AR 670-1 Racially Biased?

I have to agree with 1SG Erik Whitman. The new 670-1 just takes out the gray areas when it comes to how females should wear their hair.

The regulations on males hair have been set for decades with very little change, I feel these new regulations on females hair will stand and will not be changed again for a decade or so.

The bottom line is this. Get over it and drive on. We are all apart of an organization and the organization has policies and regulations. If you don't like the policies or regulations then find greener grass somewhere else. Retire, ETS, it doesn't matter. If you don't like it then it's time to leave. It's bullshit like this that causes conflict within an organization. And honestly, if people are going to claim racial bias they better have some strong points to back their claim or they are doing nothing more than whining and bitching. Please excuse the language, this type of crap fires me up.

I don't fully agree with ask the new standards however the problem that most young soldiers have is not realizing that they are a small piece to the greater whole. There may be something you don't understand our agree with, but someone who is higher and more trusted than you has a reason and can see the full aspect of the situation. The sooner young soldiers realize this the better out they will be. Granted it makes things easier to swallow when you see the whole picture but things as large as an Army wide regulation should be understood that even if you disagree you don't know or see what the people at that level do.

The AR 670-1 has always indicated the correct way that hair is suppose to be set for both male and females.   Though the majority who it is effecting are ethnic women, it is still stated that natural hair is the only thing that can be on the head.  Though some women get perms or relaxers to make their hair straight, but as long as it is maintained and does not interfere with the uniform or head gear.  But it is also up to the first line leaders to implement these regulations.  Especially when it comes to Reserve and Guard members.  I have seen in so many cases where women come to drill with 10 pounds of weave and braids/corn rows, etc that have never been authorized by the AR 670-1.  If the leaders are not doing their jobs, than both the leadership and Soldier fail.  This issue should have never been set as a race bias issue and more on a clear cut issue that should have been set correctly the first time.  Just as some will say that shaving the head is unauthorized, which is true to an extent, unless you are completely shaving the whole head.  People are taking context from what they are reading, and not using the common sense to to do it correctly.

Firstly, I apologize for my comments coming off as "attitude" as some put it. Secondly, I simply commented on a post with my opinion. That doesn't mean I feel personally targeted and for some of you to say I should get out of the Army not knowing me or my work ethic is unjust. I am black and my hair is natural and past my shoulders and I'm always in compliance. However what I was trying to convey in my post is the way my hair naturally grows from my head shouldn't be considered unprofessional. I'm still new to this site which is why my profile isn't complete yet, so no I'm not trolling. I wish I could address everyone who commented but there was a lot to be said.

I do not feel it is Racist! I do believe that clarity has finally been added to what had become an outdated REG.

We can't pull the race card every time a policy affects our specific race/ethnic/gender. That makes the Army look unprofessional and ridiculous honestly. That's like me saying I'm being discriminated against for my tattoos below my elbows. 

Wow, after reading the article, I am going to be brutally blunt: complaining is all I hear. Braiding everyday is damaging to ALL hair types. Ask any stylist. The reasoning is that twists don't have as neat an appearance as cornrows and regular braids do.

If you're not a black woman in the Army you can't say this isn't racially biased. It is. Period. No questions asked. Why is that the only people's hair that is considered "unprofessional" are African Americans? There's no problem when a white female dyes her hair blonde. But if a black female were to do it it'd be "unnatural." I bet the people who decided this and the people who don't think it's racially biased are mostly, if not all white men. I'm not surprised though. This new AR 670-1 is just another confirmation that we live in a misogynistic racist system.