by ALICIA WALLACE

In The Bahamas, the commitment to and practice of respectability politics continues to outweigh common sense, human decency, and care for one another. It shows up in so many spaces and has been accepted as “normal” and “proper” for so long that it is rarely questioned, even when it causes obvious harm.

Respectability politics, at one time, was a survival tactic. People in situations of vulnerability, who were marginalised, and who were at risk of violence and discrimination did all they could to blend in by conforming to mainstream “standards” that were, ultimately, those set by white and wealthy people. Black people tried to match their appearance and behaviour with that of white people in the attempt to either go unnoticed or be seen as exceptional, thereby escaping, to some extent, discrimination.

Racism is still rampant today. Classism is still a part of our reality. The survival tactics of one generation are passed down and imposed upon the next. It can be difficult to see the historical context of our practices when they are not discussed, but carried out as a matter of duty, fulfilling expectations, and become norms. For this reason, respectability politics can, in its current practice, appear to be about morals or manners rather than a tactic that was useful (to a limited extent) and is now counterproductive, harmful, and anti-black.

It was not long ago that black women who kept their hair natural, meaning it was not chemically straightened, were strongly discouraged, told that it was unprofessional. People insisted that it did not look neat when, really, it simply was not straight and did not have the properties of straight hair. At a certain point, it was fine to have natural hair if it could be made to look like it was not. This was not about neatness. It was racism. It was the oppression that accompanies the idea that blackness is shameful and that black people aspire to be as close to whiteness as possible. We have seen and heard new stories about people being dismissed from work and school for having afros or locs. Those days, evidently, are not over.

“They came to school looking like hoodlums,” a social media post by RM Bailey said. The school, dissatisfied with their length of hair, decided to take a set of boys to a barber for haircuts. They declared them “beautiful” after the haircuts were provided. The school, mandated to provide education to all enrolled children, removed these children from their classes, took and posted photographs of them, likely without the consent of their parents/guardians, and made a disgusting, disparaging comment about them.

“Hoodlum” is a term that refers to a violent criminal. This is a completely inappropriate term to use to describe any child, especially based on the length of the hair or style of their haircuts. Removing the post is not enough. The boys are owed an apology, both for denigration in the social media post and the violation of their bodily autonomy. RM Bailey, unfortunately, is not alone in this anti-Black racism that has been internalised and unleashed on children in the form of certain rules and they ways they are enforced.

CC Sweeting reportedly kept out of classes when their haircuts were deemed unacceptable. The involved adults, and likely all administrators and educators, need specialised training to give them culturally relevant information on anti-black racism, stereotyping, implicit bias, and microaggressions and support them in developing appropriate rules, regulations, and application principles.

Schools have rules and regulations. Of course. Schools have uniforms. Yes. Schools attempt to set a standard through their rules and regulations. This does not mean the rules and regulations should remain as they have been for years, and it does not mean they are being applied and enforced in appropriate ways, particularly for the education, growth, and full development of this generation.

White boys are not made to keep their hair as short as black boys. For this, there is no reason. There is a root, and it is anti-black racism. It is due to the normalisation and continuation of respectability politics that people continue to practice. From the chemical straightening of black hair and the amount of gel used to manipulate the texture and volume of black hair to achieve a ponytail that looks slick and flat from the front, these practices can be stylistic and personal choices, yet should be considered by those who engage in them. These practices absolutely should not be expected or required of anyone.

Recently, there was lively conversation about a social media post by a business that is refusing service to people wearing bonnets. It is reasonable that a person may wear a bonnet, whether protect their hair, to preserve a hairstyle, to cover hair that is not styled to their liking, or as an accessory one simply likes. It does not need to suit anyone else. No one else needs to applaud the act. It is okay to dislike someone else’s appearance. It is not okay, however, to police the bodies of other people.

It is one thing for a business to refuse service to customers and forgo the related revenue from them and the people who decide not to spend money there as a matter of principle, and it is an entirely different thing to deny or interrupt the education of a child. It is especially egregious just weeks after the handwringing over the national examination results. It is especially foolish when there are children who do not make it to school every day for various reasons, and educators complain about the absences. It is especially irresponsible when so many express concern about boys, fearing that they are or will be “lost”.

We have to be clear about what is important to us and why. Do we want the children in this country to have access to education? Do we want them to have positive experiences at school? Do we want them to fear and be insulted by teachers and administrators, or do we want them be respected and to have respect for others? Do we want them to hate themselves and feel inferior to others, or do we want them to understand their history, know that racism still exists today, and learn to embrace their blackness?

It may be easier to teach children to conform, especially for the adults who only ever conform. It is more difficult to respect children, to allow them them to have opinions, to welcome their questions, to encourage their development of personal style, and to see and treat them as whole human beings.

It is easy to dominate children and control them with fear. It is more difficult to develop relationships with them, have conversations with them, develop codes of conduct in collaboration with them, and ensure that they feel and are safe with you, and can even express a difference of opinion or offer proposals for change.

If schools—the places children spend most of their waking hours—are not environments for children to develop, grow, and learn navigate the world with dignity and respect, how do we expect them to become adults who can effectively communicate, resolve conflict, and contribute to the creation of a better world?

The Ministry of Education and Technical and Vocational Training needs to understand that its mission must extend beyond the provision of curricula and administration of exams. It is also responsible for creating environments for children to know and love themselves, to develop care and empathy for the people around them, and to navigate complex situations with dignity and respect for themselves and others.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Village Weavers by Myriam JA Chancy. Feminist Book Club, hosted by Equality Bahamas and Poinciana Paper Press, is reading Village Weavers, the winner of the 2025 Fiction OCM Bocas Prize for Caribbean Literature. Born in Port-au-Prince, Haiti and raised there and in Canada, Chancy is a writer and scholar whose academic works include Framing Silence: Revolutionary Novels by Haitian Women. Edwidge Danticat referred to her as “one of our most brilliant writers and storytellers.” TIME declared Village Weavers the best book of April. The publisher summary said: “In 1940s’ Port-au-Prince, Gertie and Sisi become fast childhood friends, despite being on opposite ends of the social and economic ladder. As young girls, they build their unlikely friendship until a deathbed revelation ripples through their families and tears them apart.” Feminist Book Club will meet to discuss the book on Wednesday, October 22, at 6pm. Register: tiny.cc/fbc2025

2. Interior Chinatown. Read the book first, then enjoy the television series adaptation. Interior Chinatown by Charles Yu won the 2020 National Book Award for Fiction. Written in the format of a screenplay, it is about the Willis Wu, the “Generic Asian Man” who plays various stereotypical roles, and aspires to be the respected “Kung Fu Guy.” The publisher said: “Playful but heartfelt, a send-up of Hollywood tropes and Asian stereotypes, Interior Chinatown is Charles Yu’s most moving, daring, and masterly novel yet.” The television show turns the book into a dizzying portrayal of tropes and stereotypes that are far too common in movies and television shows, even today. A Guardian reviewer found that the show is provocative, but maze-like, so “this dense thicket of imagination, parody and allegory will probably make more sense to those who have read the book first”.