Modern day grievancemongers? Invisible ones…
Beverley Reid, 43, will not send her son Malachi to the Quest Academy, in Farnborough Avenue, Selsdon, in a dispute over their strict uniform policy.You’ll never guess what the issue is…
She explained that the 11-year-old wears his hat due to the family's Rastafarian beliefs.
And she is unwilling to carry out the school's request of writing in and explaining why the hat – called a Tam – is a religious requirement.And so we’re at an impasse. The irresistible force of racial grievance meets the immovable object of school uniform policy...
Beverley, who lives in New Addington, said: "I feel strongly about having to write in.
"I'm sure they haven't asked a Sikh to identify their religion or a Muslim to identify their religion.
"It's like a Freemason school and I'm not into sending my son to a place like that. "Malachi's father works for the prison service, he works for the Queen, and he has got permission to wear his hat.
"This is my child they're talking about, they're trying to challenge his culture. It feels like we're in invisible chains."Oh, my giddy aunt! Pass the smelling salts, Aunt Bertha!
Beverley added: "We didn't apply for this school. Croydon Council gave me this school.
"At the moment, my son hasn't got a school.
"It's like everyone's looking and thinking why is your little boy not at school? I could cry for him."So could I. But, I suspect, for vastly different reasons.
I could cry for him because what sort of future does the poor little sod have, forced to wear a tea-cosy on his head throughout his school years, and backed by a mother who screams about 'the man' keeping her down every time she can't get her own way?
Meanwhile, principal Andy Crofts has defended the academy's stance. He said: "We have a published uniform code which we apply consistently to everyone.
"We allow head coverings that are required for religious reasons. We have asked this parent to provide us with evidence that this headwear is a religious requirement on several occasions and she has refused to do so.
"If we agreed to every parental request to modify some aspect of our uniform code, then it would cease to be a uniform."Well, indeed! And I suspect that's the point of this woman's squawking. That, or getting her kid transferred to some other unlucky school.
A Rastacap or Tam is not a religious requirement of Rastafarism, though some do wear it saying that it is for religious reasons. Not the same strength of backing as a Sikhs turban though. More like the Muslim's chadoor which is more cultural than religious. So if the school bans chadoors then they can ban Tams.
ReplyDeleteWell, let's see now....
ReplyDeleteRastafarianism, Rastafari if you prefer, rejects Western culture (Babylon) and seeks return to Africa, so why is she worried about schooling? Dreads are common but not compulsory and the Tam (Rastacap) is a convenience.
Seems this woman is setting up for getting herself some special priviledges.
black people....
ReplyDeleteXX Rastafari if you prefer, rejects Western culture (Babylon) and seeks return to Africa,XX
ReplyDeleteAye! It is a BASTARD at airports, you just can NOT get through the throngs of these bastards all demanding to "return home".
Rastafarianism brings religion into disrepute but then all religions bring religion into disrepute.
ReplyDeleteI suspect the school is on a loser here. We already sold the religious expression pass years ago with the very first crash helmet case.
ReplyDeleteThe only time this was reversed was with the Silver Ring Thing and crucifix cases, where Christians are repeatedly told by judges who are not religious authorities what their legitimate religious expression is.
The burkha case only fell because the school could show it had a reasonable policy in place which was accepted by other parents of strict observance, so they had already done what was needed.
Depending on if she is presenting the case truthfully, she owes the school no 'explanation'. All she has to say is that his religion is X and the school will have to accept that. They don't get to decide who is a Jew either.
Ridiculous. So what if it is a 'religious' requirement? Are we going to allow Jedi's to wave light sabres around, too?
ReplyDeleteWill they let him 'smoke his herb', to express his culture?
Typical blacks with chips on shoulders. They need to be taught that their culture is inferior, as is evidenced by the fact that any number of their 'brothers' want out of the shit pit that is Africa and would like to move to just about anywhere else in the world.
Do us all a favour and piss off back to the motherland. And take your ridiculous cult with you.
Bunny
ReplyDeleteWhat's the betting given the way children rebel against their parents that by 16 he'll either have s skinhead or be really into Brideshead Revisited.
pass de duchy pon de lef hand side...what a load of codswallop. Fucking Rastas...lazy fuckers...I and I and all that, lazy, dope smoking nutters ...eventually seen wandering around talking to themselves loudly - ever noticed just how many nutty niggers there are around? As for dad wearing his tea cosy in prison...WHAT? So health and safety goes out the window for a pretend religion. Oh Marcus Garvey - why didn't you succeed?
ReplyDeleteShe's got a valid point though -- those who say A must also say B.
ReplyDeleteThe school decided to break their uniform policy by allowing special status to people who claim to be too special to conform.
And now there is a competition to settle who is more special and who doesn't need to conform.
Wasn't that the reason for the kinky kiddie clothing in the first place?
Oh, my giddy aunt! Pass the smelling salts, Aunt Bertha!
ReplyDelete:)
Anonymous said: 'The school decided to break their uniform policy by allowing special status to people who claim to be too special to conform.
ReplyDeleteAnd now there is a competition to settle who is more special and who doesn't need to conform.'
Exactly - so what's the lesson to be learnt here?
Are we going to allow Jedi's to wave light sabres around, too?
ReplyDeleteWe allow Sikhs to wear the kirpan dagger. There is dispute about whether this can be no more than a blunt piece of metal, more like jewellery, or whether it has to be a bladed item capable of use.
If the Sikhs are allowed to carry a weapon, why not the Jedi?
"So if the school bans chadoors then they can ban Tams."
ReplyDeleteMaybe, but I suspect WoaR's interpretation may well prevail.
"Aye! It is a BASTARD at airports, you just can NOT get through the throngs of these bastards all demanding to "return home"."
:D
"Will they let him 'smoke his herb', to express his culture?"
That'll no doubt come next!
"If the Sikhs are allowed to carry a weapon, why not the Jedi?"
I think that's one 'religion' that isn't going to pass muster anywhere!
WOAR,
ReplyDeleteYou ask the wrong question.
Better: As we will not pander to Sambo's idolatry, why bother with Ranjit's?
I remember browsing the religious section of Waterstone's a while back and coming across the only book on Rastafarianism I've ever seen in a mainstream shop. It was a pitifully thin pamphlet with no more than five or so 'chapters', one of which was devoted to Bob Marley and one to ganja. This racially exclusive, make-it-up-as-you-go-along cult for disaffected paranoid gibbering potheads is no more a religion than Scientology or similar scams.
ReplyDelete