Man, if only that woman had followed the rules and sat at the back of the bus.

It's a bad dye job and sorry to say, she looks like a complete slob in general. If she was fighting for something she spent tons of money to get done I'd be more inclined to back her up, but this just seems like a half assed Martha Dumptruck attempt to be with the cool kids.

I highly doubt Rosa Parks would like being African American compared to pink hair.

OH man, for real? She wouldn't like being African American? Instead of having pink hair?

I understand the "point" you're trying to make. I'm not saying African American = pink hair. I'm saying that people who are willing to challenge rules they consider unfair are pretty awesome and are more likely to contribute in a meaningful way to our society than people who just blindly follow the rules because they are rules.

Yes but institutionalized RACISM and discrimination do not equal "Mommy the school won't let me dye my hair :("

Sure, buck the system, but she's going to fail her classes.

Nobody here is saying that institutionalized racism is the same thing as not being allowed to attend school with pink hair. That would be like saying pink hair is like going to school in your underwear -- it makes NO sense.

Let's get something straight here, kids:

Schools are NOT intended to spawn "by-rote" automatons, NOR are they intended to prepare you for any sort of 'job' - there are plenty of trade/vocational schools available for that purpose.

Let me make that more clear for some of you:

If you want your kid to be prepared for the 'real job world' by a school, send him to a vocational school.

Since most of us here are elitist suburbanite assholes (I know I am), most of us also know that the very term "vocational" has a stigma attached to it - and sometimes rightly so, as it is where you place 'problem children' etc.

School is intended to educate children - to teach them the educational basics we have deemed necessary for everyday living. Let's stop this ivory tower garbage about "She'll fail in the real world so f- her!" - if the school's dress code does not allow pink hair because it may be a distraction, so be it. If you think that pink hair actually IS a distraction in a school, you're probably functionally retarded, but hey, you agree with the school, so be it - you can understand where the administration is coming from.

If you realize that "distraction" is NOT the reason why this student is being punished, and instead there is some sort of decorum utilized to 'prep for the real world' (as many of you have so kindly put it) or, more likely, in some vain or ill-conceived attempt to force homogeneity for disciplinary purposes, then you ALSO fully understand why the child wants to challenge the system.

As far as the mother supporting that, I say to each her own - the student can always learn lessons in school, and dropping back one quarter is not the end of the world. Greater wars have been fought over less, so march on, brave beat up bad-dye-job soldier.

The dresscode is unconstituntional. She has every right to defend herself, her choice of haircolor, and her overall personal by any means necesary

If I came to school with NAIL POLISH on, I would have been asked to remove it or go home. And my mother would have backed the school up. I would have been the dumb one for going to school inappropriately "attired". IF some kid wore a T-shirt that offended PinkHairedGirl I bet her mother would be the first one complaining.


Parenting people!

I don't know what vocational-technical schools are like in your neck of the woods, but ours certainly wasn't a problem child dumping ground. Quite a few of the kids who went there were very intelligent and could have easily excelled in the college prep curriculum - it simply wasn't what they wanted to do and their parents (thank God) weren't closed minded snobs who were going to force them to do it.

And while it prepared them to do a certain job, I don't think they were any more or less prepared for interviewing, what to wear at work etc than anyone else. I mean if you were in cosmetology you knew what to do in that field, but if you got out of it you were probably clueless.

I understood RC's point to be that your run-of-the-mill public schools aren't intended to prepare students for the "real job world," but vocational schools are. I'm sure he'll correct me if that isn't what he meant -- but FWIW, I agree with the statement.

No, its not.

School Boards can create dress codes at their own discretion....providing that the provisions of the code serve to increase or maintain educational instruction and to do away with anything that can be deemed distracting or obstructive to the educational process.

I might also add that our votech ran on a system where the kids went to their home school and votech on rotating weeks (I think it might be semesters now) - they didn't go solely to the votech, they were still part of the student body with the college prep and business students and everyone else. I know it's not like that everywhere.

At any rate - I don't know what it's like where this girl is going to school, but our school had choices for curricula other than college prep or votech. My point being that just because she isn't in votech, doesn't mean she's not going to come straight out of school and get a job.

This is exactly the kind of conversation I was trying to avoid.

My point is exactly as Valkyrie posted - vocational schools are specifically intended for 'job preparation' while non-vocational schools should not be saddled with such expectations, as they exist to educate students, not to get them jobs. To argue otherwise is to a.) bastardize education, which should be a more 'pure' exercise and b.) place too much burden on teachers/administrators.