New Morehouse College Policy Bans Sagging
 

From: AllHipHop.com
> [mailto:alerts@ allhiphop. com]
Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 8:00 PM

Subject: New Morehouse College Policy Bans Sagging

In an attempt to eliminate “inappropriate attire,” prestigious HBCU and private institution Morehouse College has adopted a policy that bans sagging and other styles associated with Hip-Hop culture. The “Appropriate Attire Policy” initiative is the product of Morehouse President Michael Franklin, who is seeking to reestablish what he’s coined as the modern “Renaissance Man.”

That individual, Franklin states, possesses the “5 Wells” of being well-spoken,
well-read, well-traveled, well-dressed, and well-balanced. Sagging is said to
have originated in the penal system, where prisoners were unable to keep their pants up due to belt confiscations to prevent suicides and murder. Although viewed as a style for juveniles, some prominent Hip-Hop artists in their 30s and 40s still utilize sagging in videos, concert, and award show appearances. Along with the new sagging ban, students will not be allowed to sport any form of grillz, do-rags, hats, “stunna shades,” hoods, or pajamas to class.

For the full story or to comment log on: http://www.allhiphop.com/stories/new.../21997091.aspx

What are your thoughts? My friends who attended and graduated from The House' would agree with the new policy.

At first I thought this said it banned "shagging." Randy, baby!! Carry on. :p

debated this on my chapter's listserv:

i support it. as much as i support people's individuality, i am a big proponent of dress codes and uniforms. i feel some kinda way about cutting locs being "highly encouraged." but that's been a debate in the corporate/academic arena forever.

i always thought wearing pjs to class was gross. you cant take 10 minutes to change your clothes and put real shoes on? and then you take the germs from outside and bring them to your room and bed? nasty.

ETA: i thnk i need to read the commentary and the actual dress code a little more closely, then i'll come back to this.

Elizabeth Gates expresses my opposition to this better than I ever could. Frank Leon Roberts, too.

And no, just because it is a private college does NOT mean it can "do anything it wants."

^^^OMG i went to school with Frank! love him and miss him!

I read both articles. They were both good articles, but I disagree. While being a private school does not allow Morehouse to do anything that they want they can do almost anything they want. The dress code definitely falls in to that arena to me. While as a student I am staunchly opposed to uniforms I have no problems with dress codes as some things are inappropriate.
To suggest that Morehouse's banning women's clothing (and other items) is "nothing short of a reversal of the ethical sensibility of Dr. King, who warned us repeatedly about the ruse of the exterior (color, gender, etc.) over the more substantive interior (intelligence, character, integrity)." [Roberts] is absurd. Race and Gender are not in any way equal to clothing. Discriminating against someone based on something they have NO choice in is entirely different from preventing someone from wearing inappropriate attire (at a private place of business no less).
The issue of the dress code is not a limitation of the rights of a person (it is a limitation on their freedom to dress as they please). It seeks to bring order to the classroom and campus. If you're going to mold the leading men of tomorrow then it is your duty to ensure that they know how and when to dress properly. If a man goes for an interview at any leading company in a dress and pumps I am quite sure he will meet disapproval. In presenting himself he also represents Morehouse as that would be where he attends or attended school. It would make Morehouse look bad as well. The point is that the classroom is a place of business and the school has the right to create rules and policies that govern it as such (as do all private entities).

As to the issue of discouraging young black men who would like to express themselves via wearing women's clothes or other clothes that are inappropriate I think it should be discouraged in the class room only. Anything that is to the detriment of others is typically forbidden and I think that is fair. Sitting in class with a man in a dress and heels is distracting for everyone in the room. Because it is detrimental to the purpose of the school it should not be allowed.
My problem with this is that I do not feel the university is doing enough to express that anything done on your own time is fine. By banning the dresses and women's wear it does seem to some to be giving an OK for others to ridicule men who express themselves that way. The University should make it known that it has no problem with students wearing these items outside of the classroom as a precaution and as a show of support for individuality of its students when it doesn't interfere with the purpose of the university.

I am not ignoring the fact that homophobia is real and harmful. The men at Morehouse have the double whammy of being in the south and in a black community two of the most notoriously homophobic groups. The reality is that a great many of Morehouse's affiliates have negative views on homosexuality and some of that has compelled the recent dress code change. I do not however believe that their expression of their homophobia (via the dress code) was unjust or unwarranted. I do not mean to say that their homophobia is warranted or just because it could never be. I mean that though their homophobia is disgusting and unfortunate it has not caused a detriment to those who it intended to. The dress code, while likely created by homophobes, is reasonable. It has been cloaked by the addition of Du-rags, pj's, and other items, but I do recognize that it is there. The fight against homophobia will never be won if this dress code (and things like it) is used as the example because it is justified.

The Policy
 

Morehouse College Appropriate Attire Policy
October 2009


It is our expectation that students who select Morehouse do so because of the College’s outstanding legacy of producing leaders. On the campus and at College-sponsored events and activities, students at Morehouse College will be expected to dress neatly and appropriately at all times.

Students who choose not to abide by this policy will be denied admission into class and various functions and services of the College if their manner of attire is inappropriate. Examples of inappropriate attire and/or appearance include but are not limited to:

http://brooklynboyblues.blogspot.com...leges-new.html

• No caps, do-rags and/or hoods in classrooms, the cafeteria, or other indoor venues. This policy item does not apply to headgear considered as a part of religious or cultural dress.
  
• Sun glasses or “shades” are not to be work in class or at formal programs, unless medical documentation is provided to support use.
  
• Decorative orthodontic appliances (e.g. “grillz”) be they permanent or removable, shall not be worn on the campus or at College-sponsored events.
  
• Jeans at major programs such as, Opening Convocation, Commencement, Founder’s Day or other programs dictating professional, business casual attire, semi-formal or formal attire.
  
• Clothing with derogatory, offense and/or lewd messages either in words or pictures.
• Top and bottom coverings should be work at all times. No bare feet in public venues.
  
• No sagging—the wearing of one’s pants or shorts low enough to reveal undergarments or secondary layers of clothing.
  
• Pajamas, shall not be worn while in public or in common areas of the College.
  
• No wearing of clothing associated with women’s garb (dresses, tops, tunics, purses, pumps, etc.) on the Morehouse campus or at College-sponsored events.
  
• Additional dress regulations may be imposed upon students participating in certain extracurricular activities that are sponsored or organized by the College (e.g. athletic teams, the band, Glee Club, etc).

The college reserves the right to modify this policy as deemed appropriate.
*All administrative, faculty, students and support staff members are asked to assist in enforcing this policy and may report disregard or violations to the Office of Student Conduct. "

Sorry to bust in on this thread, but I'd like some clarification from you guys. I am not in any way being snide or flippant- I would really like some opinions.

I read these articles and cannot understand the argument put forth by Roberts. I would like to know how simply because an institution is banning wear that, while somewhat popular and a "cultural fashion" (as Roberts puts it), it is bringing racism into question. The quote by Roberts: "The idea that young black men on college campuses are so developmentally arrested that the only way that they can distinguish between what to wear in the classroom vs. what to wear in "corporate America" is by prohibiting them from wearing sagging jeans at all times, is not only absolutely ridiculous, it’s also quite racist."

Why can't this policy be viewed as simply dressing appropriately? Why does it have to be about racism?

If the new trend for girls entailed some sort of shirt where there was a big shape cut out of the front of the shirt and the front of the girl's bra was in plain view, it would be rational for school officials to tell students to go home and change before wearing something that inappropriate to class. Or if they wore a skirt so short that their undewear was literally sticking out one way or another. I kind of view it as the same thing. I don't view it as conformity, but as an institution of higher learning trying to help their students along by introducing cultural aspects of the world known as "after college". I see it as Morehouse trying to get their students to put their best foot forward in everything that they do, including dress. While I agree with MLK Jr. about his comments that people should see others for what they are inside, and not the outside, unfortunately that is not the case. We will always harbor an injust view of a person (no matter how slight) due to the way that they look. However, I don't think that it is racist- I think it happens across every community. Maybe I'm just naive, but I guess what's why I'm asking for your views.

I agree with what Morehouse is doing. It's enough that so many young Black men don't utilize the opportunity to get a higher education but it says something when an institution has to make a rule to TEACH them how to dress appropiately in order to be successful in whatever career choice they make.

And with them banning men from wearing dresses, well, if they don't like the rule, transfer.

...or sue for discrimination.

I'm OK with all except the bolded - so theyre pretty much saying no crossdressing. Seems very "don't ask, don't tell" to me. or am i being a captain obvious?

i dunno, unless i'm missing something, im still OK with the dress code. i think college, in general, teaches you a thing or two about growing up and how to appropriately dress for the occasion. I think it's totally OK to set a code for classes, academic buildings (including the library) and official University events (where image is key and you represent a university standard, from the President down to the mailroom staff and security guards) but i think study areas, dining halls, and other casual campus venues could be a little more lax.

Does Spelman have a similar code, in particular, not wearing clothing associated with men's garb (fedoras, ties, etc)?

Yes. That right there. Even when I was in undergrad, there were certain professors that had some 'unspoken rules' about how to come prepared for class. Some were even more outspoken and I even witnessed one dean in my freshman year have a student leave because he insisted on wearing his grillz to class.

Some things you should know to do in your spare time and some you should know to bring to a professional environment.

I disagree. "Don't ask, don't tell" deals with sexual orientation. Sexual orientation and crossdressing (or transgenderism and transsexualism, for that matter) are not the same thing. Therefore, asking young men not to wear women's clothes isn't regulating who they are attracted to.

I agree with the rest of your post, except that the dresscode should pertain to everywhere on campus except maybe inside the residence halls. Laxing the dresscode beyond that will make it impossible to enforce without security measures that will be blasted in the media.

I think the real conflict is that people see college campuses as places of free expression and self-exploration. Most private and public institutions have always found ways, perhaps more subtle than a dresscode, to keep the more "distracting" modes of expression in control.

Morehouse's policy may just have bad timing and come as a surprise to those who enjoyed an all-male atmosphere where they could wear really baggy clothes or a woman's tunic. Advertising the assistance of an 11 year old didn't calm the naysayers, either. Hampton Univ. and other institutions didn't wait for shit to hit the fan to take a critical look at its policies. Give Morehouse's dresscode a few years and it will become ingrained in the college culture with much less hooplah.

Even jewelry wearing has a code - you wouldnt wear an iced out jesus piece to an interview or to church, right? Similarly, one wouldnt wear a string of pearls to the club.

Grillz (i love that its only spelled correctly with a "z") aren't ever appropriate, unless you have a cameo in a music video below the Mason-Dixon line.

I went to the hoodest of high schools and while im hardly the troublemaker, i got sent home once for a headscarf. My hair was a wreck that day, it just wasnt happening. His response?

"Is school not important enough to attempt to be presentable for your peers and teachers?"

My 16-year-old self argued, but the now-25-year-old me totally gets it. If you felt the need to take your braids out halfway, then come to class, your priorities are elsewhere. Handle that and come back.

LOL

As someone on the other side of the desk, I can attest to the very real ways that student attire can be truly disruptive to a learning enviroment, and in that I understand the administration feeling a need to in someway construct some parameters that help create an environment conducive to learning.

Have debated this with siblings, one of whom is a Morehouse grad and very much in support of the dress code, and one of the points that I have made is that colleges across the board are facing issues, most in the disciplinary range, that most do not have the infrastructure to deal with. The infrastructure does not exist because in the past such codes (both dress and behavioral) have been unwritten and yet uniformally understood and enacted. Colleges are now having to devise the regulations to try to curtail behaviors that, very honestly, did not exist on such a broad scale even 10, 15 years ago. They are not always going to do this perfectly in the first attempt. I would not be surprised to see this policy fine-tuned both in language and in implementation in the future.

Heck, my public high school (back in the 80s...LOL) had more dress rules that we understood than most places now.

I also agree with the bolded.

Back to the saggy pants tho...I have just been one of many that is of the opinion that saggy jeans are one of the most inappropiate displays of dress that any person of any race could wear and come outside in.

It's bad when a law has to be passed to tell someone that no one else wants to see your boxers!!

This kind of comes back to what I was just saying. You more or less had 'unspoken' rules about what to do, where certain things were and weren't allowed on campus. But nowadays, people iinsist on having EVERYTHING in writing in order to know what is being said and done is legit and on the table, so my guess is these rules are being put into place because of that.

Ok, point taken. To me, i read that particular rule as "you need to present yourself the way society expects a heterosexual male to dress." im not trying to box anyone in on the basis of their clothes, as i know lots of straight dudes who carry purses/totebags and IMO, wear what looks good on you. It just seems to me that if a student decided to wear a tunic and ballet flats, regardless of how he thinks it defines his masculinity or orientation, the institution is within bounds to disagree and enforce otherwise.

I don't think they should have put the no crossdressing part in with the "dress professionally, no saggy jeans" part - IMO they are two very different issues and people are doing them for two very different reasons. Plopping them all in the same code just muddies the waters about why this is being done.

DS - you asked about men's-style clothing. I don't know how Spelman could say no to it since it's become pretty culturally accepted. Vogue and other magazines have featured women in suits and fedoras - or grungy flannel & Docs - but I've never seen GQ do a housedress layout.

And FWIW, I would totally wear a strand of pearls to a club with beat up jeans and motorcycle boots, because I'm a punk like that. :)

Point taken but I think there is still a large part of of society where saggy jeans is not considered appropiate.

And while yes, certain styles may be seen in magazines, doesn't always translate into being a professional in the workforce, not unless that is what your job calls for.

This is what I meant about not mixing the two together. You just did it. :) Spelman could hardly ban something like this as I think it would be acceptable in most workplaces. But it's definitely on the "menswear" tip.

I think the guys wearing dresses to class have ZERO to do with the guys wearing XXXXXXXXXXXL white t shirts and saggy jeans to class. It's two completely different matters and should have been addressed as such. Because, theoretically, a transvestite can be in full dress and look perfectly appropriate in an office situation. As long as you don't know she's got some junk under that Tahari suit.

I think that still may depend on what the transvestite is wearing ;)

I don't know about you, but I rock my Jesus piece at all times, son.

Bonus points if it's got black diamonds, to go with your "all black everything. "

LOL. I actually have seen people with the blinged out Jesus pieces at church. The priest just gave them a dirty look during the sermon.

Time will tell....
 

After having read all of the articles, I have to say that I am for the dress code. I attended a private high school (over 10 years go) which of course had a strict dress code. While men in womens clothing was not something that ever occured on our campus, I'm quite sure it would have been deemed not acceptable. Not because of a homophobic administration, but because of the rules that each student simply has to abide. IMO, you cannot expect a group of 17 to 20 something males to truly understand why it would be important to leave your lax attire for the appropriate occasion. I truly believe that 10 years from now, they will all look back and appreciate that they were given direction and guidance that prepared them for awaited them beyond those walls. Self expression and individuality are perfectly acceptable (as previouisly mentioned) but there is a time and a place.

In reference to Dr. King and his statement regarding Men (or people) being judged by there content/character rather than skin color, I hardly think he was referring to sagging jeans or anything of the sort. He was speaking specfically regarding the racisim that he and other African Americans were experiencing at that time.

Cross dressing, while I do not support any type of discrimination on any levels I have to say that I also believe it is inappropriate for class. If a transgender woman is seeking or planning to have gender reassignment then they obviously would not be a candidate for Morehouse College. Otherwise I have to say that I'd support it whole heartedly. Just my opinion....

Screw you all, down with Morehouse!

lol

Yes, but what is racism if not judging a person or discriminating against them just because of their outward appearance. I don't know what the term would be, but judging somebody by what subculture they follow seems little different to me.

Screw you too, Senusret!!! :D

:confused:

actually...I find this interesting...the gay community at Morehouse itself voted to allow this rule to pass:

Couple this knee-jerk response with Morehouse's recent firing of an employee who made fun of that fabulous gay wedding, and we're not sure what to think of the school's feelings towards the gays. (Morehouse's Bynum insists the policy change came after he met with Morehouse Safe Space, the campus' gay organization, which voted to OK the policy change. "Of the 27 people in the room, only three were against it.")

link

Racism defined....
 

Racism is defined as....

1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

We have to be extremely careful with the words we choose to prove a point or opinion. So as you can see when we get right down to it, its apples and oranges...this has nothing to do with racism or discrimination (which is what Dr. King was speaking of) it merely a tactic to urge our young men to strive for perfection if not more than...Something I'm quite sure Dr. King would have not only supported but taken part in and with pride....

:rolleyes:

Of the responses I've read so far, this has stood out:

From yahoo NPHC listserv
The bottom line, I think, is Morehouse has every right to do this because they are preparing these young men for what the real world has to offer and also just like when a person becomes a member of a greek org, they represent that org weather they are wearing letter or not. I believe the same can be said for the Morehouse man. When he sets foot on or off of the campus, he is a visual reflection of the school regardless of what his personality is. You only get one chance to make a first impression. The way people are reacting to this you would think that someone's mother got shot. Is it really so bad that Morehouse wants it's student's to not only be the future leaders but know how to dress the part?

Something my mother used to say is "We (both parents) wouldn't be doing this if we didn't care. How would you like it if no one cared?"

I think Morehouse is doing the same thing. If they didn't care they wouldn't have done this. A parent should always want what's best for their child? Right?

The schools mission statement:


I think that the dress policy is an action that fits within the mission statement.

Interview on CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bes...dress.code.cnn

I'm 100% for personal expression but there is always a time and place. I attend an art school. We're ground zero for expression of all types. What Morehouse is saying no to, I see every day not only at my school but in the city I live. I expect that. For what Morehouse is, stands for, perpetuates, I would expect to walk onto that campus and see clean, polished young men preparing themselves to take over the world.

Message to Alumni from President Robert M. Franklin’75
 

As I was sorting through the numerous responses on the listserv, I came across this:

An Important Message to Alumni from President Robert M. Franklin’75

Dear Alumnus:

Please take a moment to read the following message from President Robert M. Franklin’ 75.

We hope you had a great Homecoming Weekend!

The Morehouse Model: Dressing the Part

Morehouse College recently implemented an “Appropriate Attire Policy.” The policy is the result of more than two years of discussions on aligning our student development with the College’s historical mission of producing educated and ethical leaders. I have said since taking the Office of the President that it is my vision to produce Renaissance Men with a social conscience and global perspective. The Appropriate Attire Policy communicates standards of dress and behavior that reflect the Renaissance Man at Morehouse.

The attire policy is only one element of a comprehensive student development program that not only outlines appropriate on-campus dress, but also challenges students to discuss the balance between individual expression and social responsibility. This is an ageless debate that calls each generation to discuss, discern and formulate solutions that work for their time and their circumstances.

We, better than most, understand the need for self-expression of young African American males in this society. Many of their expressions, such as spoken word and socially conscious rap, styles of dress, and even hairstyles are forms of self-expression designed to further define their identity and set them apart. But other forms, including wearing sagging pants, do-rags and “grillz,” have become associated with negative stereotypes of black manhood.

Since the policy was released, a lot of attention has centered on the standard that prohibits men from wearing women’s clothing on campus. Some critics have concluded that Morehouse seeks to discriminate against certain groups of students, specifically gay, transgendered and bisexual men. This is not our intent. In fact, we have worked diligently to ensure that Morehouse is a safe, inclusive, and respectful community with a strong commitment to social justice, diversity and respectful tolerance.

We welcome lively and creative debate on diversity, civility, and open-mindedness with the understanding that these are qualities that serve as the foundation of every liberal arts institution. As we seek to implement our expectations and values, we have felt it important to identify specific behaviors (like sagging pants, caps in classrooms, profanity in public and aggressive conflict resolution) that are contrary to the College’s traditions.

Sincerely,
Robert M. Franklin’75

Here's another thought,

Most or in fact I believe that all public schools in the US have dress codes and Zero Tolerance Policies and some even make their students wear uniforms.

Corporate America has high standards and the purpose for college is to prepare a person for that world so they might as well start their training on the right foot.

Serious. . .;)

This is a great thread I'm enjoying reading everyone's comments. . . .

:)

Great topic! Well said Sorors NinjaPoodle and Serioussigma.

Great topic, excellent pros/cons arguments.

I graduated Spelman and my husband graduated Morehouse. As alumni, we both were sent literature about this "appropriate dress policy", from our colleges, respectively.

The reasons stated to us were that students were getting killed due to their clothing--ie saggy pants, hoochie mama outfits, etc. Gangs who resided in nearby project housing were showing up on campus at night doing nefarious acts while it was unknown if the students were mixed up in it or not. And students were getting hurt because of it.

Of course this out of the sites of the guards and let's just say the camera budgeting is limited.

Last month a young woman who attended Spelman was shot as a bystander during some altercation.

Atlanta PD is unable/unwilling to differentiate the students from the "locals", so they arrest everyone and ask questions later. When a Morehouse student gets arrested, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, et al. are all to happy to print it as headlines in this current news business climate, moreover, if CNN gets a wind of it, guess who is reported...

Seriously, that Morehouse endowment's bottomline is effected. You cannot have Morehouse students looking all kinds of ways being arrested on anybody's media outlet and think that the benefactors won't call and ask questions. Moreover, Morehouse students sign a code of ethics and behavioral statements as Freshmen. If they get arrested they can be expelled...

What is so hard about wearing appropriate dress to class from the unique nature of a Historically African American college in the United States and global leader?

I can understand a young person's choice to desire "freedom of expression" during his collegiate experiences, but seriously, why matriculate at Morehouse College, then? Especially, when there are myriads of colleges and universities in the world that will let him run around in his "birthday suit"? Tis much easier to switch schools than change this ideology, because this system will NEVER change!

*HI! Sorors BlueReign & SeriousSigma22!*http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-greet013.gif

AKA_Monet, I think you hit the nail on the head.

One other thing. If it were possible, I think some schools should go back to In loco parentis.

Thank you for your kind response, not trying to crash your thread.

What you are saying is from Booker T. Washington's "Up From Slavery"--for Tuskegee University.

I think many people who poo-poo-ed HBCU's in the 1980's & 1990's are finding that an HBCU-education is a unique learning complex that actually works for African Americans for really >100 years. That says something.

AKA_Monet, thanks for bringing up some points that no one else did. I don't think I realized Morehouse was that close to/in Atlanta proper. (Or more likely, I underestimated how doggone big Atlanta is.)

The Atlanta University Center, that typically includes Spelman/Morehouse are located in the West End Center, off the I-20, nearby I-75. 2-3 Marta stops from Peachtree (how do I know ;) )

I have heard that area has progressively gone downhill due to drugs & violence. While I was there, there were some students involved in serious drug trade, but the guns were not there until I was a senior. I graduated out in time.

Several social determinants are unfulfilled there.

Just like Ninjapoodle said, folks are sending their kids and copious amounts of money so that the schools will watched over these students, they would and EARN a degree the SpelHouse way. The Spelhouse Way includes appropriate dress AND appropriate behavior--i.e. etiquette--a Southern style of etiquette (religious mixed with ethnic cultural customs, rituals and behaviors).