Black female lawmakers challenge Army hairstyle ban

[Jazzy]

WASHINGTON - Black female lawmakers are urging Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to reconsider revised Army regulations that ban hairstyles frequently worn by minority women in the military.

Sixteen female members of the Congressional Black Caucus signed a letter Thursday to Hagel, stating that the changes are "discriminatory rules targeting soldiers who are women of color."

They say that references in the rule calling hairstyles worn mostly by black women "unkempt" and "matted" are offensive and show a lack of "cultural sensitivity."

The lawmakers are encouraging Hagel to reconsider the regulation.

The Army regulation issued earlier this month bans most twists, dreadlocks and large cornrows- styles predominantly worn by African-American women with natural hairstyles. Though it's meant to help make soldiers' appearances consistent, black military women have criticized the update as racially biased.

Source

Do you think this ban is racially biased?

 

[gaze-universe]

It is and it isn't. I don't see why one group of people should be let have deviating hairstyles based on their predominance over it and fear coming off as racist by saying "No, you can't have that hairstyle in army." Then again, I'm not sure why hairstyle has to be regulated in army. Does it have some conflict with practicality when you're in service? Is long hair banned for other groups of women? Or pony tails? Braids? I think you have to compare it with other hair regulations in order to decide whether or not it's racially biased.

 

[Jazzy]

Female haircuts will conform to the following standards:

Females will ensure their hair is neatly groomed, that the length and bulk of the hair are not excessive, and that the hair does not present a ragged, unkempt, or extreme appearance. Likewise, trendy styles that result in shaved portions of the scalp (other than the neckline) or designs cut into the hair are prohibited. Females may wear braids and cornrows as long as the braided style is conservative, the braids and cornrows lie snugly on the head, and any hairholding devices comply with the standards below. Dreadlocks (unkempt, twisted, matted individual parts of hair) are prohibited in uniform or in civilian clothes on duty. Hair will not fall over the eyebrows or extend below the bottom edge of the collar at any time during normal activity or when standing in formation. Long hair that falls naturally below the bottom edge of the collar, to include braids, will be neatly and inconspicuously fastened or pinned, so no free-hanging hair is visible. This includes styles worn with the physical fitness uniform/improved physical fitness uniform (PFU/IPFU).

Styles that are lopsided or distinctly unbalanced are prohibited. Ponytails, pigtails, or braids that are not secured to the head (allowing hair to hang freely), widely spaced individual hanging locks, and other extreme styles that protrude from the head are prohibited. Extensions, weaves, wigs, and hairpieces are authorized; however, these additions must have the same general appearance as the individual’s natural hair. Additionally, any wigs, extensions, hairpieces, or weaves must comply with the grooming policies set forth in this paragraph.

Females will ensure that hairstyles do not interfere with proper wear of military headgear and protective masks or equipment at any time. When headgear is worn, the hair will not extend below the bottom edge of the front of the headgear, nor will it extend below the bottom edge of the collar.

Hair-holding devices are authorized only for the purpose of securing the hair. Soldiers will not place hairholding devices in the hair for decorative purposes. All hair-holding devices must be plain and of a color as close to the soldier’s hair as is possible or clear. Authorized devices include, but are not limited to, small, plain scrunchies (elastic hair bands covered with material), barrettes, combs, pins, clips, rubber bands, and hair bands. Devices that are conspicuous, excessive, or decorative are prohibited. Some examples of prohibited devices include, but are not limited to, large, lacy scrunchies; beads, bows, or claw clips; clips, pins, or barrettes with butterflies, flowers, sparkles, gems, or scalloped edges; and bows made from hairpieces.

Source

Reading this, I don't see why the Black female lawmakers are urging Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to reconsider revised Army regulations that ban hairstyles frequently worn by minority women in the military. Do you?

 

[gaze-universe]

Reading the above, it doesn't seem to me either that there should be a revise on the regulations. From what I've seen african american person's hair with dreadlocks looks better than caucasian's. But army might not be the place to wear your hair on dreads, especially if they're long. Cornrows, since they're not completely prohibited? I don't see the problem on setting such a guideline to keep it 'conservative' instead of allowing a more distinct personal style or preference in favor of personal/cultural expression?

How I see it, it comes down to a certain view of what this 'conservative style' means and both hair types have restrictions, in what I read. I don't see why race has to be brought up or why one should get offended about not getting a free style based on color or culture.

 

[Evil Eye]

Do you think this ban is racially biased?

I doubt anyone even considered race when drawing up these regulations.