Boy 8 told long hair has to go

Clippings from news sources involving fashion freedom and other gender equality issues.
STEVIE
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1963
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 11:01 pm
Location: North East Scotland.

Re: Boy 8 told long hair has to go

Post by STEVIE »

HI Sinned.
Coincidentally, you have just echoed a sentiment expressed to me by a female colleague today.
Why would it look "odd" is my question to you as it was to her?
It really makes no difference whether it's tied back unless there are safety issues.
The kid himself should be able to choose for himself and that is what really counts.
As I said earlier, I don't believe this is a gender issue.
The school has simply made a decision based on conservative and outdated views.
Steve.

User avatar
Sinned
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 4213
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England

Re: Boy 8 told long hair has to go

Post by Sinned »

Steve, I just think that he would have difficulty keeping to the "2 metre" safety rule with hair that stood out that far from his body! I mean, long hair is ok and everyone should be able to choose but the way he has it is in the best possible way to antagonise the situation. Let's have a bit of moderation here and safety here. I wonder if he back-combs it to get it like that?
I believe in offering every assistance short of actual help but then mainly just want to be left to be myself in all my difference and uniqueness.

User avatar
Fred in Skirts
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2912
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2016 6:48 pm
Location: Southeast Corner of Aiken County, SC USA

Re: Boy 8 told long hair has to go

Post by Fred in Skirts »

It looks like he stuck his finger in a wall outlet. I have seen demonstrations of ultra high voltage generators where a woman with hair that went down to her bum was standing an a platform when the power was turned on her hair stood out just like that.. :geek: :rofl:
Fred :kiltdance:

"The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle."


"It is better to be hated for what you are than be loved for what you are not" Andre Gide: 1869 - 1951

STEVIE
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1963
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 11:01 pm
Location: North East Scotland.

Re: Boy 8 told long hair has to go

Post by STEVIE »

I will admit that I hadn't looked at the photo but still think that it is just a fashion statement and no more.
As for some risk from infringing the social distancing rules, I doubt it. Sinned, I think you exaggerate and down that road lies social paranoia not safety. Besides, the kids themselves will be effectively exempt in this country anyway.
Fred, you have said on many occasions that you pay no heed to what others think of how you dress and appear. I can respect that but bear in mind that this kid may just feel the same way.
Having said all that, I personally don't like the look either.
However, if we summarily condemn anyone else's, can we not only expect to be so judged on our own choices?
Steve.

User avatar
r.m.anderson
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2101
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 6:25 pm
Location: Bloomington MN USA

Re: Boy 8 told long hair has to go

Post by r.m.anderson »

If he has not be advised - he should be made aware of the hazards of L-O-N-G hair:

First off a FIRE hazard -
Stay away from moving parts and machinery -
Beware of sticky gummy entanglements
If working in a kitchen/galley the requirements of wearing a hair net -
In a restaurant keeping the hair out of others dining space -

There are others - care must be taken to the extreme otherwise the
loss of those locks maybe necessary to escaping what snarled snared them.

At least it is not as bad as 6 feet of unkempt finger or toe nails !

And wait to when he sports a beard ! LOL !
"Kilt-On" -or- as the case may be "Skirt-On" !
WHY ?
Isn't wearing a kilt enough?
Well a skirt will do in a pinch!
Make mine short and don't you dare think of pinching there !

User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 11458
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: Boy 8 told long hair has to go

Post by crfriend »

It's worth pointing up that having long hair is intrinsically no more dangerous, say, than breathing or crossing the street. It's also the individual who has the responsibility to keep himself from harm and nobody else's. If anyone tries to "take responsibility" for the actions of another adult he is overstepping his bounds, full stop.

To Stu's comment about it being a "signifier" of sorts, what happens in the case where it is a sign of precisely nothing other than an individual style choice made for personal preference? I suspect that the overwhelming cases of that are of that type. Of the notion of it being inherently "feminine" I'll point out that very, very few women have long hair today.

Ditto with skirts. Everybody want to jump on one bandwagon or other and infer meaning into the act when quite likely it is nothing more than a style choice on the part of the individual who is freely expressing that choice.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!

Stu
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 792
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 8:25 am
Location: Sweden

Re: Boy 8 told long hair has to go

Post by Stu »

crfriend wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2020 1:20 pm
To Stu's comment about it being a "signifier" of sorts, what happens in the case where it is a sign of precisely nothing other than an individual style choice made for personal preference?
There are two ways of thinking about a signifier: one is from the point of view of the producer of the sign and, in this case, that would be the boy. The other, more generally accepted definition, relates to the receiver - how is the sign interpreted? If the boy with long hair is sporting that look because it's just his individual expression of his preference of style, then nothing happens in that respect, which is why it's not generally relevant. In terms of its interpretation, then it depends largely on the prevailing culture. You say that "very, very few women have long hair today", but I am not sure that's entirely true. However, comparing boys to adult women can be misleading as you are comparing children with adults. Very few young boys have hair which is mid-back length and stringently maintained, whereas this is common for girls of the same age. When a boy does have hair of that length, he risks being mistaken for a girl and some people would inevitably wonder if that was intentional. Someone above mentioned Kai Schreiber, a 12-year-old son of actor parents, and who is not a trans girl so far as i know. I doubt anyone would look at him and think he was a boy being individualistic, but rather that he was a girl or a very feminine bot. What do you think?

Image

pelmut
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1256
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 10:36 am
Location: Somerset, England

Re: Boy 8 told long hair has to go

Post by pelmut »

Stu wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2020 4:15 pm
There are two ways of thinking about a signifier: one is from the point of view of the producer of the sign and, in this case, that would be the boy. The other, more generally accepted definition, relates to the receiver - how is the sign interpreted?
There is a third way: it may not be intended as a sign at all.  Some people in this group wear skirts because of the signs they send out, but I suspect far more have different reasons, such as comfort, convenience or just a desire to try it and see.  There are quite a lot of posts indicating that skirt-wearing being read as any type of sign can be a bit of a nuisance -- and being read as a sign that the wearer is something which he isn't can be very upsetting.
There is no such thing as a normal person, only someone you don't know very well yet.

Stu
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 792
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 8:25 am
Location: Sweden

Re: Boy 8 told long hair has to go

Post by Stu »

pelmut wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2020 5:11 pm
There is a third way: it may not be intended as a sign at all.
Yes, that's true, if you are defining signs from the perspective of the transmitter rather than the receiver, which is the less orthodox way of interpreting a sign in semiotics. To demonstrate that, think of an example where you see smoke pouring out of a neighbour's house and assume the place is on fire. There was no intention by the neighbour to use the smoke to inform people that there was a fire. However, these generally coincide, which is why we understand the process of signification. The boy in the picture may have long hair because he sees that as a signifier that he identifies with the female sex rather than the male sex, or he might just like long hair. Taken with the other signifiers (his clothing), former becomes more likely from the point of view of the transmitter. The receiver, on the other hand, will make interpretations of the signifiers according to cultural conventions. As the boy is not trans, he is the exception to this rule. While receivers will assume he is a girl, and that if they discover he is biologically male they will likely assume he identifies as a girl, the reality is that he is simply expressing his preferences in terms of his appearance and, in doing so, defying semiotic conventions.

User avatar
Fred in Skirts
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2912
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2016 6:48 pm
Location: Southeast Corner of Aiken County, SC USA

Re: Boy 8 told long hair has to go

Post by Fred in Skirts »

STEVIE wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2020 9:57 am
Fred, you have said on many occasions that you pay no heed to what others think of how you dress and appear. I can respect that but bear in mind that this kid may just feel the same way.
Having said all that, I personally don't like the look either.
However, if we summarily condemn anyone else's, can we not only expect to be so judged on our own choices? Steve.
Steve I was not trying to shame the boy he can where what he likes high voltage hair and all. I was just saying what it reminded me of..
Fred :kiltdance:

"The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle."


"It is better to be hated for what you are than be loved for what you are not" Andre Gide: 1869 - 1951

User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 11458
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: Boy 8 told long hair has to go

Post by crfriend »

Stu wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2020 7:24 pm
The receiver, on the other hand, will make interpretations of the signifiers according to cultural conventions.
In this case the receiver is clearly in error, and the error is likely caused by potentially deliberate confusion over what a simple style choice might involve. This is the hill we here are trying to take.

Will we succeed? I have no idea. The optimist in me, however, is hopeful. But there is one Hell of a lot of noise that has to be cut through in the interim.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!

Stu
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 792
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 8:25 am
Location: Sweden

Re: Boy 8 told long hair has to go

Post by Stu »

crfriend wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 1:37 am
In this case the receiver is clearly in error, and the error is likely caused by potentially deliberate confusion over what a simple style choice might involve. This is the hill we here are trying to take.
Can I slightly re-frame that and then we can agree. Rather than saying that the receiver is in error, are we not instead challenging the cultural conventions that give rise to this perception?

pelmut
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1256
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 10:36 am
Location: Somerset, England

Re: Boy 8 told long hair has to go

Post by pelmut »

...or the receiver is in error for using erroneous cultural conventions ?
There is no such thing as a normal person, only someone you don't know very well yet.

User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 11458
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: Boy 8 told long hair has to go

Post by crfriend »

Stu wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 6:54 am
Rather than saying that the receiver is in error, are we not instead challenging the cultural conventions that give rise to this perception?
That's fair, note that in this case my usage of the term "in error" ascribed precisely no blame for it is the innocent sort of error we can all make if our tools or experience is faulty or incomplete.

Our actions are largely out of the realm of common experience, and thus will tend to confuse those with less-than-open minds. However, that does not excuse the receiver acting out if we are causing no injury to him.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!

Stu
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 792
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 8:25 am
Location: Sweden

Re: Boy 8 told long hair has to go

Post by Stu »

pelmut wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 7:56 am
...or the receiver is in error for using erroneous cultural conventions ?
They aren't "erroneous cultural conventions" - I am not sure if such things exist. What I am saying is that we are challenging cultural conventions every time we, as men, walk out in a skirt. We are not saying the cultural convention is "erroneous", but simply that we wish to change it in order to give ourselves more freedoms and choices.

Post Reply