I have known very conservative parents who allow boys this young to wear long hair. Essentially the school is saying that this four-year-old is a "rebel," simply because of the length of his hair?

Yes, in the military, it is right to standardize haircuts. But this is a little boy -- hardly more than a baby! This makes no sense to me. Old wood-cuts show that boys in all ages wore hair either long or short. I wonder if this school would treat a little girl the same way if she wore her hair quite short?

I respect the school's decision about styles of clothing that may be considered indecent. Length of hair is, to me anyway, a different matter.

Nevertheless, if I were the parents of this child, I'd simply home-school him.

More hair wars? How much more is it gonna take? We went through the greasers who wore t-shirts and blue jeans to school (oh my!) then the hippies growing hair in all directions (those pinkos!) to the punks who basically turned their hair into weapons (mon dieu!) to the skins to said he hell with this and shaved it all off (unacceptable!) and somehow we're still not over it.

No hair past ear lobes? OK this is an out and out attempt to bring back 1970s haircuts. Think Bobby Brady. This whole school board is simply trying to reimpose their glory era when they were the rebels. Disco Lives and don't you forget it. Talk about a "distraction" in class. That whole decade was a distraction.

Wells, the battle will continue. Try imposing a dress code where the young ladies don't "attract the attention to the individual". I mean guys, I got really, really bad news for you: females have been dressing to attract attention for many, many, many thousands of years so........

Good luck with that.