Uniforms for us, but not for them?

After years of slow to little progress, the old shadow of separate and unequal continues to loom over American public schools. Recently, public school systems in the Washington DC Metro area have adopted mandatory uniform policies in an attempt to curb problem behavior amongst students. In their attempt to dissuade discord, some administrators have instituted uniform policies that highlight the age-old signs of segregation. Take for instance the schools in my home county of Prince George's County, MD. Most schools in predominantly African-American PG County have instituted a mandatory uniform policy. However, select schools have dodged this requirement since the uniform policy began in 2006. How is it that some schools are exempt from an what is clearly a system-wide policy? The answer lies in the demographics.

A quick look at the list of county schools with mandatory uniform policies (found here ) shows that all PG County high schools, except for Eleanor Roosevelt in Greenbelt and Bowie High, have mandatory policies in effect this school year. Why the exception for Roosevelt and Bowie? Status, location, and demographics. Eleanor Roosevelt is the crown jewel of the county school system, boasting an award-winning math and science program that draws the best and brightest, and typically non-African-American, students in the county. Bowie High sits less than ten miles from predominantly white Anne Arundel County, in one of PG County's richest, and whitest, cities. Other elementary and middle schools excluded from the list are also located in the twenty mile radius between Bowie and Roosevelt. Notably, both schools are miles outside the Beltway.

The exemption of Roosevelt, Bowie, and other schools in the Northwestern Region of PG County from mandatory uniform policies reveals a segregated approach to policy that reflects greater social inequalities. Are children who attend predominantly black schools in lower income, urban areas less capable of succeeding academically or behaving properly without a restrictive uniform policy? Yes and no. For years, PG County students have survived and succeeded sans uniform policies. However, the decades without uniforms were fraught with violence attributed to clothing theft and gang paraphernalia, as well as concerns over the suggestive and explicit nature of styles chosen by students. Despite, the benefits of instituting uniform policies, improved behavior and increased performance, the negative impact of excluding schools based on status and locations contributes to an elitist, atmosphere that places one population of students above another. But what competent administrator would ever admit to such exclusionary tactics?

Indeed, in some cases, African-American student populations have proven that the freedom to dress as they want has impaired their educational performance, but not to the point that they should be completely stripped of the option. To prevent feelings of elitism and oppression among the county students, the administrators have two options: make the uniform policy mandatory in all schools or drop the dress code. I'm sure that dropping the dress code is not an option, so PG county administrators should take a system wide policy into serious considerations. As an opponent of uniform policies in any environment, I feel the whole concept is far too reactionary to be substantial. It is a band-aid. Administrators, teachers, parents and students need to tend to the true wounds of failing public systems like teacher shortages, lack sufficient resources, poor funding, waning parental participation, and decreased dedication to study. Dressing up the problem isn't going to make anything better, and excluding select student populations based on performance and demographics is nothing less than elitist and exclusionary. If education continues to go in that direction then all our progress as a free, literate society will be lost.

AKA

A clever criminal will always have multiple aliases to keep the law at bay. Entertainers, artists, and authors, on the other hand, use aliases and pseudonyms to either protect their identity or incorporate their art into their identity, and vice versa. In hip-hop, aliases are fundamental to the identity of MCs. They define the artist, their style, and their message. Sometimes, an artist will change their alias as they evolve artistically. But what happens when an artist has so many aliases that their audience loses track; what happens when the average person follows this trend and has more aliases than fingers?

Just last week, notorious alias switcher, Puff Daddy--I mean Puffy....wait, I mean P. Diddy...actually, I meant Diddy....aw, screw it--posted a self-aggrandizing youtube clip where he swears he has not changed his name (of course, he also claims he has the right to change his name because of the life he's lived--paralyzing narcissism not withstanding, of course). But, honestly, can we blame the gossip sites for thinking he's changed his name again? He's changed it so many times--making a big deal about each time--that anybody who cared has lost track and may as well just call him whatever they please.

Now, I expect no less from an egotistical entertainer like Puffy (my preffered aka for Mr. Combs); but when controversial reality TV star Greg, from Real World Hollywood, rattled off a staggering list of inane aliases on his youtube blog, I had to comment. This kid had about five, give or take, aliases before he got to his given name. He goes by 1.Pretyboy 2.The Chosen One 3.Prince 4.Prince of Darkness 5.The Lord is My Savior, I Shall Not Want (my personal favorite). I'm sure there were more, but I convulsed in laughter after that last one. Surely, this is all part of his over-the-top, made-for-tv character, but I can't help but think this is representative of a generation that is overly infatuated with aliases and alter-egos. (If you don't believe me, just check myspace and see how many users use their real names.)

Nicknames are one thing, as they are usually endearing or demeaning names bestowed by friends, family, or enemies with knowledge of one's personality, demeanor, or bodily functions. An alias is a far more egotistical attempt, where someone tries to define themselves with some self-promoting moniker. I understand we live in a digital age of usernames and online ids, but should we really be so infatuated with renaming ourselves a thousand times over. I know we don't all have names we love, but they'll be with you longer than your alias will. So to all the Diddys, Princes, Thors, Black Caesars, Muja Stars, Princesses, Ravens, etc., etc., Remember a rose by any other name would never smell as sweet. Now, I know that's right!