By Michael Bielawski
A new law signed by the governor that prohibits discrimination due to hairstyles during the hiring process.
The bill is sponsored by Rep. Kevin “Coach” Christie, D-Hartford, Rep. Michael Mrowicki, D-Putney, and seven others. There is at least one Republican supporter who is Rep. Anne Donahue, R-Northfield.
The text for Act 92 includes a definition of the word race that asserts if someone chose not to hire a person due to their hairstyle that could also be construed as an act of racism.
Its text states, “‘Race’ includes traits associated with or perceived to be associated with race, including hair type, hair texture, hairstyles, and protective hairstyles. As used in this subdivision, the term ‘protective hairstyles’ includes hairstyles such as individual braids, cornrows, locs, twists, Bantu knots, afros, afro puffs, and other formations, as well as wigs, headwraps, and other head coverings.”
Spoken testimony by Amy Harrington, a concerned parent from Windsor, about her duaghter’s experience with hair discimination. She spoke to the House Committee on General and Housing on Jan. 11, it begins about 36 minutes into this committee recording.
“The conversation about hair is about much more than the appearance of people,” she said. “It’s about individuality, it’s about being genuine to yourself and who you are, it’s about feeling confident in your skin, and I think that we all want that.”
She shared that her daughter who is of Jamaican and Indian descent has experienced discrimination based on her hair and they believe it was race-related.
“She has had quite a hair journey… she had a straightener and she straightened it every single day,” she said. She said that her daughter got a lot of mean comments due to her hair being different from most of her classmates.
Testimony submitted included an infographic submitted by Saudia LaMont, a Vermont House candidate for the Lamoille-Washington District.
The supportive document states, “The freedom to take pride in one’s appearance in a manner that feels in alignment with the traits associated with their race and culture, improves confidence, self-esteem, dignity and respect. If passed, people who choose to wear their “natural” hair will have the same protections from discrimination, harassment, and bullying as other protected classes.”
“Racism under another name?”
The NAACP Legal Defense Fund states that discrimination based on hair is really racism in another form.
Their webpage states, “For decades, LDF has recognized natural hair discrimination as racism by another name. Through advocacy and litigation, LDF has worked to end race-based hair discrimination.”
It further states, “Hair discrimination is rooted in systemic racism, and often helps preserve white spaces. Policies that further hair discrimination advance white Anglo-Saxon Protestant cultural norms as the default norms to which everyone should adhere. Hair and grooming policies that prohibit natural hairstyles — like afros, braids, bantu knots, and locs — have been used to justify the removal of Black children from classrooms and Black adults from their employment.”
On X, social media activists do assert in numerous posts that certain hairstyles are perceived as unprofessional as a form of white supremacy. @rhemaspov wrote, “white supremacy is the reason our hair is seen as ghetto and unprofessional and it’s the same reason they can wear our hairstyles and receive zero backlash or discrimination for it.”
A federal counterpart bill
There’s a federal bill, known as the CROWN Act (Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair), that addresses discrimination based on hairstyles. Democratic Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, who is the lead sponsor of the bill, said during a House floor debate that some people “think because your hair is kinky, it is braided, it is in knots or it is not straightened blonde and light brown, that you somehow are not worthy of access.” She further called it a form of discrimination.
An Associated Press report also notes that the federal bill seems to largely be about race at least as much as it is about hair. Their report states, “Black people who wear hairstyles like Afros, cornrows or tightly coiled twists should not face bias in society, school and the workplace, the U.S. House said Friday in voting to make it explicit that such discrimination is a violation of federal civil rights law.”
The author is a writer for the Vermont Daily Chronicle
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Legislation, Race and Division
Does this or will this type of legislation extend to other categories like tattoos and body piercings? Personally, if I sat down in a restaurant and the waitress came up with pink hair and a face covered in tattoos and piercings I would lose my appetite.
…then there is the issue of a safety hazard, like sharp spiked, epoxied hair poking someone in the eye. How about flammability hazards of people like California Gov. Newsome? It’s not complicated how people feel…when you encounter someone who goes to great lengths to look bizarre, you naturally wonder about their motivation.
For some it seems like a giant billboard that says: “dont hire me or rent to me”.
If these bills pass, I hope every white guy with dreadlocks promptly seeks federal employment or military service and find out what happens. Willing to bet the lawsuits that stem for their naturally occurring hair exclusion are tossed….
Wouldn’t a white guy with dreadlocks be guilty of cultural appropriation, and, therefore, canceled?
This is really intended to restrict employers from hiring anyone based on meeting criteria on professional appearance. I have been a working woman for 40 years. Historically, woman of all races, fix their hair to meet professional work standards and to look neat and clean. There is a professional work standard for appearance, which contradicts people’s individual style. This law is meant to attack that standard, as being racist. All societal standards are being dismantled, one by one.
John, people don’t immigrate from states or we would have deported you a while ago. And you call yourself a lawyer!!! Stick to playing farmer.
Stay out of this one, you pretending to be the arbiter of who can live here is one of many examples of your hubris.
You are as much of a “real Vermonter as the person you seek to denigrate. Idealistic lawyer, couldn’t cut it in the city so he falls back on Grandparents wealth to play farmer. Show me the real Vermonter in that story, trust fund baby.
Take the “we” out of your mouth because Real Vermonters don’t judge their neighbors. It seems that label is something you really care about, but you’ll NEVER be one. Grow some dreads and get over it.
Whoops, got my stories about white fragility mixed up, my bad
“THEIR” neighbors, or “OUR” neighbors, Chris?
Employers are allowed to set standards in the image they want to project. You are not owed a job if you do not fit their image. It’s NOT racism, or ageism, or anything else. Quit acting entitled, because I can assure you America is fu*king sick of it!!
I am chuckling though, at the thought of me telling the barber in boot camp that he couldn’t shave my head because I wanted to stay my “authentic” self!! BWHAHAHAHA!!!
Me thinking the barber would boot your buttox out of his chair.
Give me a beak, is this all these legislators have to do now we are worrying about hairstyles and kids making fun of other kids ………….My God, where do we get these clowns?
The state is sinking economically quicker than the Titanic, and now we need ” Hair Police ” ……….. this is pathetic !!
Mike Mrowicki seems to be making a move for the post-Krowinski era. He has a safe seat with the good denizens of Putney, Dummerston and Brattleboro providing cover with plenty of rainbow and BLM flags, as well as 16-year-olds voting. Sponsoring anti-gun legislation, sponsoring this stuff,… Jersey guy makes good in VT.
Glorified masks, “For the children,” of course.
Watch this person.
I see this as being abused by people who are not qualified for the position they are applying for as a way to cry racism when they are not hired. You cannot force an employer to hire you if you do not project the image they wish to have for their company. Personally, I don’t care what your hair looks like as long as it is clean and not falling into my food. However, if the person is not qualified or isn’t as qualified as the employer needs…stop whining and using the racist excuse and go get the skills needed to get hired. CCV is offering free degrees…do the work and quit looking for ways to blame everyone else. The state is going down the toilet and all the Legislature can come up with is laws about hair styles….are you kidding me?
I think four of us voted NO to this bill in the House, proud to report I was one.
Other than looking for new ways to steal our money, don’t these clowns in Montpelier have anything better to do?
You about covered the democrat/progressive agenda…between stealing our money and virtue signaling.