It occurred to me the other day when I saw that Farrakhan had mollified his position, that what longhairs need is a name for discrimination against them. Discrimination against race is racism, against sex is sexism, what is it against hair length? When someone is discriminatory, you dont simply attack their position, you instead lump them into a group that is not where anyone wants to be. Some men will stand firm on their position of womens inferiority, but when the label of Sexist is slapped on them because of their stance their position lessens. People love their opinions, but they abhor labels. What could that label be?
Also I wonder, as I am sure many of you have, what would come of starting a business and rejecting potential employees because of their short hair or their lack of willingness to grow it out? Would there be lawsuits similar to the Blockbuster case, is so who would the court side with? The precedence set in previous cases would work just as well if the table were turned. Just some thoughts.
Dear Kevin,
That's what I've been thinking too. Racial, sexual and other minority and lifestyle groups have been able to get together and fight for their rights, especially in countries like the United States and Western Europe but longhairs for some reason don't seem to be able to get together and organise for their right to wear longhair without discrimination.
Perhaps as a musician in London, England once said about the Musicians Union there, "we musicians are untogether" -- ie. musicians are so disorganised and casual that they can't organise along the same way a labour union can.
Right now, there are people organising a big demo against the IMF in Washington D.C. in April. I wish the longhairs in the United States could organisation a Million Longhaired Men march to protest discrimination against longhaired men.
Charles
Hippyism?
Anti-Hippism?
Some of us aren't hippies, thanks.
How about rectal-terrestrial interface-ism?
How about "folliclism"? Has that nice legal-mumbo-jumbo ring to it.
Kay