't see how having hair like that inspires gang culture.sSubZerOo

Only schools that have uniforms are private schools.. And you can wear nikes at school in public.. It makes you look like a chav? Its a atheltic shoe for crying out loud.. Nothing is wrong with wearing one.. Furthermore companies do hire people with tattooes just as long as its not plainly visible and covered up.. And furthermore "it is teaching children a way to live life" to me is overly negative.. I don't want life to be about a bunch of mindless drones talking alike, looking the same, thinking alike..

That's dancing around the question. This is first time I've ever heard that nikes inspire gang culture. You can wear nikes to school. At least, in some American schools and colleges. As for tattoos, that's different, but I hear that some companies are okay with it, anyway, while others don't mind as long as it isn't visible, like on the forearm or face. It sounds like you're talking about a particular model for schools and companies, when there are obviously other standards.BranKetra

Yes, different schools have different standards. But that doesn't matter, If the kid wanted his haircut, he could go to a school that allows it. Rather than joining up to a school with an EXPLICIT uniform policy, which was apperently neglected by the parents. And expect to be given special exceptions because of where your parents were born

[QUOTE="BranKetra"] That's dancing around the question. This is first time I've ever heard that nikes inspire gang culture. You can wear nikes to school. At least, in some American schools and colleges. As for tattoos, that's different, but I hear that some companies are okay with it, anyway, while others don't mind as long as it isn't visible, like on the forearm or face. It sounds like you're talking about a particular model for schools and companies, when there are obviously other standards.Overlord93

Yes, different schools have different standards. But that doesn't matter, If the kid wanted his haircut, he could go to a school that allows it. Rather than joining up to a school with an EXPLICIT uniform policy, which was apperently neglected by the parents. And expect to be given special exceptions because of where your parents were born

[QUOTE="BranKetra"] That's dancing around the question. This is first time I've ever heard that nikes inspire gang culture. You can wear nikes to school. At least, in some American schools and colleges. As for tattoos, that's different, but I hear that some companies are okay with it, anyway, while others don't mind as long as it isn't visible, like on the forearm or face. It sounds like you're talking about a particular model for schools and companies, when there are obviously other standards.Overlord93

Yes, different schools have different standards. But that doesn't matter, If the kid wanted his haircut, he could go to a school that allows it. Rather than joining up to a school with an EXPLICIT uniform policy, which was apperently neglected by the parents. And expect to be given special exceptions because of where your parents were born

Glad I never had to attend a school in Great Britain...

[QUOTE="BranKetra"]

[QUOTE="Overlord93"] Same reason you can't wear nikes to school, it makes you look like a chav. This is how the world works. Its the same reason why a company won't employ you if you have a tatoo. It is teaching children a way to live life. These schools have a uniform for a reason.

hesel

If so, that looks like a white person who is dressed like a black gangster. In other words, that doesn't really help your argument. In fact, I'd say it does the opposite.

I didn't know it was possible to dress like a gangsta

I didn't know it was possible to dress like a gangsta

Bucked20

[QUOTE="Bucked20"]

I didn't know it was possible to dress like a gangsta

BranKetra

[QUOTE="BranKetra"][QUOTE="Bucked20"]

I didn't know it was possible to dress like a gangsta

Bucked20

[QUOTE="BranKetra"] That's dancing around the question. This is first time I've ever heard that nikes inspire gang culture. You can wear nikes to school. At least, in some American schools and colleges. As for tattoos, that's different, but I hear that some companies are okay with it, anyway, while others don't mind as long as it isn't visible, like on the forearm or face. It sounds like you're talking about a particular model for schools and companies, when there are obviously other standards.Overlord93

Yes, different schools have different standards. But that doesn't matter, If the kid wanted his haircut, he could go to a school that allows it. Rather than joining up to a school with an EXPLICIT uniform policy, which was apperently neglected by the parents. And expect to be given special exceptions because of where your parents were born

grape_of_wrath

[QUOTE="Bucked20"][QUOTE="BranKetra"]Yeah, it's possible. Doesn't mean it works, but people do it.BranKetra

[QUOTE="Overlord93"]

[QUOTE="BranKetra"] That's dancing around the question. This is first time I've ever heard that nikes inspire gang culture. You can wear nikes to school. At least, in some American schools and colleges. As for tattoos, that's different, but I hear that some companies are okay with it, anyway, while others don't mind as long as it isn't visible, like on the forearm or face. It sounds like you're talking about a particular model for schools and companies, when there are obviously other standards.VanHelsingBoA64

Yes, different schools have different standards. But that doesn't matter, If the kid wanted his haircut, he could go to a school that allows it. Rather than joining up to a school with an EXPLICIT uniform policy, which was apperently neglected by the parents. And expect to be given special exceptions because of where your parents were born

[QUOTE="grape_of_wrath"]

LJS9502_basic

Evidently LJS's opinon carries more weight for the UK than the House of Lords' opinion.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="grape_of_wrath"]

worlock77

Evidently LJS's opinon carries more weight for the UK than the House of Lords' opinion.

[QUOTE="VanHelsingBoA64"][QUOTE="Overlord93"] Almost all schools in England have strict uniform policies. My school didin't allow any makeup, piercings, rings, hair colouring, extreme haircuts i.e. #1 cuts, mohawks. My primary school didn't even allow watches. Uniform had to be exactly identical and had to be ordered through the school, as a boy you could be thrown out for having a navy blazer instead of a black one. This is done, as Piranha rightly said, to put everyone on equal. Nobody is different because of their clothes or their background. To bring conformity and dicipline.

Yes, different schools have different standards. But that doesn't matter, If the kid wanted his haircut, he could go to a school that allows it. Rather than joining up to a school with an EXPLICIT uniform policy, which was apperently neglected by the parents. And expect to be given special exceptions because of where your parents were born

Overlord93

Sounds like the schools in Britain try to enforce their narrow Anglo culture at the expense of all others.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Please don't mingle your posts within mine. Thanks. And you are still basing your opinion on partial evidence. Dress code is not discrimination. Be it direct or indirect.

LJS9502_basic

Evidently LJS's opinon carries more weight for the UK than the House of Lords' opinion.

From a legal standpoint, no, it really doesn't. The House of Lords make the law for the UK. Considering this is a thread about a legal case in the UK their opinion carries more weight than yours.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="worlock77"]

Evidently LJS's opinon carries more weight for the UK than the House of Lords' opinion.

worlock77

From a legal standpoint, no, it really doesn't. The House of Lords make the law for the UK. Considering this is a thread about a legal case in the UK their opinion carries more weight than yours.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]It carries equal weight. Opinion is opinion.;)LJS9502_basic

From a legal standpoint, no, it really doesn't. The House of Lords make the law for the UK. Considering this is a thread about a legal case in the UK their opinion carries more weight than yours.

That's a nice strawman you've got there. Did you build it yourself?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="worlock77"]

From a legal standpoint, no, it really doesn't. The House of Lords make the law for the UK. Considering this is a thread about a legal case in the UK their opinion carries more weight than yours.

worlock77

That's a nice strawman you've got there. Did you build it yourself?