As teenagers attending high school in the early sixties, we had certain rules that were enforced–including some for the way in which we were attired. For one thing, the boys had to wear belts. And our shirts had to be tucked in. These were pretty stringent rules, all right. Probably we didn’t know how Communistic our school was back then.
Communistic? Sure, that’s what the young intellectual students of San Antonio are claiming about the unreasonable demands of the public school system there. When the school board decided to ban nose rings, spiked hair, multi-colored hair, baggy jeans, and shorts, one freshman student said, “This ain’t a communist country. We can wear what we want,” according to an AP article in the Denton Record-Chronicle of May 15 (12A).
Let me make a wild and reckless statement here: the disintegration of a reasonable dress code in the mid- sixties contributed to and was a symptom of the rebellious attitudes that were developing at that time. Having graduated in 1964 from high school when reasonable hair length and tucked-in shirts were the norm, it might best be described as culture shock when I returned to the high school classroom to teach in 1969. Belts? We were lucky if the students wore CLOTHES.
The rules had been thrown out the window. Students wore sloppy-looking clothes, had messy-looking hair, and had developed similarly-crummy attitudes. Many were obnoxious, surly, and possessed a “You-can’t-make-me-do-anything-I-don’t-want-to-do” attitude.
One girl in particular worried the faculty and administration. She frequently wore a micro-miniskirt to school, and afterwards she would leave on the back of her dropout boyfriend’s motorcycle, thus exposing what should not be seen by the general viewing public. A girl’s counselor spoke with the mother of the girl in an attempt to communicate the spectacle her daughter was making of herself, as well as some of the dangers involved. The mother scolded the concerned counselor, “She can wear anything I let her wear, and it’s none of your business.” The school took no subsequent action on this or any other problem for fear of a lawsuit by that self-appointed guarantor of freedom, the ACLU.
This breakdown of authority was further typified by the song, “Harper Valley P.T.A.” Presumably, those who listen to the words are supposed to cheer the beleaguered mother who exposes the hypocrisy of the school board, but the “logic” used to justify the mother is fallacious. The ploy used in the story is to call attention away from oneself to focus it on others. The mother doesn’t defend her miniskirts, her drinking, or her running wild; she simply points an accusing finger at everyone else and calls them hypocrites, which they apparently are. What this argument amounts to is: “Yeah, I’m bad, but so are you” or “Yeah, I’m bad, but you’re worse.”
Many people still think in those terms. As long as somebody else is worse, it serves to comfort. Of course, the end result is anarchy. Has the judge or any juror in a court case ever done anything wrong? “Well, then, how dare you judge me?” Many people use human imperfections to justify their rebellion against authority.
But rebellion is rebellion, no matter what disguise it wears at the moment. The charge that we are a Communist nation if a school decides to set certain standards of behavior or dress is fatuous. Restaurants post signs which say, “No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service.” Does that make it a Commie Cafe? Various jobs require that employees wear a uniform; does that make one a Party member?
If the school board (which is elected by parents) determines that a dress code is in order, then the parents and students should either abide by the decision or elect someone who will neither implement nor enforce standards. In the meantime they should quit whining and be mature enough to accept the decision.
Open Rebellion
One student vows concerning her nose ring: “I’m not going to get rid of it no matter what they say. I’m keeping it. I’ll protest and stand outside with signs if I have to. I’m keeping it.” The issue is not whether she can wear a nose ring (though why anyone would want to remains a mystery); the issue is one of authority. There is such an amalgamation of “I’ll decide for myself what’s right or wrong” (autonomy) with “Don’t judge me for any bizarre moral or personal behavior that I exhibit” that few people want to abide by the rules.
“In my judgment the speed limit should be 80 m.p.h.; so I’ll just drive that fast.” Try explaining that reasoning to the policeman as he writes out the ticket. “Taxes are too high; it won’t matter if I chisel a little off here and there.” Try convincing an IRS auditor with that excuse. “I didn’t think the Bible’s teachings on fornication, gambling, homosexuality, and abortion were fair; so I did what pleased me.” See if the Lord will accept these equivocations on the day of judgment.
It apparently has not occurred to the students that the school board might have reasons for their standards (just as God has reasons for His). The Lord is familiar with rebellion–from His own people. Ezekiel was commissioned to preach to those already in captivity–Israelites who (one might expect) would feel just a modicum of humility. After charging the prophet to speak to them, God says:
“But the house of Israel will not listen to you, because they will not listen to Me; for all the house of Israel are impudent and hard-hearted. Behold, I have made your face strong against their faces, and your forehead strong against their foreheads. Like adamant stone stronger than flint, I have made your forehead; do not be afraid of them, nor be dismayed by their looks, though they are a rebellious house” (Ezekiel 3:7-9).
That’s just the way some people are: “I’m going to protest–even if it means going into captivity!”
Overraction
Another potential scholar said: “They’re always telling us what to do and now they’re telling us what to wear. They’ll have us in straitjackets in a few years.” Some people have a gift for exaggeration. Every time an unpopular law is passed or standards of decency are imposed, someone feels honor-bound to describe the authority in charge as some kin to Adolph Hitler. If authorities are not accused of being Nazis, the epithet of Communists will do as a substitute.
The “Red Herring” Defense
As already mentioned, there is the “Why-are-you-picking-on-me-when-someone-else-is-worse?” defense. A freshman girls complains: “There’s worse things going on in school. There’s drug deals going on. . . . Why don’t they do something about that?” Such has been the Kelly Flinn defense in recent weeks. In order to gain sympathy and try to get the focus of attention off herself, her defense posture has been, “Guys commit adultery, too; they get away with it and are not court-martialed.”
First of all, nobody “gets away with it”–not unless they can figure out a way to keep God from witnessing their immoral acts. Of course, some in the military do not get caught–both male and female. Since there are more males, it would not be wrong to think that quite a few males have dodged punishment. But many have been court-martialed for precisely that offense. Besides, she also disobeyed orders and lied. Disciplinary action never hinged upon one issue only.
The attitude of many people, when they get caught disobeying the rules, is: “Let’s change the rules.” Most people don’t want to admit that they are rebellious and impudent (which is the truth of the matter). Let’s make some exceptions. That’s how rules get dumbed down. That’s the way that discipline breaks down.
Perhaps the students in San Antonio see no relationship between authority, standards, and discipline, but it exists. They may not see any relevance between dress and behavior, but there is a correlation. Appearance matters. It determines how others view us, and it plays a role in how we view ourselves.
“But my orange hair makes a statement.” Yes, it does. People will probably react as they do to Dennis Rodman: “He’s a pretty good basketball player, but he sure is weird.” “But the fourteen pieces of pierced jewelry all over my face and body say something.” What? That it will be hard for you to get through the metal detector at the airport? Such displays say to most that you are in desperate need of attention. The more that join the latest craze, the less different each one becomes. Be a rebel. Submit to authority.
*Send comments or questions concerning this article to Gary Summers. Please refer to this article as: “CHALLENGES TO AUTHORITY (6/1/97).”