No one is talking about wigs? WTF? Why do you keep lying?
lol. I'm done.
No one is talking about wigs? WTF? Why do you keep lying?
Long hair styles were wigs. Your argument was refuted so now you're relying on splitting hairs over what hair styles actually were.
lol. I’m done.
After calling me a racist too. ROFL XD
Long hair styles were wigs.
Incorrect. And that's a fact (not opinion, maybe you'll learn). It's so easy to look up to make sure you aren't wrong. . .and still you don't? Amazing.
After calling me a racist too.
I just said using your own metric, you're racist. I don't agree with your metric, which should be obvious.
Your argument has abandoned the premise we are discussing in favor of focusing on wigs again. I took the time to add some sources to the lower section of my argument since your argument now rests on splitting hairs over hair styles and ad hominem attacks.
Getting back to the discussion at hand, policies regulating hair length are racist against Black people.
I just said using your own metric, you’re racist. I don’t agree with your metric, which should be obvious.
I'm not forcing people to cut their hair or denying them their cultural heritage. So by my argument's own metric your argument is incorrect about its conclusion. Still though, I have nothing to do with this discussion. Ad hominem attacks about me do not add credibility to your argument. Your argument has been refuted by the evidence presented. Again here is the source.
Here is some stuff I learned about wigs that refutes your argument about long hair not being wigs in reference to 19th century US presidents.
Long hair styles were wigs. Your argument even referenced 19th century US presidents with long hair styles. Those long hair styles were wigs which were worn in their youth at the end of 18th century and which were mostly abandoned by those presidents by the time they took office in the 19th century in favor of short hair.
Here is a source that covers the relevant time period. Lincoln occasionally wore a wig.
One notable error in the article is that Washington's hair was powered to make it look like a wig. But that he was a president during the 18th century when wigs were still popular, which explains that fashion choice.
Even though wigs were fashionable, George Washington kept his own hair. He kept his hair long and tied back in a queue, or ponytail.
Although he didn't wear a wig, George Washington did powder his hair, giving it the iconic white color seen in famous portraits. Powdering one's hair was another custom of the time.
As a young man, George Washington was actually a redhead!
This wiki page has some more details backed up by sources. Again, some of these 19th century presidents had worn wigs earlier in life, but Jefferson and John Quincy Adams had, as far as we know, mostly stopped by the time they were actually in office.
In the United States, only four presidents, from John Adams to James Monroe, wore curly powdered wigs tied in a queue according to the old-fashioned style of the 18th century,[21][22] though Thomas Jefferson wore a powdered wig only rarely and stopped wearing a wig entirely shortly after becoming president in 1801.[23] John Quincy Adams also wore a powdered wig in his youth, but he abandoned this fashion while serving as the U.S. Minister to Russia (1809–1814),[24] long before his accession to the presidency in 1825. Unlike them, the first president, George Washington, never wore a wig; instead, he powdered, curled and tied in a queue his own long hair.[25]
No one is talking about wigs? WTF? Why do you keep lying?
lol. I'm done.
Long hair styles were wigs. Your argument was refuted so now you're relying on splitting hairs over what hair styles actually were.
After calling me a racist too. ROFL XD
Incorrect. And that's a fact (not opinion, maybe you'll learn). It's so easy to look up to make sure you aren't wrong. . .and still you don't? Amazing.
I just said using your own metric, you're racist. I don't agree with your metric, which should be obvious.
Your argument has abandoned the premise we are discussing in favor of focusing on wigs again. I took the time to add some sources to the lower section of my argument since your argument now rests on splitting hairs over hair styles and ad hominem attacks.
Getting back to the discussion at hand, policies regulating hair length are racist against Black people.
I'm not forcing people to cut their hair or denying them their cultural heritage. So by my argument's own metric your argument is incorrect about its conclusion. Still though, I have nothing to do with this discussion. Ad hominem attacks about me do not add credibility to your argument. Your argument has been refuted by the evidence presented. Again here is the source.
https://www.aclutx.org/sites/default/files/dresscodereport_2-1-24.pdf
Here is some stuff I learned about wigs that refutes your argument about long hair not being wigs in reference to 19th century US presidents.
Long hair styles were wigs. Your argument even referenced 19th century US presidents with long hair styles. Those long hair styles were wigs which were worn in their youth at the end of 18th century and which were mostly abandoned by those presidents by the time they took office in the 19th century in favor of short hair.
Here is a source that covers the relevant time period. Lincoln occasionally wore a wig.
https://www.sishair.com/presidents-who-wore-wigs/
One notable error in the article is that Washington's hair was powered to make it look like a wig. But that he was a president during the 18th century when wigs were still popular, which explains that fashion choice.
https://www.mountvernon.org/george-washington/facts/myths/ten-misconceptions-about-washington/
This wiki page has some more details backed up by sources. Again, some of these 19th century presidents had worn wigs earlier in life, but Jefferson and John Quincy Adams had, as far as we know, mostly stopped by the time they were actually in office.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wig