Black Texas student given additional suspension for loc hairstyle | CNN
www.cnn.com
A Black Texas high school student who was suspended because his loc hairstyle violated the district’s dress code was suspended again upon his return to school Monday, an attorney for the family told CNN.

クロスポスト: https://lemmy.world/post/5414417

A Black Texas high school student who was suspended because his loc hairstyle violated the district’s dress code was suspended again upon his return to school Monday, an attorney for the family told CNN.

Darryl George has been suspended for more than two weeks because his loc hairstyle violates the Barbers Hill Independent School District dress and grooming code, according to his family.

The code states that “male students’ hair will not extend, at any time, below the eyebrows or below the ear lobes,” CNN previously reported.

  • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
    431·
    1 year ago

    The code states that “male students’ hair will not extend, at any time, below the eyebrows or below the ear lobes,”

    Conservatives really believe they can Hitler Youth their way out of diversity.

    If only they put half that effort into funding schools adequately so kids would have the class sizes and resources to learn. Nah, that’s for 1st world countries, not shitholes like us.

    • Shinhoshi@lemmygrad.mlOPEnglish
      211·
      1 year ago

      1st world countries

      Your daily reminder that this is a Cold War era term, so 1st world = US and allies; 2nd world = USSR, China, and allies; 3rd = everyone else

      I think you meant 2nd world countries ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

      • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
        45·
        1 year ago

        Which world is a plutocracy?

        We’re that one in practice.

        Also, language evolves rapidly, terms change meanings over time often.

        Try getting 100 random people or even college graduates and try to get agreement on the modern meaning and usage of socialism.

        Words and terms evolve, even dictionaries make regular changes to react to already in use changes over time.

        I think the more modern usage is 1st world= developed socioeconomic infrastructure 2nd world = developing nation 3rd world = impoverished/underdeveloped nation.

        • Shinhoshi@lemmygrad.mlOPEnglish
          7·
          1 year ago

          Which world is a plutocracy?

          Definitely the capitalist and colonizing “first world” countries, no question. Their wealthy even control Global South countries to a large extent.

          I think the more modern usage is

          If you meant Global North and Global South, just say it. But it’s completely ludicrous to suggest the US is a Global South country, so I suspect you didn’t mean that.

      • SulaymanF@lemmy.worldEnglish
        217·
        1 year ago

        First world are democracies, second world were communist countries, third world were everything else.

        • albigu@lemmygrad.ml
          141·
          1 year ago

          First world are democracies

          lol.

          third world were everything else.

          This is a fun one. Assuming communist countries aren’t democratic (which is incorrect), then the third world is mysteriously neither democratic nor communist. It must be a strange situation to be in, to think that the 1st is democratic, but then the 3rd which is controlled by the 1st is not, and somehow the commies are the anti-democratic ones.

          If one examines that situation, they’ll inevitably question why those countries would be kept undemocratic but also anti-communist (which again is supposed to be the negation of democracy) by those very same democratic countries, but that’s dangerous thoughts for a 1st worlder.

          • SoylentBlake@lemm.ee
            11·
            1 year ago

            No joke. There’s so much nuance thats just glossed over.

            Any country can democratically decide to democratize the means of production (that’s what communism is, it’s like us, but with EXTRA democracy) Marx said it was inevitable. I think he’s right.

            Neo-libs find it impossible that a society would actively choose a government that puts the importance of everyones quality of life, establishing a medium or high floor thru social programs, ahead of making money.

            Cuz how could anything be more important than making money, amirite?

            Reminds me of conservatives screaming voter fraud. Cuz if a democrat won then there’s was clearly fraud; no REAL American would vote for a Democrat, right boys, right?!?

            Like holy fuck people. Do you ever hear yourselves? Have any kind of introspection?

            (R’s screaming voter fraud… They are the party of projection, if there’s fraud, id check Republican wins first. Notably the Senate wins of Rand Paul, Mitch McConnel, Susan Collins and the Fuckface from South Carolina…all were polling waaaaay down before election day. Turns out they ALL had a +17 point swing. +17. That sure seems weird…what, we can’t check those machines? REALLY?!)