The recent federal court decision that "the refusal to hire someone because of their dreadlocks is legal" is nothing other than an active, blatant form of racism. Let's be honest with ourselves, people are not attacking the hairstyle because of claims that it looks "unclean" and "unprofessional," but rather because they are uncomfortable with the racial and ethnic culture it represents.
With the arising "Black Lives Matter" movement, which brings to light the unjust executions of black individuals by police, white supremacy is under attack. Being in a country that was founded on the oppression of the indigenous and enslaved people of color, we have long been in practice of appearing to give "rights to minorities," only to then find a way to "legally" violate it.
The First Amendment of the United States Constitution is in place to protect the right to freedom of expression from government interference. Thus, in order to regain some of that "power," our white-washed federal government is supporting a constitutional violation, all in the name of keeping white power alive. This legalization of racial discrimination is not only unconstitutional, but a violation of human rights.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, (which was modeled after the United States Constitution) was proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly on December 10, 1948. The UDHR's Article 2 declares that "Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status." Although not a legally binding document, it is referred to as an outline for the fundamentals of Human Rights. Thus, when Article 19 iterates, "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression," there is again evidence of a rights violation. As Article 19 then continues with, "this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference," it can be applied to a person who holds the opinion that they should not have to change their hairstyle because they believe dreads are indeed professional. For holding this opinion, the individual should not be reciprocated with interference from the employer and government.
As was brought up by the Equal Employment Opportunity Committee in the Chasity Jones case, this is also a violation of Title Vll in the 1964 Civil Rights Act:
SEC. 2000e-2. [Section 703]
(a) Employer practices
It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer -
(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin
Dreads are being targeted as a racial characteristic, but our government, who has a death grip on white idealism, will continually claim their justification for legality when they are in the wrong. As people of the nation, we should not stand by and accept such tyrannical acts of power. People should not be eliminated from a job because of their hair; it should be about their efficiency and capability to perform the tasks the occupation entitles. Take a look at Albert Einstein:
Do you think he was reprimanded by the government for his hairstyle? Did the government then decide that it is was legal not to hire someone for having a crazy, unkept head of white hair?
NOPE.
And why not? How about because he was so brilliant, no one gave a hoot what his hair looked like. He was a white male who had both the status and privilege to avoid such ridiculous scrutiny. For a person's intelligence is not reflected in what they look like, but in who they are. However, dreads by no means suggest a lack of intelligence or professionalism — that was a stereotype created by racists.
I am not a woman of color or of African descent, but I believe dreads are beautiful, dignified, and an honorable representation of cultural heritage. As a white ally to communities of color, I believe it is important for the allyship to this community to call these claims what they are — an active practice of racism. During this critical cultural moment, I think it is important for allies to discuss these issues and stand with communities of color. People of color have been raising this issue of inequality for thousands of years, but they should not have to do this activist work alone. Equally important, no one should be actively discriminated against because they differ from the "white ideal;" for if it was a common cultural expression and hairstyle for white individuals to have dreads, I guarantee you we would not even be having this conversation.
