The news story that a teacher at a University forced several male students to undergo a haircut has raised many questions about social values which we consider as normal. Clearly, male long hair is considered offensive and female long hair desirable as per the socio-cultural hegemony. So without any bother, a member of the precordial team of Rabindra University at Sirajganj ordered the haircuts.
The teacher demonstrated the power of orthodoxy at the institutional level. Had this been done by the police , the protest would have gone international and HR agencies may have protested and manob bondhons would have been many at Dhaka and elsewhere. Had they been girl students, it may well have been seen as something close to physical assault. We do tolerate so much violence.
The social cultural definition of cultural space is deeply embedded amongst us. In this framework, any authority has absolute control over our mind and body and can do as they wish. It doesn’t matter if it’s a political leader, an amla or a proctorial team member. This is therefore linked to power exertion and any sign of contest of that is seen as actionable offense.
In the case of the said University, it was not a matter that falls within the perimeter of its authority since a university’s main task is to help students learn. Body hair maintenance is not the University’s concern unless it threatens the students or the institution. So how does long hair qualify as that ?.
Historically speaking it does because it signifies disagreement with the dominant and the powerful and that is always treated as a threat. Even long hair is seen as challenging the status quo and it’s this that leads to questions about the powers that be and hence is always an act of subordination, even rebellion.
Bangladesh’s recent history has many such incidents and they were also seen by the authorities’ as signals of social protest. Anything that the hegemon doesn’t do, means it needs resisting so the hair cuts.
Yet long hair is a tradition in Bengal which has many cultural implications. Given that the teacher teaches history and culture, she should have known that both Lalon and Tagore had long hair and that is probably a signal that should be read about the faculty in general. It’s a signal that the said teacher at least is very alienated from Bangladesh’s own culture.
Equally significant is the bullying aspect of it. Just because she can do it , she did it. She considered the students private body as public property into which the University could intrude. That is something she must have gained from the spirit of the University itself. The act may be considered an isolated one but in the space of time of today signals how the powerful treat the powerless. The students have now mobilized protest and she has had to resign from her posts though not from the University. Soon it will pass but the university is branded as the hair cutting university, an insult to the brand the institution wanted to honour- Rabindranath Tagore.
