Girl Excluded From School Photo For Hair Bow

I can see why someone would infer from the written hair-related rules that probably a hair bow is a no-go. But, I also can see why someone else would look at those same rules and think they were in the clear with said hair bow.

Team poorly written code.

Also, I agree with whoever said the kid looks like a Bratz doll.

And I hate Bratz dolls with a passion.

For those that are wondering what is wrong with braids, from a religious persepctive, some Christian denominations do not allow braids because of the following Scripture:

1 Timothy 2: 9-10

Likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works.

Some people take that to mean no braids at all and others take it to mean that hair should be done in a manner that doesn't draw attention. I'm not sure of the Catholic stance (sounds like a Catholic school) on this issue, but I doubt they forbid all braids. I have a feeling the rule exists to keep children dressing in a way that isn't attention-grabbing (probably why they also have school uniforms - duh). That bow draws attention to the girl. It's not a braid, but it goes against the school values, obviously. I bet the little girl got a lot of attention for her hair that day from all of the other children.

And the clothing is gross. I agree she looks like a bratz doll. I hate that style of clothing for small children - anything that makes them look like pop culture trash. She may be covered up completely, but the outfit draws attention to her and makes her look like a mini-hooker, IMO.

A hooker? REALLY!?!!! You seriously look at that kid and think that her clothes are selling sex?

Yes. Do I think the child is trying to sell sex? No. Do I think the parent bought the clothes with that intention? No. But I think that entire "look" and culture for children is one which causes our children to grow up way too early.

I'm a prude and I dress very plainly. I see fashion as a way that people try to express themselves. The way you dress obviously says something about you. To me, clothing like that on a little girl sends a "diva" or "princess" (and not in the innocent way) or "sexy" message. I look at the little pre-teen girls dressing this way on the popular kid shows, especially the ones about being rock stars, and there are sexual undertones to the way the children move.

That's a little girl to me. She is being dressed like a woman. To me, those styles automatically sexualize her in the same way putting a child in a beauty pageant does. Yuck.

But once again, I'm a prude and not really into fashion in the popular sense. I don't find those animal prints and sparkles attractive at all, even on a grown woman. On a child it looks ridiculous.

God forbid a child sparkle or shine. To me, you make it sexual, not the child.

God forbid we focus on showing them how to sparkle or shine from within instead of through their clothing (which is the intention of the school dress code, I believe).

We all draw the line somewhere between what is and isn't appropriate for our children. Obviously, you are fine with that style. I am not. No biggie.

Honest question - when you look at that outfit (the picture on the top and the animal prints) what is the message that you believe it is sending? What are the words that come to your mind?

I see a little girl who is proud of who she is. I don't assess smarts on what a kid wears.

I think that no beads targets black children, but to be honest the first thing I though of when it said braids was a white child with long blonde hair in braided pigtails. I didn't consider a black child with many small braids until the image was posted.

I can kind of see where if you think that a number of things are distracting to a child's education that plastic clanking hair beads would be one of those things.

I certainly don't see her as sexy. As far as the hair, I am not talking about the hair but the point that her clothes are sexy.

I don't see the clothes as a "look at me style". I just don't get why does a kid have to be covered from head to toe or plainly to be assessed as smart or an individual? This isn't what she wore to school.

Or at least that is the point I am trying to make.

I should probably stop letting my kid wear cowboy boots to school. People might think she is a real cowgirl.

I'm not even engaging AW on this one. Not.trying. Although, I have to say I wouldn't let my little girl wear that outfit either. The shoes pinky would browbeat me into buying for her but the rest of it is tacky tacky tacky and looks like shit Theresa from RHONJ would stick on her kid.

And you know, little black girls don't have to wear cornrows so I don't take it as a personal affront if I came across a school that axed them.

Also, I'm pretty sure it never occured to the school that an attention seeking hairdresser would fashion his kid's hair into a bow on top of her head so I'm not sure why we're all surprised that it's not mentioned in the dresscode.

Is anyone else picturing this guy?