When I put this up for discussion I had noted that the school had refused the boy permission to tier his hair in a bun, he had it done in this way in one of the photo's.
Now, OK, I wear my hair longer than either of my daughters and when I joined, no, re-joined the Wimpey Group on my return from Oz in 1975 I was told that my hair, then hanging to about six inches above my belt was 'unacceptably long' by the HR, Personnel in those days, lady who did my interview and told me that I would have to cut it, a 'short back and sides' was the preferred length fo rall male employees.
Needless to say I wasn't exactly happy at this prospect and was discussing it with a couple of colleaugues from my previous time at the company and a tall elderly gentleman stopped and listened for a few minutes and then asked for the name of the Personell staffer who had told me this was the case. I gave it and the gentleman walked off.
One of the bods at the table told me that I was either going to keep my hair or lose my job. It turned out to be the latter and a memo was circulated stating that unless the length of an employees hair (male or female) was no business of the Company's unless it was a saftey hazard or was not kept tidy and clean.
The old gentleman was Sir Godfrey Mitchell, the owner of the Wimpey Group and, had he not been theer to hear me bitching I would not have worked for the Group for 22 years! I did cut my hair back to just below my collar after about four or five years, it was too much trouble in a wind!
This is to say I notice that in the UK the matter seems to be left to parents or kids but in America it seems to be a matter of political import!
