Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ARMY GROOMING REGULATIONS: 'RACIALLY BIASED'?
Big Peace ^ | 4/2/2014 | AWR HAWKINS

Posted on 04/02/2014 3:02:52 AM PDT by markomalley

Approximately 6,000 people have  signed a petition claiming the U.S. Army's new grooming regulations are "racially biased" against "women with ethnically diverse hair."

According TIME, "soldiers and civilians signed a White House petition" asking the Army to "reconsider" the new regulations, which bar "twists, both flat twists as well as two strand twists; as well as dreadlocks, which are defined as 'any matted or locked coils or ropes of hair.'"

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Government
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

1 posted on 04/02/2014 3:02:52 AM PDT by markomalley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: markomalley

there were those with “sensitive skin” asking for waivers so they wouldn’t be required to shave in the 80s


2 posted on 04/02/2014 3:04:32 AM PDT by yldstrk ( My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Ain’t no bias - 1/8-inch clipper guard, take it to everyone.


3 posted on 04/02/2014 3:08:42 AM PDT by grobdriver (Where is Wilson Blair when you need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

I wonder why they want to get rid of dreads. If they are done nicely, they look professional. I don’t think they would get in the way of emergency gear. Kinda silly to get rid of a policy that worked for a long time.


4 posted on 04/02/2014 3:09:37 AM PDT by napscoordinator ( Santorum-Bachmann 2016 for the future of the country!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
Nope ... satanically biased.

Everything wrong or amiss in America can be directly attributed (imo) to the satanic effort to enslave and kill a free people.

ANYthing muzzie is satanic, so there's about half the problems there.


We tend to water down or completely forget the impact of Jesus and holiness in our formative years.

5 posted on 04/02/2014 3:12:10 AM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true .. I have no proof .. but they're true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk
I remember that in the early 70s. Black soldiers getting “folliculitis” and getting a waiver for shaving.
6 posted on 04/02/2014 3:12:53 AM PDT by Gaffer (Comprehensive Immigration Reform is just another name for Comprehensive Capitulation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Air Force 35-10 regs barred Mohawk style haircuts in the late 70s.


7 posted on 04/02/2014 3:15:53 AM PDT by Yo-Yo (Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grobdriver
Ain’t no bias - 1/8-inch clipper guard, take it to everyone.

Yup! That was the haircut, the ONLY haircut, we were offered!

8 posted on 04/02/2014 3:22:41 AM PDT by Road Warrior 04 (Molon Labe! (Oathkeeper))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

biggest stink in the barracks in the 60’s ... smelled like a women’s salon burning hair.


9 posted on 04/02/2014 3:24:09 AM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true .. I have no proof .. but they're true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

always rebels


10 posted on 04/02/2014 3:29:13 AM PDT by yldstrk ( My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk

“RACISIM, RACISIM, RACISIM”........Anyone tired of hearing that cried about every thing on earth? I know I am.

I’m racist against white tennis shoes
I’m racist against Black coffee
I’m racist against Irish green T-shirts
I’m racist against racists
I’m sick of hearing about racists

Need I go on?


11 posted on 04/02/2014 3:45:39 AM PDT by DaveA37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

The armed services will now be cutting back on maneuvers, firearms training, and instruction in the use of explosives to arrange for extra time to be spent on fashion sense, grooming, counseling in personal appearance and racial sensitivity, and instruction in homosexual techniques.

It’s an Obama kinda thing.


12 posted on 04/02/2014 3:46:43 AM PDT by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Progov

And the very next thread of FR started out titled, (you guessed it), “Racisim At The Root of Detroit’s Problems”


13 posted on 04/02/2014 3:48:52 AM PDT by DaveA37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Our president is a joke. Congress is a joke. Public schools are a joke. Now our military is becoming a joke.

I don’t recognize America any more.


14 posted on 04/02/2014 3:53:27 AM PDT by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

To my knowledge, dreadlocks were not allowed by the old regs.

Mostly, the new regs define hairstyles more narrowly and specifically than the old regs. Before, the female regs stated that hair must be above the bottom of the collar, or be put up—there may have been more to it, but I don’t recall since I haven’t read it in a while. The new regs state what is acceptable in a hair style—no changes in length more than 1” (so none of the really short in the back, long in the front), parts must be straight, short hair cannot be shorter than a certain minimum, long hair cannot be put up in a lopsided fashion, etc. The new regs also state that females can only wear clear nail polish, where before, we could wear “conservative” colored polish.

I’m not sure why anyone would want to wear dreadlocks in the first place. It’s hard enough to keep hair clean, why would anyone want to make it even more dirt and germ catching?


15 posted on 04/02/2014 4:07:17 AM PDT by exDemMom (Current visual of the hole the US continues to dig itself into: http://www.usdebtclock.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley


16 posted on 04/02/2014 4:14:02 AM PDT by JoeProBono (SOME IMAGES MAY BE DISTURBING VIEWER DISCRETION IS ADVISED;-{)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: exDemMom
I’m not sure why anyone would want to wear dreadlocks in the first place. It’s hard enough to keep hair clean, why would anyone want to make it even more dirt and germ catching?

The whole point of dreads is that they are never supposed to be washed. It's an Aboriginal/Rastafarian thing.

17 posted on 04/02/2014 4:20:53 AM PDT by The_Victor (If all I want is a warm feeling, I should just wet my pants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

That has to be one of the silliest uses of the PC phrase “ethnically diverse” I have ever seen.

How precisely does one have “ethnically diverse hair”? Hair characteristic of three or four different ethnic groups on different parts of the head? Blonde hair that naturally forms an afro if grown out?


18 posted on 04/02/2014 4:43:58 AM PDT by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
Sgt. Jasmine Jacobs signed the petition. She said: "Most black women, their hair doesn't grow straight down, it grows out. I'm disappointed to see the Army, rather than inform themselves on how black people wear their hair, they've white-washed it all."

I see what she did there. It's actually pretty clever.

19 posted on 04/02/2014 5:02:39 AM PDT by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th (and 17th))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

My brother is in now and he has a special disposition where he doesn’t have to shave with a trimmer, he uses an edger which gets really close but his hair, like mine, can’t be allowed to get under the skin. He’s already had surgery to remove keloids once. I also don’t see the problem with short twists for women which can be under an inch long. A black womans hair does take a lot of upkeep but there are several styles they’re banning that are short and neat.


20 posted on 04/02/2014 5:05:34 AM PDT by Raymann
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson