Perhaps he could have known the word would be seized upon. After all, with the term’s opposite, “diversity,” being treated by so many today as a theological principle bestowed from on high, it’s not surprising that using the concept of “conformity” to defend an action would invite scorn. But perhaps this raises the question:
Which term has now has taken on the flavor of a false religion and heresy?
The case at issue involves Texas official Greg Poole, the Barbers Hill Independent School District (BHISD) superintendent, and a black teen who the district says is violating its hairstyle policy.
The Washington Post reports on the story:
A week after a Texas superintendent took out a newspaper ad to defend the continued suspension of Darryl George over the way he wears his hair, the Black teen’s family filed a third request for a religious exemption to allow him to return to school months after he was originally disciplined.
George’s family sued the state’s governor and attorney general in September, alleging that the state failed to enforce a new law that prohibits hair discrimination when the high school junior was suspended because the district said his hair was too long. George has been repeatedly suspended and disciplined since.
“Being an American requires conformity with the positive benefit of unity,” wrote Greg Poole, the superintendent, in a Jan. 14 full-page advertisement in the Houston Chronicle, referencing dress codes at military academies as an example he said demonstrated the importance of rigorous standards. The ad ran after the Chronicle published an editorial criticizing the district’s actions.
Poole wrote that the suspension was based on George’s hair length — not style….
With the way the teen’s hair desires are being defended by the Chronicle, some may wonder if its name should be the Follicle. This one-sidedness, in fact, is apparently why the BHISD decided to get its message out via an ad.
There’s more to this story, too, of course. Poole states that other black pupils have been granted religious exemptions, but that boys’ hair must not extend past their eyebrows or earlobes and that George’s does so when let down. The teen’s mother, Darresha George, claims the hairstyle is a religious imperative that keeps them “closer to the Higher power God.” She’s also accusing the district of racism (well, there’s a first), asserting that some white students are allowed to sport longer hair.
What claims are correct, however, and whether the BHISD’s hairstyle code is ideal are actually secondary to deeper issues that largely go unaddressed.
Yet before proceeding, know that this is an issue because, in an example of Lone Star State wokeness, the Texas Legislature passed and Governor Greg Abbott signed into law last year “a version of the Create a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair Act, known as the Crown Act,” relates the Post. This measure is billed as preventing “hair discrimination,” but thwarts local control and facilitates desires to wear counter-cultural coiffures.
Whatever one’s opinion, however, the deeper issue is the comic-book understanding reflected in this issue’s treatment. For instance, the Post mentioned Poole’s “conformity” call as if he was a blaspheming heretic. This was reflected in the relevant MSN.com comments section, with one respondent claiming, “‘Conformity” has never been part of our DNA.” Sure about that?
Interestingly, I just recently addressed this subject while tackling our “diversity” obsession. To wit:
In reality, both diversity and conformity are necessary and good — in certain situations.
We absolutely, for example, want conformity to the truth that one mustn’t commit murder, rape, or theft; to the imperative of having nice manners; to the virtue of honesty; and many other goods. As for diversity, it’s an inescapable reality, with people being taller and shorter, stronger and weaker, smarter and duller. It also can be a good: That people have varied gifts is why we’ve had Einstein, Pasteur, Aristotle, da Vinci, Aquinas, Watson and Crick, and history’s other geniuses. We have diversity in products and services and invention and innovation because man has diversity in talent and inclination.
But our diversity agenda is like pig-face’s [a fictional demagogue I’d mentioned] conformity demands. It’s divorced from the only thing that informs us as to when diversity or conformity is desirable: Truth. When this happens, an agenda, which should be meant to serve the good, becomes the “good” — aka a false god.
With respect to school dress and hairstyle codes, unless you believe it’s okay letting kids attend class au naturel (or how about in a thong bikini?) or with the most ridiculous hairstyles imaginable (see here, here, and here), you support such codes, too. Ergo, this is just an argument about where to draw the lines — and who should be drawing them.
Contemplating this, remember that kids are immature; they’re easily distracted and need structure and discipline. Is it not possible, too, that the now much bemoaned in-school disorder in behavior just reflects the disorder in dress? Note here the principle, “If you want to play the part, it helps to look the part.”
But comic-book commentators and commenters don’t ponder the above; thus is it not surprising that the Post presented the comic-book version of Superintendent Poole’s letter and omitted a most interesting point he made.
The “Chronicle criticizes limited dress code conformity that is correlated to student success,” he wrote, “yet wholeheartedly sanctioned complete face-mask wearing conformity that is still questioned today as an adequate defense against COVID-19.”
Ah, so the great diversity chiefs do demand conformity — as long as it engenders a unity of collective insanity.
