Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: GOP Jack*ssery gone wild: Boehner’s spokesbot says being gay is a choice, religion is not Previous entry: Bill Donohue: gay adoption “against nature,” Catholic Church has homo, not pedophilia problem

Morehouse dress code bans cross-dressing: it’s not ‘expected in Morehouse men’

FashionLGBTRace

We are talking about five students who are living a gay lifestyle that is leading them to dress a way we do not expect in Morehouse men.”
—Dr. William Bynum, vice president for Student Services

When sweeping statements like this are made, it makes you want to ask Bynum if he knows if there’s a difference between gay/trans/cross-dressing, since it’s pretty apparent from the ignorant statement that he probably doesn’t. (CNN):

An all-male college in Atlanta, Georgia, has banned the wearing of women’s clothes, makeup, high heels and purses as part of a new crackdown on what the institution calls inappropriate attire. No dress-wearing is part of a larger dress code launched this week that Morehouse College is calling its “Appropriate Attire Policy.”

The policy also bans wearing hats in buildings, pajamas in public, do-rags, sagging pants, sunglasses in class and walking barefoot on campus.

Senior Devon Watson said he disagrees with parts of the new policy, especially those that tell students what they should wear in free time outside of the classroom.

“I feel that there will be a lot of resentment and backlash,” Watson said. “It infringes on the student’s freedom of expression. I matriculated successfully for three-and-half years dressing so how is this a problem?”

It’s one thing to ban droopy drawers and dressing in pajama bottoms on campus because it looks unprofessional, but when you cross into the territory of a blanket statement about gender expression, it’s discriminatory. What if a male student shows up for class dressed in a sharp tailored woman’s business suit, appropriate footwear, etc? to Bynum, that’s equivalent to dressing up like Carmen Miranda with a basket of fruit on her head.

According to the CNN article, Bynum met with the campus gay organization, Morehouse Safe Space, which voted on the policy and overwhelmingly supported it, 27-3. MSS says on its Twitter page that “We are the ONLY LGBT Organization @ Morehouse College. We strive to find an alliance amongst Gay & Straight Students in the AUC.” I think it’s a safe assumption to say the “T” is there as lip service based on that vote. Given how there’s already a lack of affirmation for LGB at many HBCUs, the trans issue is simply not enough on the radar to put up a fight, and that’s sad.

An another article (Atlanta Journal-Constitution), Bynum gives additional reasoning for the no-dresses policy that are also revealing and relevant to note.

“This is necessary, this is needed according to the students,” he said. “We know the challenges that young African-American men face. We know that how a student dresses has nothing to do with what is in their head, but first impressions mean everything.”

It shows you how black (and other POC) trans folk are double damned in their communities—they are the living hurdle to cultural acceptance and thus are vilified in policies like this.

***

The article also notes that at Hampton University that would enrage me—students with braids or dreadlocks are encouraged to cut their hair. Again, locs are becoming more acceptable in the workplace, HBCUs are concerned that aside from an afro (I assume it would only find a short one acceptable), that locs and braids even a well groomed styles, are an impediment to employment when one is already dealing with racial discrimination. It’s not fair, but I’d have to say, in some parts of the country and some professions, this crap is still true. You have to land the job first, and then see if you can “go natural.”

The Morehouse Dress Code Policy is below the fold.

Morehouse College Appropriate Attire Policy
October 2009

Published in The Maroon Tiger

It is our expectation that students who select Morehouse do so because of the College’s outstanding legacy of producing leaders. On the campus and at College-sponsored events and activities, students at Morehouse College will be expected to dress neatly and appropriately at all times.

Students who choose not to abide by this policy will be denied admission into class and various functions and services of the College if their manner of attire is inappropriate. Examples of inappropriate attire and/or appearance include but are not limited to:

1. No caps, do-rags and/or hoods in classrooms, the cafeteria, or other indoor venues. This policy item does not apply to headgear considered as a part of religious or cultural dress.

2. Sun glasses or “shades” are not to be work in class or at formal programs, unless medical documentation is provided to support use.

3. Decorative orthodontic appliances (e.g. “grillz”) be they permanent or removable, shall not be worn on the campus or at College-sponsored events.

4. Jeans at major programs such as, Opening Convocation, Commencement, Founder’s Day or other programs dictating professional, business casual attire, semi-formal or formal attire.

5. Clothing with derogatory, offense and/or lewd messages either in words or pictures.

6. Top and bottom coverings should be work at all times. No bare feet in public venues.

7. No sagging—the wearing of one’s pants or shorts low enough to reveal undergarments or secondary layers of clothing.

8. Pajamas, shall not be worn while in public or in common areas of the College.

9. No wearing of clothing associated with women’s garb (dresses, tops, tunics, purses, pumps, etc.) on the Morehouse campus or at College-sponsored events.

10. Additional dress regulations may be imposed upon students participating in certain extracurricular activities that are sponsored or organized by the College (e.g. athletic teams, the band, Glee Club, etc).

11. The college reserves the right to modify this policy as deemed appropriate. *All administrative, faculty, students and support staff members are asked to assist in enforcing this policy and may report disregard or violations to the Office of Student Conduct. “

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Pam Spaulding on 12:50 PM • (36) Comments

Examples of inappropriate attire and/or appearance include but are not limited to:

So they are going to empower clothing police whose exercises of discretion will be reviewed by a clothing judicial system?

Comment #1: PhysioProf  on  10/17  at  01:18 PM

I wonder what Dean Lawrence Carter thinks of this? I’ve heard him speak before at a Buddhist (SGI) meeting in NYC.

Comment #2: pitbullgirl65  on  10/17  at  01:29 PM

Why would a transgender or transvestite (m -> f) person want to go to an all-male school?  Let’s leave aside the issue of single-gender education; if the person sees herself as female all or part of the time, it doesn’t seem like the best situation for her.

Not to say that the rule is right or wrong.  And the administrator is an idiot for conflating G and T.  But if the school as a whole is willing to educate straight and gay men equally (again, something that probably deserves its own post), then I think it is fulfilling its mission.

Mixing trans people and single-gender education (or living arrangements/facilities at co-ed colleges) is always going to be an issue.  I think you could make an argument for a m->f transgendered person at an all-women school, but I could also see some women there being uncomfortable with the presence of a physically male person at a place that’s supposed to be safe and empowering for them.

So to sum up, Bynum = douchebag, but this is a very difficult situation that might have no clean, easy answer.

Comment #3: Dave Fried  on  10/17  at  01:54 PM

The no hats rule is bad too.  Unless Morehouse is unlike every other college campus I’ve been on (including some in the South), climate control is spotty and/or outside the control of the people occupying a given space.  Which means it can get uncomfortably cold.  If the temperature can’t be adjusted, the logical thing to do is wear more clothing - including perhaps a hat.  I know I’ve worn a hat at work - for warmth - on more than one occasion, as have multiple coworkers, and I even wrote part of my dissertation wearing gloves.  (Yes, that makes typing an interesting challenge.)  The hat thing though, is just short sighted and perhaps a bit callous.  Rule #9 is plainly bigoted.

Comment #4: libdevil  on  10/17  at  01:54 PM

We know that how a student dresses has nothing to do with what is in their head, but first impressions mean everything.”

The answer to that is to challenge the impressions people make based on these things.  Fight for changes so that people are expected to judge based on personality rather than appearance.  (This would fit in well as a secondary issue in challenging the way people tend to subconsciously judge things like economic status and trustworthiness based on skin color.)

It is a “softer” expression of bigotry, but no less bigoted, to make respect dependent on adherence to restrictive social roles as to deny respect based on an immutable characteristic.  THIS belongs in the garbage bin alongside “stay in the closet, fags” and “act like a lady to get respect.”

Honestly, one of the better things we could do as a society, for everyone’s benefit, is to get it through everyone’s head that value, worth, and dignity are innate, and not bestowed by the proper amount/type of clothing, or genderconforming behavior, or skin of the favored colors.

Dress codes such as this one undermine that, championing the same concept that underscores all prejudices.

Comment #5: Kyra  on  10/17  at  03:17 PM

Gonna get reamed for this, but: So the idea is to turn out a bunch of House Slaves, pre-programmed to acede to the whims of a bunch of whites, without the oppressors even haveing to do anything?  How very Thomasian of Morehouse.  Does the dress code have an acceptable skintone requirement too?

Comment #6: phalamir  on  10/17  at  03:27 PM

” It’s not fair, but I’d have to say, in some parts of the country and some professions, this crap is still true”

Maybe, maybe not
It wouldn’t surprise me, but then again, most corporations follow the leader and if its acceptable at corporate HQ in Manhattan, its acceptable in the field sales office for region 7 in Dubuque

My advice on dress code to recent collage grads on their first job interview is—- don’t listen to my advice, its been 30+ yrs since I was in your shoes so how would I know
My CIO in his sixties might (and you’d be surprised how often its not true) be impressed if you dress like a character from “Mad Men”, but so what? You wont be interviewing with him
You’ll be interviewing with a guy in his 30’s who has never worked in a place that didn’t have casual Fridays and probably isnt going to be turned off by, say a man with an earring

The last person you should take advice from is the “vice president for Student Services” since he has been walled up in an ivory tower since the Kennedy administration

Comment #7: jefft452  on  10/17  at  03:38 PM

“And the administrator is an idiot for conflating G and T”
not disputing that he is an idiot, but to be honest that is a fairly common idiocy

The bigger issue is the “I wouldn’t join any club that would have me as a member” problem

Like the Catholic Church, a men’s only collage in 2009 has to suspect everyone of being gay

The internal contradictions of - a group of authoritarian homophobes running Sausage-Fest U, where healthy young men voluntarily go to bond with other healthy young men in a manly way without any contact with those icky girls - is necessarily going to lead to a lot of which hunts

Comment #8: jefft452  on  10/17  at  04:10 PM

That ban at Hampton against locs and braids will hopefully be shown for what it is; at best, it’s purely generational (though I’m assuming the worst and agreeing race is the factor).  Most folks I know under a certain age (unless raging racists) don’t bat an eyelash at dreadlocks and braids in the workplace, because those styles can look completely pro, chic and appropriate depending on the person’s overall carry.  To the point that I never even considered, before Pam’s post, that dreads/braids would even be called into question, the way that tattoos often are by squarer types.  So WTF?

Ottawa is such a bubble, sometimes (sheepish).

Comment #9: Ranylt  on  10/17  at  04:26 PM

Getting outraged at stuff like this is like getting outraged at a Christian college’s “no drinking” or “mandatory chapel on wednesday nights” or “mandatory jacket and tie” policies. These colleges want to promote a certain set of cultural and social values, and the students who find that culture and value system inconducive to their personal and academic goals can find someplace else.

Comment #10: Tyro  on  10/17  at  04:52 PM

Meh. I would never go to a school in the first place that presumed to tell me how to dress.

Comment #11: Bitter Scribe  on  10/17  at  06:45 PM

Bitter Scribe:

I would never go to a single-sex school either. So there you have it.

Comment #12: BrianX  on  10/17  at  07:15 PM

Tyro:

I think you’re missing the point. It’s not so much about Morehouse’s rights (which they certainly have) but the long-term effect on their students and on society at large. The question is whether doing such a thing is a good thing overall; given that a strict dress code is usually a sign of an environment that has little truck with academic freedom or independent thinking, I’ll let you draw your own conclusions.

Comment #13: BrianX  on  10/17  at  07:20 PM

Don’t a lot of men in Africa wear robes?

Comment #14: Ms Kate  on  10/17  at  07:38 PM

BrianX, I disagree with you about strict dress codes and academic freedom and independent thinking, but that’s going back to High School, and we are talking about college right now.

Comment #15: agolden  on  10/17  at  07:51 PM

I think you’re missing the point. It’s not so much about Morehouse’s rights (which they certainly have) but the long-term effect on their students and on society at large. The question is whether doing such a thing is a good thing overall; given that a strict dress code is usually a sign of an environment that has little truck with academic freedom or independent thinking, I’ll let you draw your own conclusions.

IMHO, probably not, but different schools have different academic goals. Perhaps there is some group of students for whom the system works quite well. And I think I understood the point of this post very well. It was something along the lines of, “OMG someone said something crazy and archaically conservative!” and in this case, that person happened to be Dr. William Bynum at Morehouse.

I’m not much into dress codes myself: I’m more the sort who viewed college as an opportunity to concentrate on academics to the almost exclusion of appearances. But if a school and its students feel that part of a well-rounded education is instruction in the arts of gentlemanliness, then go to it. Dress codes will, by their nature, always be a couple of generations behind the standards of the modern day. Just because I wouldn’t put up with that sort of college environment doesn’t mean that other colleges might adopt such things as part of their overall culture. The Citadel and Virginia Military Institute make their students dress up in goofy-looking military-style uniforms, but some people are into that sort of thing.

Comment #16: Tyro  on  10/17  at  08:10 PM

I do *not* understand a ban on braids. One of my coworkers at a large and stuffy insurance corporation wore braids all the time, and they were so carefully maintained and styled that she had one of the most professional looks on anyone. (Like RanyIt says, it’s part of overall presentation. The braids weren’t dangling but swept into pinned twists and such sculptural, dignified looks, and her clothes would suit an executive)

I would also say, a college with those sorts of codes is going to drive away a lot of potential students (and attract others). For most young adults, college is expected to be a time for freedom and experimentation.  This college is actually clearly for people aiming to fit in to a specific lifestyle—power-chasing, class conscious, cultural conservatives. If they make that clear to the kids applying, so that they don’t have to waste time finding another school once Sticksupourass University doesn’t work out, then the dress code is just part of the training for that chosen life.

But gay =/= transsexual =/= transvestite. Bynum is a bigoted idiot.

Comment #17: Samantha Vimes  on  10/17  at  08:14 PM

Any school which is looking to train young folks in upper middle class presentation is going to train them conservatively.  The whole point is to be able to pass through without leaving ripples.

Comment #18: Punditus Maximus  on  10/17  at  09:07 PM

”The whole point is to be able to pass through without leaving ripples.”

Yes, that’s their intent, but its hard not to leave ripples because of this:

”Dress codes will, by their nature, always be a couple of generations behind the standards of the modern day.”

A 25 year old dressed like an IBM executive circa 1970 is going to stick out like a sore thumb in a 2009 corporate office

Comment #19: jefft452  on  10/17  at  09:24 PM

”We are the ONLY LGBT Organization @ Morehouse College. We strive to find an alliance amongst Gay & Straight Students in the AUC.” I think it’s a safe assumption to say the “T” is there as lip service based on that vote. Given how there’s already a lack of affirmation for LGB at many HBCUs, the trans issue is simply not enough on the radar to put up a fight, and that’s sad.

FWIW, if this is the “only” LGBT organization on campus, I suspect that this is an organization wholly controlled by the administration.  Notre Dame has a similar group.  It is the “only” LGBT organization on campus because the administration refuses to recognize any LGBT group.  LGBT students join the unofficial groups, of course, and the administration trots out the official group when it needs cover against charges of bigotry.  Given the vote, I’ll bet this is the same arrangement, and so is not necessarily representative of the student body’s views.

Comment #20: Thom  on  10/17  at  10:08 PM

*refuses to recognize any other group

Comment #21: Thom  on  10/17  at  10:09 PM

Bitter Scribe:

I would never go to a single-sex school either. So there you have it.

Yeah, I went to one (prep school), and I can’t say I recommend it.

Comment #22: Bitter Scribe  on  10/17  at  10:15 PM

Yep Morehouse wants their students to look like IBM engineers circa 1970.

Concerning the five students who wear women’s clothes—I think the school should narrowly tailor a response. Are they preop transgenders—in which case their clothing should be appropriate to their gender? Are they trying to tweak the administration? Are they doing it for the lulz?

Comment #23: Hector B.  on  10/17  at  10:25 PM

“This college is actually clearly for people aiming to fit in to a specific lifestyle—power-chasing, class conscious, cultural conservatives. If they make that clear to the kids applying, so that they don’t have to waste time finding another school once Sticksupourass University doesn’t work out”

a valid point, however they are not really tayloring thier marketing to the students, but to the student’s helicopter parents

Comment #24: jefft452  on  10/17  at  10:47 PM

But if a school and its students feel that part of a well-rounded education is instruction in the arts of gentlemanliness, then go to it.

Tyro,

Unless we’re talking military academies whose mission is to socialize students into the strict hierarchical job environment where uniforms are mandatory, dress codes IMO have no place in a higher ed institution.  Not only is part of the education one receives as an undergrad is determining how to create and express one’s own identity separate from one’s parents or even the rest of society, it is not the university/college’s job to parent student clothing choices unless they actually violate local/state/Federal laws.  We don’t need a return to the 1950’s when undergrads were treated as children to the point of having DORM MOTHERS for crying out loud!!! rolleyes

If one wants training in the arts of gentlemanliness, that should either be provided by the parents/family and/or failing that…..one can make the case of bringing back “finishing schools”......

A 25 year old dressed like an IBM executive circa 1970 is going to stick out like a sore thumb in a 2009 corporate office

Anyone who dressed like that at my undergrad would have been perceived either as a Conservatory major going to a formal recital or an overly pretentious pro-corporate/wannabe capitalist tool to be mocked and scorned, especially if they confirmed that initial stereotype through their actions and/or choice of major (economics). 

Professionally….there’s a reason why the pointy-haired boss character exists in Dilbert and why some friends have disparaging nicknames for formal dress.  Even a supervisor who wore a suit everyday called it “his mandated costume”.

Comment #25: exholt  on  10/18  at  12:58 AM

Incidentally, my planned Halloween costume is actually wearing a formal suit and tie….the favored dress of many politicians, including one who’s well-known for leaving his job for several days to hike on a certain trail when he was actually enjoying himself at a more exotic locale. 

Now to find flag pins for the US, a certain southern state, and that exotic locale…..

BTW: Does anyone know if this politician plays any musical instruments?

Comment #26: exholt  on  10/18  at  01:05 AM

I think hiking boots and a map of the App. Trail would finish that costume off perfectly, exholt.

Comment #27: libdevil  on  10/18  at  10:17 AM

Hm.  The caps business is perfectly reasonable IMHO since traditionally a gentleman wore a hat outdoors and removed it when he entered a building, which is all that Morehouse is requiring.  They also include a religious exemption for groups like Orthodox Jews or Sikhs, so where’s the problem? 

As for the rest of the dress code…with the exception of the “no jeans at college programs” ban, this is no different from what these young men will have to do when they graduate and get jobs. 

Finally, as for transsexuals at single-sex schools…I have very, very mixed feelings about this.  I can understand their desire for safety (especially for FTMs who might be in danger on a coed campus) but I went to a single-sex school that is still single-sex and plans to stay that way, and I can too easily see this as a way to force single-sex colleges to go coed.  Also, what about the cis students who go to a Morehouse or a Smith or a Hampden-Sydney because they *want* an all male or all female environment?  What about their rights to privacy and a safe space?

It’s a sticky situation.  I don’t envy the college administrators who have to deal with this.

Comment #28: Ellid  on  10/18  at  10:31 AM

Is Morehouse a religious school? I just started reading The Year of Living Biblically, in which the author gives up wearing his wife’s sweatshirts because Deuteronomy 22:5 prohibits men wearing women’s clothing and vice versa.

Comment #29: Hector B.  on  10/18  at  10:40 AM

About locs, dreads, etc in work places: there are actually some workplaces where it makes sense to ban certain types of these, but also any creams, style procuct etc for any hair style.  It isn’t because of the style, but because of the contamination of those things in manufacturing, testing, laboratory settings.  A clean room needs to be a clean room.  For an office setting?  No, no reason it should make a difference to anyone.  So if the job is not a chemist, biologist, etc that is done with minor cleanroom (rather than bunny-suit level clean room) policies in mind, hairstyle shouldn’t be a problem. 
Is the hair clean?  Does it interfer with perfomance on the job?  unless the answers are no, why would anyone care?  No rational reason; so that leaves bigotry of some sort.

Comment #30: helen w. h.  on  10/18  at  12:16 PM

“No wearing of clothing associated with women’s garb (dresses, tops, tunics, purses, pumps, etc.)”

Since women wear pants, does this mean that pants are also “associated with women’s garb”?

Comment #31: jefft452  on  10/18  at  01:11 PM

Hector B asked:

Concerning the five students who wear women’s clothes—I think the school should narrowly tailor a response. Are they preop transgenders—in which case their clothing should be appropriate to their gender? Are they trying to tweak the administration? Are they doing it for the lulz?

If they are pre-op transexuals, and Morehouse College is, as it proclaims itself to be, “The only all male historically black institution of higher learning in the United States,” aren’t they setting themselves up for expulsion once they are post-op?

The Morehouse homepage has the blurb, “Developing Leaders with a Social Conscience.”  I’m guessing that most of my friends at Pandagon would disagree with how Morehouse defines “social conscience.”  But, it’s a private school, so it has the leeway to set rules like that.

Comment #32: Dana  on  10/18  at  01:40 PM

It’s one thing to ban droopy drawers and dressing in pajama bottoms on campus because it looks unprofessional, but when you cross into the territory of a blanket statement about gender expression, it’s discriminatory. What if a male student shows up for class dressed in a sharp tailored woman’s business suit, appropriate footwear, etc?

What happens if a man shows up for class in a full tuxedo and cumber bun?  What happens if he shows up in a military uniform?  What happens if he shows up in a helmet, pads, and football uniform?

It’s a dress code.  They’re not supposed to make strict logical sense.  They’re supposed to create an atmosphere of conformity and unity.  If everyone shows up in charcoal gray suits and you show up in a blue blazer and tan slacks, they can bust you for being out of dress code simply because you don’t fit in.  That’s just the nature of dress codes.

The real cutting issue here is the reach a school should have outside of campus.  If you show up in a hockey outfit to a Halloween party on the other side of town, and the school dress code states you’re not allowed to root for the Penguins, can they fuck your academic career over it?

But that’s not in play here because the women’s dress thing only extends within campus.  Ultimately, if you’re ok with a generalized dress code policy, you’re going to have to deal with some policies that are more draconian than others.  I don’t see how you can have it both ways.  If you fight them and win on this, they can just choke back what people can wear further - issue specific school uniforms for instance - and then what do you say?  “Hey, you’re pre-selected shirt, blazer, slacks, and shoes are restricting my right to wear a blouse and a skirt”?  That freedom was ceded with the right to wear dreeds, flip flops, and PJs.

Comment #33: Zifnab  on  10/18  at  02:39 PM

high-heeled shoes were created for men. used to be, a century or three ago, women wearing “pumps” was immoral and wasn’t going to happen.

tunics are male shirts, from a specific time period when women wearing tunics would likely result in dead women.

“tops” i cannot help but wonder WTF? a top is, by fashion definition, a garment designed to cover the torso. every shirt, ever, is a “top”.

Comment #34: denelian  on  10/19  at  03:15 AM

A dress code? Banning pajamas? At college? o.O

I went to a women’s college; at Freshman Orientation we were each issued a pair of Brenau pajama pants. It was more uncommon for people to wear regular clothes to classes—especially morning classes—than pajamas.

Comment #35: stonebiscuit  on  10/19  at  12:50 PM

Why would a transgender or transvestite (m -> f) person want to go to an all-male school?  Let’s leave aside the issue of single-gender education; if the person sees herself as female all or part of the time, it doesn’t seem like the best situation for her.

This policy is not aimed at transgendered people, per se. IMO it appears that this policy is aimed at gay men, particularly those who (they believe) dress too effeminately. It would not surprise me that the more identifiable gay men on campus will be targeted and stigmatized.

Comment #36: Tonybrown74  on  10/19  at  04:34 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.