Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

yardwork

(67,288 posts)
17. I can give some examples.
Thu Jul 17, 2025, 03:08 PM
Jul 17

Hegseth banned facial hair, which is necessary for the facial hygiene of many men with curly hair. Shaving causes their skin to break out. Some white men are affected by this issue, but most people with tightly curling facial hair are Black or brown.

Many Black women use hair extensions for a variety of reasons, including racist expectations that Black women's hair look "white," i.e., long and straight. As long as those hair extensions are controlled in regulation ways - coiled into a bun, pulled back - it shouldn't matter whether a woman's hair is naturally long and straight or achieved in a salon. But this new policy says it's ok for white women to have naturally long, straight hair, but not ok for Black women to achieve the same look through artificial means.

And so forth. I think the inherent racism in the requirement that manicures be "American" or "French" polish speaks for itself. It's one thing to have a policy that everyone's nails be only X cm long. It's quite another to say this. Why not just say "no polish of any kind?"

Recommendations

3 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Yeah SickOfTheOnePct Jul 17 #1
Uh Huh atreides1 Jul 17 #3
Yes. This is a racist and sexist policy. yardwork Jul 17 #4
Racist and sexist how? SickOfTheOnePct Jul 17 #5
Ummmm.... everybody expresses their individuality. yardwork Jul 17 #10
Again, how so? N/t SickOfTheOnePct Jul 17 #13
One that I read about Nittersing Jul 17 #15
No, it hasn't been rescinded SickOfTheOnePct Jul 17 #18
??? Does that mean they have to get approval every year? nt Nittersing Jul 17 #19
Yes... SickOfTheOnePct Jul 17 #24
I can give some examples. yardwork Jul 17 #17
Thanks for the response SickOfTheOnePct Jul 17 #22
Let's see how it's enforced. yardwork Jul 17 #33
Are we going to run out of white males? I mean Rollins wants 34 million to make sinkingfeeling Jul 17 #8
They're definitely in high demand! yardwork Jul 17 #11
iirc THERE ARE ONLY 2-3 MILLION US FARM WORKERS WarGamer Jul 17 #35
The rule could crimp JD's fashion style when he visits the Pentagon. nt allegorical oracle Jul 17 #32
More.. Demovictory9 Jul 17 #2
...and THAT's just the men! Totally Tunsie Jul 17 #6
Good thing he's not running the appearance of Fox News. sinkingfeeling Jul 17 #7
Folks like Trump and JD Vance would not pass muster in this man's Army. Midnight Writer Jul 17 #9
But that's white male makeup! That's ok. yardwork Jul 17 #12
Malicious Compliance: ret5hd Jul 17 #28
Please tell me that this never happened before, and certainly not in a Democratic administration... CTyankee Jul 17 #14
Cancel culture!!! RedWhiteBlueIsRacist Jul 17 #16
I can't figure out Figure 7.12 jmowreader Jul 17 #20
Air Force folks SickOfTheOnePct Jul 17 #23
That makes sense, thanks jmowreader Jul 17 #25
I was actually in the Air Force Wifes husband Jul 17 #34
The secretary of defense is a Level I position in the Executive Schedule, thus earning a salary of US$246,400. CTyankee Jul 17 #21
Why does he know so much about nail polish and fake eyelashes? Irish_Dem Jul 17 #26
It would be more to Hegseth's credit if he would ban democrank Jul 17 #27
How about couch fucker's eyeliner? SheltieLover Jul 17 #29
And folks, this is not from The Onion or Borowitz. WestMichRad Jul 17 #30
that is so stupid and petty. What is wrong with eyelash extensions? ecstatic Jul 17 #31
For the Air Force... SickOfTheOnePct Jul 17 #36
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Pete Hegseth bans false e...»Reply #17