I am dreading dreadlocks.

Status
Not open for further replies.
winnie said:
'Clean and neat' is to some extent subjective. Its going to take some work to overcome personal biases but still have reasonable standards.
Click to expand...
I agree.

I had help once who had dread locks. Wasn't really my cup of tea, but everything about him was clean and well-groomed.

Just this past week I tried a guy.
He showed up with his pants sagging below his ass, and his pants were torn in a couple of places. I was immediately like - umm, no. There isn't any way you're coming into my job looking like that.

For me, here's the bottom line.
If I have to drop you at the front door of my job site, is the customer going to be intimidated or feel threatened by the way you look?

It's got nothing to do with race.

That guy with dreads I mentioned, he was black.
Nice guy. Clean. Well-spoken, too. From Jamaica.

The guy with his pants sagging is white. Looked like he crawled out from under a trash can. Dirty and unkempt. Nice guy, but needs to clean up
 
I've always tried to be open minded and live by the motto of don't judge a book by its cover. My experience with a Rasta man apprentice (he was from St. Vincent) was a positive one even though when first meeting him his appearance I didn't like. He had dreads that were about 5' long, he wore a pair of women's pantyhose on his head to keep it all together under his hardhat. He had a thick long ugly beard that made the Taliban look well groomed. During the heat of the summer his hair did smell. He would go and have it professionally washed every two weeks because it wasn't possible for him to wash it himself. We worked together for a year and a half. Did I say that I hated his appearance? Yes I did, to my eye it was unpleasant but at the end of the day he was one of the best partners I ever had in my 35 years in this business.
 
I had a couple of guys that were from Jamaica that had long dreds, but you never knew it because they kept them put up in one of those crocheted caps. They only took it off after work.
 
There's a guy on a job I'm currently working that wears a dread sock and clearly has massive dreadlocks inside it, and I think that's a perfectly acceptable way to work. Keeps them out of his way, keeps them from getting into something he's working on.
 
It should be obvious that many rules meant to address racism often identify and provide benefit specifically on the basis of race, and are thus inherently racist.

When one considers the explicitly racist rules that have been around since the founding of our country, perhaps some racist redress is in order, but that is a separate question.

In general I oppose needs testing for benefits, and believe that we as a society should be working to lift everyone up, rather then trying to target specific past wrongs to specific populations.

The big thing to remember is that the most powerful force most humans encounter is other humans. Even when God acts, the most powerful form of that action is through other humans. None of us really deserve the huge benefits heaped upon us by other people, except by our heaping those benefits on to others.

Some people, by virtue of being excluded as 'other' get less of this collective benefit, through no personal fault or failing

Jon
 
Coppersmith said:
...

The problem is I have seen many instances of gross, nasty dreadlocks. I would not want to hire somebody who looks like they have never brushed their hair and just let it become a giant matted mess. Am I being prejudiced? Do I have a legitimate concern?
Click to expand...

I'll be blunt. The red part is prejudiced and you should get over it. If the dreads don't smell bad they are not objectively 'gross' and your attitude about what it 'looks like' is precisely what the law was written to protect people from.

It is true that people with dreads don't brush their hair. That's the style. As a way of keeping hair managed, it isn't any grosser than braids, it's just less work in the long run. People with dreads (as I can personally attest from the year in college I had them) wash their hair as often as other people.

Write a company policy about the length of hair, how it must be managed safely on the job site, etc, that doesn't discriminate based on style, that specifies results rather than methods. Then apply it to everyone. That will protect you from accusations of discrimination. Calling dreadlocks 'gross' will do the opposite.
 
winnie said:
It should be obvious that many rules meant to address racism often identify and provide benefit specifically on the basis of race, and are thus inherently racist.
Click to expand...
I think "many" is a stretch. Anti-discrimination is not the same as affirmative action. And while affirmative action (not previously under discussion in this thread) is obviously a race-based policy, that does not make it racist.

Cheers, Wayne
 
jaggedben said:
I'll be blunt. The red part is prejudiced and you should get over it.
Click to expand...
LOL
He has Every right to have a hair style is likes and does not like. Every human is prejudice to things that they are familiar to.
It's when you act with hate that it a problem.
I don't like dreads I think they're Nasty. Though I don't beat up or not hang out with my friend cause he has them. It's his choice.
Just like its mine to not like them.
 
I thought I would further clarify my position with some pictures.

Acceptable
dl1.jpgdl2.jpg

Marginal (somewhat sloppy/messy)

dl3.jpgdl4.jpg

Unacceptable (This is what I mean when I say giant matted mess.)

dl5.jpgdl6.jpgdl7.jpgdl8.jpgdl9.jpg
 
Coppersmith said:
I thought I would further clarify my position with some pictures.

Acceptable
View attachment 2559896View attachment 2559897

Marginal (somewhat sloppy/messy)

View attachment 2559898View attachment 2559899

Unacceptable (This is what I mean when I say giant matted mess.)

View attachment 2559900View attachment 2559901View attachment 2559902View attachment 2559903View attachment 2559904
Click to expand...
Length aside, I'd say your judgments are subjective and I'd ask you how you'd write your company policy such that a) there's a clear objective basis for it and b) the basis applies to dreaded and non dreaded hairstyles alike.
 
jaggedben said:
Length aside, I'd say your judgments are subjective and I'd ask you how you'd write your company policy such that a) there's a clear objective basis for it and b) the basis applies to dreaded and non dreaded hairstyles alike.
Click to expand...
I'm not judging on length at all. It's the matted aspect of the hair I don't like. The bigger the mats, the nastier in my opinion.
 
Coppersmith said:
I thought I would further clarify my position with some pictures.
Click to expand...
Honestly, I think I would try to approach it through the eyes of a customer and not only my personal preferences.

There are quite a few "abhorrent" personal styles I can't get with. I don't want to see a tattooed freak with virtually all of his bare skin inked - especially neck and face. I don't want to see a bunch of excess piercing - especially face. I really don't want to see crazy colors in somebody's hair, somebody dressed like a gypsy, and probably some other stuff. I'm pretty conservative in my style.

But there are a whole lot of people who don't mind those things. A whole lot of customers who don't mind those things.

Opting for character and ethics over style ain't a bad way to go
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top