Dyed Hair and Mutual Consent

[Netzi]

From B-to-the-logger

I started this on Saturday, 17 October and finished too-day.

My mom went to Orlando, Florida's Walt Disney World Resort with every inhabitant in my house. It's no surprise I was in my grandparents' (mom's side) house. It started with me in the bedroom, lying down and thinking about kids dying their hair. I visit these blogs and websites and see unschooled kids free to express themselves in funky ways: shaved hair, blue hair, bouncy expressions, black nails, pink dresses, self-made clothes...damn! I'm happy for them. Compare that to my background. I get quite miserable; my family didn't let me do that, maybe because it was "too weird".

I wonder why parents impose those stupidities. It's their kids' bodies, not theirs. As long as kids don't harm anyone, why should it matter? The only reasons I can guess are because parents are scared of seeing "weird" in their house while wanting to control kids' fate as much as they can.

Some youth rights advocates agree with the parents. If you're under their roof, abide to their wishes. You're on another person's territory. I disagree; that sounds good when there's mutual consent. Let's say I'm going to stay over at Bobby's house. We discuss how he likes to run things, with my input if possible. If something sounds wrong, there are other housing options. Ok then. I choose his place. Of course I have to comply. I agreed to his rules. I'd be an idiot to have blue hair when he hates weird colours. And what if Bobby's strange, someone first being super smooth, later getting strict after a while? That can happen. Good thing fate is still on your side. If situations are bad, leave. Nothing is forcing you to stay.

In the typical parent/child situation, children don't choose who their parents are and where they live. And they can't think of leaving, unless they're age eighteen or "emancipated minors". If leaving by "running away, they can get caught by police. Now legally forced under parents' confines, they must consent to rules they can't change or input, because most parents' "consent" involves adults making rules and conditions while kids have no choice but to follow. Resistance, even a darn stupid mistake, equals punishment. Sure, there are also those "authoritative parents". They're also anti-youth. A respectful relationship is hard when superficial, arbitrary, and unnecessary desires seem important. What I see from them is this: "Okay Daniel, you can drive, but under one condition: keep your school grades up". Or "Kali, you know I want you to wait for a tattoo and bellybutton piercing (or sexy outfits) until your eighteenth birthday, so for now, deal with not having one". Or this situation: "Carrie and Michael, no allowance or T.V. time until you get your chores done". Or this upsetting one: "Alex. Ms Turner from math class just called. She said you're being disruptive. As a result, I'm taking away from cell phone, computer, (insert anything the kid enjoys) until you get your act together". I don't know, but I see something weird and oppressive about that. Can anyone explain?

Either way, how can you abide to something so unfair and one-sided?! Young people need more dignity that what they now have.



(It's slightly off-topic but still relevant. What makes it worse is already oppressed people taking choice away from the young. It's why I can't stand Rosie O'Donnell, aside from her okay sense of humour. I glimpsed her HBO gay family cruise special a while ago. She and her little daughter were talking about hair, haircuts--something to that extent. I don't know how but dyed hair was mentioned. Then comes Rosie saying how the daughter can't change her hair until "she can vote". What the heck? A lesbian! People like her should know better than to respect stupid laws and social mores. Why not? Society was too cruel with "deviants". Take that benefit to question the world and have better self-understandings. Yet I still see some gays being as ageist as their straight counterparts. It makes me wonder about their movement. I get the feeling they did it more for their self-interests than for society at large. We would then be seeing more people worrying over lack of community life than for gay marriage. If for the latter, then gays should know better...much better.)


Are cuss words allowed or accepted? I just edited a few.

[Netzi]

Even Hot Topic? Wow, I never knew.

There's always the other side, mom's wanting to be "hip", criticizing their "geeky" or "nerdy" kid. I don't like that either. While I'm fine with merely disagreeing parents, I don't like coercion in favor of the adult. Disagreements should be said, not pushed.

Pink hair looks cute on some people. Yeah. I don't think your example makes sense because some of these people are the "Eww...pink hair" type, but change their minds when it's for a cause.

[Charissa Vaunderbroad]

There are some food based vegetable dyes that are very bright and semi permanent available at (dare I say?) hot topic.
I was once at a supercut's where a self described "hip" mother was making her crying son get a mohawk. I get angry when people control their children and project their fantasy of who they should be onto them. Whether it is normalcy or weirdness it should be the child's choice or it is a violation.

Many people in my area are dying pink highlights in their hair to represent breast cancer support, I like it even if it doesn't make sense.

[Netzi]

Thanks for the comment.

I'm one who agrees with understanding others' wishes, but I have a hard time respecting wishes when one party (young people, in this case) may not be considered. Hence the rant.

"But as to unschooling families, part of the principle is that the people are on the same team--not that it's "the kids' hair" but that a member of a family that might have social obligations or expectations could potentially do damage to the reputation of the group by some extreme piercings or tattoos or crazy hair. And very often mainstream teens do those things with the intention of doing damage to their parents' feelings, and peace, and reputation."

I agree, but aren't there parents who don't let their kids know that, who would rather promote a "no ifs, ands, or buts" situation? Aren't there parents treating their kids as less responsible and more deserving of another person's authority? Don't those situations bring more irrationality, which is why mainstream teens do what you mentioned? A sincere question.

"Did" what? Acknowledge homosexuality?
If someone's gay, he doesn't "do that," and it's not for the interest of society at large. I'm not heterosexual for the society at large, nor for my own self interest, but I just am."

I'm only critical of the current gay rights stuff. I find it quite self-serving to make something like marriage of much importance, compared to other things happening to (basically) everyone. But then, they're not to blame. The government has made too much interference with something that should be private. Who are they (to government) to require people to acknowledge their unity, and worse, define marriage?

"There are legal requirements of parents. They are required to take care of their kids. Kids are required to go home, generally speaking. It's not "force," but it's not "nothing," either.'

The quote you posted was me discussing a (possibly older) person staying over at a friend's place. A situation with more mutual consent. Though I don't have a problem with the parents fulfilling their need to care for kids, it's only when abused.

[Sandra Dodd]

-=-I wonder why parents impose those stupidities. It's their kids' bodies, not theirs. As long as kids don't harm anyone, why should it matter? -=-

If you call it "stupid" without understanding their reasons, it will make it difficult for people to trust that you're mature enough to hear any reasons. You can shut down communications by insulting the other side.

But as to unschooling families, part of the principle is that the people are on the same team--not that it's "the kids' hair" but that a member of a family that might have social obligations or expectations could potentially do damage to the reputation of the group by some extreme piercings or tattoos or crazy hair. And very often mainstream teens do those things with the intention of doing damage to their parents' feelings, and peace, and reputation.

-=-Yet I still see some gays being as ageist as their straight counterparts. It makes me wonder about their movement. I get the feeling they did it more for their self-interests than for society at large-=-

"Did" what? Acknowledge homosexuality?
If someone's gay, he doesn't "do that," and it's not for the interest of society at large. I'm not heterosexual for the society at large, nor for my own self interest, but I just am.

-=- If situations are bad, leave. Nothing is forcing you to stay.-=-

There are legal requirements of parents. They are required to take care of their kids. Kids are required to go home, generally speaking. It's not "force," but it's not "nothing," either.

[Netzi]

Henna sounds good. I didn't hear about that option until last week. Good thing, because the permanent, hazardous dyes are scary.

[Slinky]

The thing I worry about with dye is the chemicals. There are a lot of chemical free or chemical light options these days though. Lucky for me my girls have never been all that interested in dyeing their hair so I have not had to worry about the issue. They now do henna their hair when I do mine but the oldest was not even interested in that till recently.