A Native American Family Fights Against Hair Length Rules

Well... I am truly appalled. In this day and age, hair is still an issue!? How many doctors, lawyers, business people, technical people, etc., have long hair, beards, body piercings, tattoos? Take off the blinders you ignorant, useless, POS, and LOOK around you. Oh, maybe in Needville you don't see them, but long hair on males is NORMAL. Get that!? NORMAL!! Damn... For what, 40 years at least?

Doggone, this man in Needville needs to get a clue and leave these folks alone. NO ONE, but NO ONE has the right to tell anyone else how to wear their hair, beyond stating that it must be clean and neat.

Let this child go to school, wear his hair as he wishes. Thankfully, these clods who think men must wear long hair and have a suit and can't have tattoos or piercings are rapidly dying out -and good riddance. Maybe one day we can all stand on our own merits and not have to put up with foolishness like "you will wear your hair like this, your clothes like this, believe/think only this, no smoking this, no drinking that, no having sex with whom you choose".

Until that day, we will simply have to tolerate those who are rich in ignorance and poor in intelligence.

I wrote "Thankfully, these clods who think men must wear long hair " and meant "Thankfully, these clods who think men must wear short hair". My mistake.

If the child is not enrolled in that school, why aren't the parents finding a school to accomodate their child instead of filing a suit against the school to take their boy? As a parent myself, if the issue was that important to me, I would make the effort to drive my child to an accomodating school even if it meant driving an hour every morning. If the school district feels this way, yet the parents insist on the child attending, isn't that subjecting your child's education to values you don't agree with (not just on this issue but probably others as well)?

I believe the school district is within rights to set their policies how they see fit. If a parent doesn't like a policy, then they have a right to transfer to one that agrees with them. It seems that the parents want to take the easy way out and force their child upon the school because it's the closest, not because it is the best for their situation.

Carouselambra, they shouldn't have to find a different school for their son to exercise his constitutional rights. The school district is NOT within their rights to make an unconstitutional rule and this family is holding their ground. They're not just doing this for their son, though that is their top priority...they are doing this for every Native American in this country that has been discriminated against and told that we can't be who we are. They are doing this for future children that religiously and culturally don't want to cut their hair, and shouldn't have to, to go to a public school. We didn't get religious freedom until 1978, and still, 30 years later we're not granted those rights all over the country. This family is doing a very important thing by standing their ground. They shouldn't have to drive their son far away to go to school, or find a school that can "accommodate" them....their religious beliefs should be accommodated anywhere. Walk a mile in a Native Americans shoe for once, and realize that we're still fighting for equal rights. They are descendants of the same tribe as me, and I am really proud of them and proud that I am a member of such a strong tribe with strong people in it, like them.

The question of why this school, why not just move to another has been asked before. We are zoned to that school and if we just go away, we are teaching our son that his rights are not worth fighting for. It also shows the school district that it is ok for them to ignore the rights of students and their families.

The easy way is not always the right way. When school segregation was abolished it wasn't easy for those students who were "different" either.

"The school district is NOT within their rights to make an unconstitutional rule and this family is holding their ground". What constitutional right is being violated? The schools (here in Texas) do make rules and have policies that go against some basic liberties, such as limited speech and which clothes you can or can't wear. When this boy uses the word "penis" as the article has mentioned he has (or the word f*&k, or wears a questionable shirt, or writes a fictional story about blowing up the school, etc.) are the parents then going to sue over his expulsion because his rights were violated? Children are not granted the same rights and priveleges as adults, especailly when in an organization such as a school (or boy scouts, or Little League, etc). While I have no problem with the speech or actions of this family or little boy (other than possibly suing the school), the school boards are elected by their constituents and they set the rules that they want their students/children to follow. It is a reflection of how that community wants their children to behave. In this case conservative town, conservative board. Shocking or unexpected? No. That's why they should look for an alternative until a school board is elected that sees things their way. It seems strange that they would want his education shaped by people they disagree with on a major issue (to them) such as this. What else could they teach the child that goes against their individual beliefs and mores that they wouldn't know about? Isn't that more of a concern than this one issue?

Can't the school make an exception for this child for religious/spiritual reasons?

I know plenty of kids with short hair who are little hellions raised by incompetent parents. Here is a child with parents trying to teach him to be a good citizen, and the school is hung up on his hair length. And it's long for cultural reasons, not just because he wants it long.

And I thought HISD schools were horrible.

The civil right being violated is that of religious freedom. The school cannot take away all rights of students and that has been proven in many court cases before. Also, the word "penis" is the correct term for a body part. Why would he or anyone else get in trouble for using it correctly?

"Also, the word "penis" is the correct term for a body part. Why would he or anyone else get in trouble for using it correctly?"

If the school has a problem with long hair, don't you think they would have a problem with that word even if/when used correctly outside of science class? Let's make some assumptions (I hate doing it, but I'll base it on my own experiences with school districts): Against long hair = conservative. Conservative = No sex ed or abstinance only. No sex ed or abstinance only = consequences incurred when word "penis" or any similar word is spoken. What other problems is this boy going to run into if the progressive parents insist on sending him to (what sounds like) an ultra-conservative school? Worse yet, why aren't they concerned about the conservative leanings possibly being taught/learned by the boy if that is against the core of that family's values (but in line with the community's core of values, hence the board representatives that they elected to enact/enforce such policies)?

I feel it is the families rights to have their child not cut his hair, if that is what the child wants.
Many years ago, My son, all the way thru school, here in Harris county, did not cut his hair from Sixth grade all the way thru high school. He wanted it that way, and I felt if it wasnt harming anyone. Then that is what he wanted. We kept it trimmed and very nice, but he finally cut his hair totally short, when he was 29 years old. But again that was HIS choice. NO one elses. His rights!!!
if this child wants his kept, then it should be that way.
For his Indian beliefs. The family I Thank you for standing up for your child and beliefs. And I bless you for that too. You do have people behind you.
Sutanith

This is definitely about religious freedom. The superintendent sounds foolish when he says:

"I've got a lot of friends that are Native-American Indians from Oklahoma, South Dakota, lot of places, some over in ­Louisiana in the Choctaw Nation, and they all cut their hair," Rhodes says."

How ignorant! There is much diversity within the Native-American community. They all don't have the same religious beliefs. Just because you know a few doesn't give you the right to trample over this family's rights.

I hope this family wins their suit.

Yes, this story has made its way across the United States.
Does this principal know anyting of Indian ways? Traditions? Does he know Indians with long hair was here lone before the white man invaded?
I know many Indians from many states, including the states the Principal mentioned, in fact I am married to a Cherokee and have studied the Cherokee ways. Some Indians have traditional long hair, others have their hair cut short and many have in between lengths. And in todays' world many men(Indian or other) wear their hair long but that doesn't mean they are hoodlums or going to be trouble makers
Is it so much the rule the principal is trying to uphold or is he afraid of a different culture that he perhaps doesn't understand? I don't see why this young man cannot keep his long hair as this is his traditon.If he keeps it neat and clean what is the big deal?? Hair does not make the person..just because a child has short hair does not mean he will not cause trouble at school nor does it mean that a child with long hair will be a trouble maker.If the school board upholds their religious beliefs by opening with their prayer why can't an Indian child have long hair which is part of their beliefs?
I am happy to see a young person stand up for their culture and their traditions. And by the way does the principal know the term "native American" is a white mans word?
I say give the boy and his family a chance.

I'm Native and you can believe that when I have children, their hair will not be cut. I was brought up traditionally by the ways of my people and I sure am not going to change just to appease a precious little snowflakes. Our ways and traditions have existed here long before the Mr. Columbus ever even saw our shores.

On the point at hand, Mr. Rhodes' arguements are pure garbage.

1.Not all Natives are the same and you can sure believe that some of us have remained traditional and have not assimilated.

2. Many professionals I have seen with beards and/or long hair, doctors and lawyers included. There's a way to have long hair and beards and still looks clean and professional. Heck many professionals have tattoos and body piercings too these days.

3. If he wants use the moral "values" argument- even Jesus had long hair.

4. This isn't pre-1990s, time for him and the school system to get with the times.

1. "The community" here has NO RIGHT to tread on the Constitution, any more than "the community" had a right to pass Jim Crow laws decades ago.

2. This couple owns 50 acres in Needville. They pay property taxes. This child has every RIGHT to an education without having to give up his religion.

3. If we had school vouchers, maybe these parents would have more choices. But NISD has a monopoly on tax monies, so unlike a private business, they are mandated to provide an education for ALL children in their district, regardless of religion. And that means, according to the law, they cannot disallow that child entry to the school any more than they can tell a child in a wheelchair to find another school.

4. This isn't gang colors, mildly offensive t-shirts, or (*gasp*) piercings, people, it's HAIR. The girls in this class will have hair that is just as long, this is only a "requirement" because the child also happens to have a PENIS. (Yes, I said it, PENIS PENIS PENIS. Grow the hell up.)

5. Unlike a rule to "listen to your teachers," NISD has no legitimate reason for this rule. Otherwise, girls would have the same hair length requirement. Contrast this with an industrial site where beards cannot be *SAFELY* worn due to employees needing the ability to use a short-term air supply in an emergency... *that* is a rule with some merit. This isn't.

A long-haired man once said, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath." In other words, it doesn't matter how important "the rule" is, when a rule does not serve the people under that rule, it is not a sin to ignore it. Even if your grandpappy thought it was a good idea.

So, WWJD? He would, unfortunately, be that child being turned away at the schoolhouse door, because Nazarenes don't cut their hair either (not to mention that he would be expelled for unexcused absences for all those Jewish holy days--but that's another issue altogether).

It's amazing to see the same people who would fight tooth and nail to protect a child's right to pray in school will also deny another child's right to keeping their long hair.

Now, I'm for the rights of children to pray as well, but if it came down to it, at least a child *COULD* just pray outside of school hours. This child's beliefs include a simple practice that won't disrupt the class and can't be just turned off when the child comes onto government property.

Why aren't they concerned about the conservative leanings possibly being taught/learned by the boy once he enters the school if those teachings are going to be against the core of his family's values? This is my question to the parents since they disagree with the hair policy (and probably many others in the school they have yet to learn). Are they implying it is okay to be brain-washed and coerced by the district through their teachings as long as they let him keep his hair. Aren't they really saying "I want you to educate him with a conservative slant, even though we also disagree with those teachings, just as long as you don't cut his hair"? Shouldn't they be lucky to discover this policy and be able to say "I don't want my child taught by these closed-minded people"?

carouselambra, by using your reasoning then people who are discriminated due to their ethnicity should have gone back to their mother country instead of fighting for equal rights. That's pretty silly.

Michelle has already answered your questions above. They choose to stay in this school district because this is the school district they are zoned to. This school district has an obligation to educate children, regardless of the length of their hair. They are going to fight this because it is the right thing to do, just as it was the right thing for millions of African Americans to stand up against the racist laws that dominated our country not too long ago. They will not flee to another school district because fighting this unjust rule is the right thing (and the AMERICAN thing) to do.

And now, carouselambra, I will move on to doing the many constructive things I need to do today, like work in my garden. Because I have better things to do than come back to a news article numerous times hoping that someone wants to fight with me.

"by using your reasoning then people who are discriminated due to their ethnicity should have gone back to their mother country instead of fighting for equal rights"

Wow. That is some assumption based on the fact that my comments or question had nothing to do with discriminition or race. The question refers to the parents purposefully subjecting their child's education to people with whom they don't agree. In Texas (at least in Harris County), you don't have to go to the school you are zoned in! There are a number of exemptions that will allow a student to transfer to other districts, this issue being one of them (I'm referring to the issue of disagreeing with the quality of the educators). Based on the replies, I guess I was wrong in assuming that parents would be more concerned about the quality of the people teaching the child. To me it relates to having an unfit babysitter watch your child just because they lived next door and were available. No wonder the majority of our youth can't think for themselves if parents aren't concerned about this issue. This kid seems to be more advanced than other children his age. 'Tis a shame the parents want to send him there and probably stunt his potential in this school district.

carouselambra, just because the school has a "conservative slant" and unconstitutionally wont allow their son to come to school with long hair, does not mean they disagree with everything the school is going to teach. Just because a school may have a "conservative slant" in their rules does not mean that their education is not at par with national standards, doesn't mean they're not teaching the correct curriculum, etc etc. Schools can't just teach whatever the way, no matter how conservative or liberal they are...they have to teach to certain standards, so the education their son would get there would be no more or less "brain washing" than any other school, the education itself would be no more or less conservative than any other school and the child would be able to learn just as much at that school than any other, because it is a public school held to certain standards. Their conservative rules don't necessarily reflect their teaching, the quality of their education or how well the kids are taught. This fight goes way beyond what school these parents want their son to go to...it has national implications (and I hope it helps nationally, not just locally)...it is a battle for equal rights that will carry across the country. Just like in the 60's when people fought against segregation - same deal here, except it's 200-friggin-8 and this shouldn't even be an issue today. They are just fighting for their son to be able to get the same quality of education that every other child in the community gets, and by your reasoning about half the kids in that school should be driven a few hours to school somewhere else because their parents disagree with the conservativeness of the school, because I am willing to bet that not everyone in that community is conservative.

Mr. Rhodes... it's pretty narrow minded to say , If they say it I do it!

so..

To you then I say, "Go jump off of a bridge!"

I cannot believe in 2008 a school district so close to where I live is so ignorant and bigoted as to not allow a 5 year old to express his heritage. What is the point of living in this country...oh, wait. The Native Americans were here first. The white Europeans just imposed their "heritage" on everyone and everything. Perhaps the "newcomers" ought to conform to the natives' ways. Shame on you Needville. You make me sick.

If you come to my home you need to follow my rules.

If girls are allowed to have long hair, they they have to allow boys to also. This is basic nondiscrimination law.

I was born and raised in Texas (mesquite) I have lived in Houston, and being Native American myself I was shown race problems simply because I had a sign on my truck that stated that I was Native and proud of it. But it is pretty sad to say the least that this poor child has to go through the same problems that our ancestors did. Come on, it isn't fair that Natives still have to fight for our rights and religious beliefs when the Europeans do what ever it is that they want religiously! How is that fair? Our beliefs weren't changed just because they wanted it traditionaly for 500 years. Give up we will never be Europeans. Leave the boy alone.

Well, I can say that this right here is ONE reason why I home school my youngest children. I have put 3 through the public school systems and telling people how you have to wear your hair is just ridiculous! I am not Native American, nor is my husband, but I see nothing wrong with long hair on males and my boys had long hair up until the time that they wanted it cut. This Mr. Rhodes says he is a rule follower not a rule breaker, why are we rule breakers just because we don't want to live like robots!! We are all individuals and we should be treated as individuals, not robots who look, talk, act and do everything exactly like everyone else!

This is what is wrong with our world today, we are not allowed to be ourselves!

Does this man Rhodes have no honor? When I seen this incident on a national news broadcast this morning I could not believe something like this was happening here in the USofA, and especially in TX. Is this man Rhodes so ignorant that he doesn't know that many men and women have died, and are still dying, so little five year olds can wear braids to school if they choose? Or dread-locks, or pigtails, or shaved-heads? And doesn't this man Rhodes know that a great portion of those who made the ultimate sacrifice for freedom were American Indians? It is very upsetting to me that the words heritage and beliefs are coded for plain ole' bigotry by this man Rhodes. I am an American Indian, as is my grandson, who will also be starting the first grade in another few weeks, but not with braided hair as two of my sons did, but with a Mohawk style of hair. And I know his great-grandfather, who served with the 101st during wwII, would be proud.
For this man Rhodes, in the famous immortal words of Voltaire, "I may disagree with everything you say, but I shall defend to the death your right to say it." And Mr. Rhodes, if you cannot understand what this means, I suggest that you go to the nearest recruiting station and enlist for at least four years, take your turn on guard duty while on a night patrol/ambush, walk point, detonate some claymores from a LP, dodge some AK-47 rounds, then when, or if, you make it back home, reflect on how you then feel about little six year olds wearing their hair in braids to school. GET A LIFE!

Long hair is not a constitutional right. And since Texans are not required to enroll their children in public schools--they have the right to homeschool their children--public schools have a right to set their own standards of behavior and dress. The biggest problem with public schools is that they are saddled with the responsibility of being all things to all people; instead, they end up pleasing nobody completely, and pissing off most people instead. This family moved into the Needville area completely oblivious to the cultural atmosphere of the residents. They should have done their homework. It sounds to me like they would probably prefer to homeschool their child anyway. There is help out there for parents who choose to do that.

Rhodes is a follower if he always does what is asked of him.
How are children being taught under these guidelines. What does the length of ones hair have to do with the ability to learn.I thank the Lord my children never had to encounter such racist views. I thought TX was suppose to be evolving?

Sandy

Rhodes is a follower if he always does what is asked of him.
How are children being taught under these guidelines. What does the length of ones hair have to do with the ability to learn.I thank the Lord my children never had to encounter such racist views. I thought TX was suppose to be evolving?

Sandy

The only concern here is to ensure that the hair is clean; there should be no issue as to its length! The hair on the young lad is braided- no accessories or extra dressing; it's respectful. The district's adults have been more disrespectful than the child or the parents. I agree, it's 2008; one's hair does NOT define the individual's personality or position in society.

As Native American's we should not have to cut our hair because it's a school policy, our people already have lost alot because of the white man. Do they not understand how much it means to Native Americans to live or be traditional?
Well as a Native American Woman I stand up for myself and let no one tell me how to live my life nor let the white man.

As Native American's we should not have to cut our hair because it's a school policy, our people already have lost alot because of the white man. Do they not understand how much it means to Native Americans to live or be traditional?
Well as a Native American Woman I stand up for myself and let no one tell me how to live my life nor let the white man.

I am Native American and my grandson has long hair, he has been called a girl. My grandson wears a head piece that requires a long braid to hold it on. He dances and we follow the pow wows. I understand the hair part of this disagreement but I don't understand why he would want to live in a place that has publicly announced (in this article)themselves to be "tight", unwilling to open their minds and proud of it. There is so many nice, friendly places in this country.

I am Native American and my grandson has long hair, he has been called a girl. My grandson wears a head piece that requires a long braid to hold it on. He dances and we follow the pow wows. I understand the hair part of this disagreement but I don't understand why he would want to live in a place that has publicly announced (in this article)themselves to be "tight", unwilling to open their minds and proud of it. There is so many nice, friendly places in this country.