The purple hair in question that got my daughter sent home from school, presented for you to decide how “distracting” it seems to be.
I spoke with the vice principal at North yesterday (Ms Patton-Griffin?), and she explained that the primary reason for the “no un-natural hair color” is to prevent gang activity. She said that gangs often use certain colors to identify themselves, most often red and blue. Well, OK, by that logic, shouldn’t the school also ban gang colors on clothing, purses, and such? Her second reason was that the un-natural hair color was a distraction, and stated that several people asked her on Wednesday, “Why does SHE get to color her hair?” Hm. Well, if the policy was changed or rescinded, then any kid could use any color, and no one would feel slighted. And how is hair color any more distracting than green nail polish, or red eye shadow, or even big, dangling earrings, or any other such personal effect that kids (and adults) use to express themselves?
I dunno. This “natural hair color only” policy leaves me scratching my head. There’s a school board meeting on Monday evening; we may attend and see if the policy can be reviewed. Any of you folks had experience with this policy, or tried to change it?