"Morehouse MEN"...Don't dress like women. Well, maybe some of them do.

Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Morehouse graduate.

I just finished reading this article from Inside Higher Education and it explains how there's a new dress-code being enforced at Morehouse (an all-male historically black college) that's being well-received in general by the students but not so well-received by the homosexual population. Sidebar: What's politically correct, gay or homosexual or both?

I actually think that Morehouse College's creation of a dress code is a great idea for an all-male H.B..CU. With all the stereotypical images of Black males floating around television, movies, and the InterWeb I think this is conducive to helping young brothers step up their game as far as situation-appropriate attire goes. And I'll go on record and mention that of the 3 men I know that are Morehouse graduates, they all dress very very well and know how to dress specific to the event/occasion.

As for the dress code, it seemed fair overall and sensible. Some of the items that jumped out at me from the dress code are the following:

• Sunglasses may not be worn in class or at formal programs. This is a welcomed dress code mandate as far as I'm concerned. I'm tired of seeing guys wearing shades in the club, let alone class or a formal program. You're future ain't that bright, bama.


• Jeans may not be worn at major programs such as convocation, commencement or Founder's Day. I consider this part of the "step your game up" program that all young Black males should have to go through. I'm tired of seeing dudes show up at funerals with jeans on and a R.I.P. T-shirt. And I'm tired of dudes showing up at the N.S.B.E. banquets with durags jeans and a blazer on thinking they are stylin'.


• "Sagging," defined as "the wearing of one's pants or shorts low enough to reveal undergarments or secondary layers of clothing," is banned. Do I even need to comment on the fantastic-ness of this one? Not only do I not care what the sign on your azz says homeboy, I don't want to SEE the sign on your azz either!


• Wearing of "clothing associated with women's garb (for example, dresses, tunics, purses, handbags, pumps, wigs, make-up, etc.)" is banned. (Morehouse educates only male students.) This one appears to be causing a bit of controversy among the gay students. Not a surprise. I'd call this one the "Rid us of the Queens" mandate. This is obviously an attempt to keep some of the gay males from taking it "too far". I don't think this is right, however. This seems kind of discriminatory even though I'm not necessarily fond of guys dressing up in women's clothing. It's one of those, you don't like to see it but they have the right to do it type of things, like visiting one of those racist group's websites. But nowadays with the tight jeans and man-purses the attire/accessories of the young male isn't that far off from a female's "typical" attire/accessories.

This particular stipulation/rule however makes me wonder...

The above picture is taken from my previous blogpost.

Overall, I think the dress code is definitely a GOOD thing. Young men (especially young Black men) need to be held to a high standard for the way they present themselves in public and in general. Take a second to perform a Google image search for "young black male" and take a look at the first result you get.

And while I think the dress code is a great idea, at the same time I don't see the need to have a stipulation that targets a specific demographic subset of the student body. Doesn't the leadership at Morehouse want the "Morehouse Man" be tolerant enough to live with a few cross (or close-to cross) dressing guys on campus? You'll have to live with it in the "real world" once you get out of college, so why not start learning to be tolerant (if you aren't already) at Morehouse?

In addition, if the dress code is "part of a larger agenda to develop student's minds and 'social consciences'" (according to Morehouse Vice President for Student Services, William Bynum), then how does this stipulation fit in with that agenda?

Social conscience is defined as "an attitude of sensitivity toward and sense of responsibility regarding injustice and problems in society." That is, part of having a social conscience is being sensitive towards injustice. Wouldn't it be an injustice to have a dress code that completely singles-out a specific group of the student body? If this where a predominantly white institution and a no-durag policy was instituted I'm sure many Black students would be defiant. Just because Morehouse is an all-male institution doesn't mean it should (or that it has the right to) single-out the part of the gay population that wants to dress like females. And yes one could argue that Morehouse banning durags singles-out the "durag wearing" population at the school but we all know that's not the same issue as discrimination based on sexual preference.

In general, this rule echoes a larger societal sentiment toward gay males and in this case specifically gay males that dress like women. In this case that sentiment could be considered disdain, uncomfortableness, or even intolerance. The U.S. is a male-dominated society and nowadays that doesn't always coincide with the sexual evolution that seems to have taken place among the youth of America. If Morehouse really wants to "develop students' minds and social consciences", it should consider rescinding that particular part of the dress code. Maybe they'll help instill some tolerance by being more tolerant as a college. In general, the Black community might want to start realizing the parallels between the civil rights movement, women's rights movement, and gay rights movement. They're not equivalent, but some very important lessons can be learned and from that knowledge, more progressive and forward-thinking choices/policies can be made.