Student pulled out of class at Amesbury Middle School due to hairstyle

AmesburyDo we need rules regulating hair styles in schools?A black female student in grade eight, who attends Amesbury Middle School in North York, was recently admonished by her principal for wearing her hair in a natural style. The student was pulled out of class and purportedly told that she looked unprofessional and would never get a job looking the way she did. The most surprising thing is that the principal is also black. This story went viral on social media when the students’ aunt, Kaysie Quansah, took to Facebook to express her outrage at what had happened to her niece. Her post was passionate, she seemed hurt by what her niece had gone through. She stated, that the Principal “told my niece that she needs to put her hair up, gave her a hair band/scrunchie/ponytail holder (whatever you'd like to call it) and repeatedly told her to do something about her hair.”  A principal is an educator and should be a strong leader, someone who provides a positive environment for our children. When we drop our children off at school in the morning, we leave them there in hopes that they will be cared for by the best people in the community. Educators have a big responsibility; to impact our children’s’ lives in the most positive way possible. The Facebook statement contradicts this notion, “My sister was then called and told that my niece's hair was *too poofy*, *unprofessional*, that *no one would hire her with hair like that*, and if *she were working in a store, no one would buy anything from her*”.This story hit home for me, as a mother of mixed children (of Latino, black and white background) and as another social problem that we ignore on a daily basis. We must teach our children self-love not self-hate, we must teach them that what is most important is what is on the inside, how we treat people and how to be respectful of others and their situations.It is sad to see self-hate, because it demonstrates that there is a bigger issue at play here. The student’s aunt states it well, “I would like to know what gives you the authority to be the decision maker on stunting my nieces' dreams by telling her that she cannot achieve careers based off her looks. (Principal) why are you projecting your SELF HATE onto my niece? (Principal) love yourself, and allow my niece to do the same.”Kuddos to the family for making this story known to the media, which led to an outpour of support for the family.

Let us know what you think about this story. Do you think physical appearance should affect the education we receive in our schools or job opportunities later in life?

Can you believe?

 I_Cant_Believe_butter        When it comes to product labeling, the award for first place goes to Unilever for a product they dubbed, “I Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter!” It isn’t; and to be truthful I’m not quite sure what it is. You know; it’s the white and yellow tub that sits on the margarine shelf in the supermarket; the one that is periodically put on sale for $1.It was the name of the product that induced me to try it and I have to admit that it’s the taste that keeps me using it. Although when I read the ingredients I can’t fully understand why I keep eating it.The package boldly proclaims “Made with Sweet Cream Buttermilk” but on the ingredient list, in tiny letters, says, “Buttermilk powder (milk)”.   Product labeling regulations in both Canada and United States require ingredients on package labels to be listed in the order of their quantity from largest to smallest. They don’t have to give the quantities (ie. reveal their recipe) but they must provide you with the ingredients.   In this product, buttermilk comes after salt so you can infer from this that the entire one pound (454 gram) tub of margarine contains less “sweet cream buttermilk”; err sorry, “buttermilk powder” than it does salt.What happened to the “sweet cream buttermilk”? In fact there is no milk at all. On the original package they did discretely mention, in small letters, that it was “margarine”, sort of in a whisper. Now it has become a “SPREAD” although they call it a “buttery spread” (whatever that means).   It should be re-named; “Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter or Even Margarine Spread!” Wikipedia tells us that the product was developed in 1979 by the J.H. Filbert Company based in Baltimore Maryland before it was bought out by Unilever.   Unilever is a multinational corporation. It owns more than 400 brands.   They brought “almost butter” to Canada back in 1991.I love their commercial. A handsomely masculine bearded guy kneading dough at an outdoor market smiles and says to a couple of attractive women, “I love making the kind of food you really love putting in your body” 100% taste, 0% artificial preservatives, purified water (just like it comes out of your tap), “just a pinch of salt”.   Oops…that pinch of salt is actually 90 milligrams per tablespoon, which is much more than the pinch in the Canadian product which contains 60 mg. of salt per two teaspoons.If the Canadian teaspoons are metric teaspoons and the tablespoon is a U.S. tablespoon the salt content will be even higher, 133 mg, that’s more than double!   I telephoned the company to ask but the consumer representative didn’t know.Oh by the way, the fine print on their web site candidly confesses to unavoidably using some genetically modified oils (just a trace) but not to worry; there may even be less than the “sweet cream buttermilk” in their Canadian Product.   Sorry but the healthier version hasn’t come to Canada yet.   As their website proclaims, “Now that’s something you can feel good about.”The “can’t believe” website boldly avers: “We believe that what we take out is just as important as what we put into our buttery spreads”.Their commercial ends with, “It’s time to believe.”But is it?