If there’s one thing that Anthony*, a Queensland father of two, has learned in wanting to send his children to a private school, it’s this: “There’s what’s legal, and then there’s what’s right.”
Anthony is facing a David and Goliath battle with a private school in the state. His son, the youngest of his two children, is being refused from attending the school for breaching the dress code for haircuts, which enforces male students to have a “short back and sides” haircut.
He has contacted several organisations in search of answers, including the school’s board, the Non-State Schools Accreditation Board (NSSAB) and the Queensland Human Rights Commission (QHRC). None of the organisations could overturn the headmaster’s decision before the start of the 2024 school year.
Most private schools have dress code policies that perpetuate the stereotypical binary of how boys and girls should dress. While on face value it seems discriminatory to refuse a student for sitting outside those stereotypes, it’s much more complex than that: as a private entity, discrimination and human rights laws work differently in private schools.
But studies show gender inequality and issues like gender-based violence starts with gender stereotypes: men who strongly agreed with stereotypically masculine looks and behaviours were 17 times more likely to have hit their partner, according to The Man Box study from the Jesuit Social Services (JSS).
Anthony has since pulled both his children from the school, yet is determined to continue fighting the legal battle that could cost him up to $25,000.
Why? He says the goal is to champion gender equality for children in generations to come.
The story
Around eight years ago, Anthony and his wife, Sarah**, bought a house close by to a private school they wanted their children to one day attend.
The college is a co-educational, non-denominational school, offering enrolments from prep to Year 12. Anthony and Sarah saw the school as a great opportunity to be a part of a school community for the years to come.
“And we kind of assumed that, being non-denominational, it would be more inclusive,” Anthony said.
Their first child started in the childcare services in 2018, and it was here that Anthony saw the first small but somewhat overt signs of gender stereotypes. From having separate girls and boys corners in play areas at the centre, to giving out name tags coloured blue for boys and pink for girls, Anthony was aware and slightly concerned about what this meant for his and the other children.
“The indications that there were fixed gender norms weren’t obvious at first, but became more obvious over time,” Anthony said.
“Kids learn more from what they see than what we tell them. So we can say that everyone’s equal, but if we don’t treat everyone equally, then they just go by what they see.”
In 2022, his then four-year-old son, who had grown his hair long and was wearing it in a top knot, had his first enrolment interview at the school.
Anthony was aware of the “short back and sides” hair code at the school, but was uncomfortable with forcing his young child to have a haircut, something he clearly did not want to do.
“It was never our plan or our intention that he would have long hair. We just let him be himself, and he ended up having long hair, and ended up liking it,” Anthony said.
“We knew the rules around hair at the school, but we’re always aware that policies can change and evolve as societal expectations evolve and change.”
So Anthony, who was already heavily involved in the school community, broached the subject with school leadership around changing the school’s policies for haircuts.
“We were optimistic that, if we presented a strong case, and they were open minded and progressive, the policy would be updated and be more inclusive,” Anthony said.
Little did Anthony know that his optimism wouldn’t be enough, and his pursuit for gender equality would lead him to a seemingly unwinnable legal battle against the private school institution.
The Man Box
This Queensland private school is far from alone in having strict uniform codes that are still guided by “traditional”, binary ideals of how men and women should present themselves.
But advocates are increasingly raising concerns about how enforcing traditional “rules” on masculinity and femininity can negatively impact younger people in the future.
Cara Gleeson, the interim CEO of gender-based violence advocacy organisation Our Watch, said gender inequality that starts at early ages perpetuates broader gendered issues in the future.
“We know from recent research that young men who hold rigid views on masculinity and gender stereotypes are much more likely to display a range of problematic behaviours, including the use of physical and sexual violence against an intimate partner and having thoughts of suicide,” Gleeson said.
“We want to see young men encouraged to be the best version of themselves by their teachers and school community. An easy way to do this is to challenge rigid stereotypes and model a broad interpretation of masculinity.”
These “rigid stereotypes”, or as the Jesuit Social Services (JSS) calls “The Man Box”, include acting/appearing tough, being in a heterosexual relationship, not showing emotion and more.
The Man Box can alter men’s perspectives on what it means to be a man, and can put women in extremely dangerous positions in the future – yet a quarter of men aged 18-30 identified with the Man Box rules, according to JSS’ 2024 study.
The research found men who strongly agreed with the Man Box rules were 17 times more likely to have hit their partner, nine times more likely to blame a woman for making a man hit her, and six times more likely to have forced a partner to do something sexual that is degrading or humiliating.
Gleeson said challenging ideals of the “Man Box” and thus ending gender-based violence starts with education.
“Gender inequality is the key driver of violence against women, and challenging gender stereotypes is something we can all do to create the cultural change required to end violence against women,” Gleeson said.
“One of the key vehicles for challenging these stereotypes and giving young people the tools they need is through respectful relationships education.
“Respectful relationship education is an approach where everyone across the whole school is part of teaching and modelling respect and equality in a school community, including through school policies.”
In its 2024 pre-budget submission in January, the Australian Gender Equality Council (AGEC) said gender stereotypes are “a fundamental cause of gender inequality” which is embedded in the education system.
“The current education system plants the seeds of gender inequality in each new generation, representing a fundamental cause of gender inequality,” the submission reads.
The AGEC suggests the government undertake a review of the National Curriculum “to identify and eliminate gender bias”, ensure all schools offer non-gendered uniform options, among other recommendations.
The proposal
It was the start of 2023, just twelve months before school started for Anthony’s son, who still refused to have a haircut, attached to his top knot hairstyle.
“We didn’t want to tell our kids how they had to be or who they had to be,” Anthony said. “We wanted them to be able to be themselves.”
Believing the school would understand, Anthony met with the headmaster, the deputy headmaster and some other executives at the private school, asking about potential policy changes to the school’s dress code.
Anthony found the school leadership very supportive of his desire to suggest the policy changes.
“They were really positive and encouraging of me proposing an amendment, and so I was not led to believe that this would be met with opposition or difficulty at all,” Anthony said.
So Anthony wrote a proposal with 16 different points of argument on why the school should consider the changes, including the growth of gender-neutral hair policies at schools. According to his research, Anthony said 92 out of the 115 schools in the region had gender-neutral hair policies: that is, if it’s long, tie it up.
“They’re a private school, they want to be neat and presentable, but at the same time, I thought there was an opportunity to be more equitable,” he said.
Anthony submitted his proposal in June 2023. He acquired the backing of several other parents at the school, including nine who put their name on the proposal in support.
It took five months before Anthony received a final decision from the school.
“I had to keep chasing them,” Anthony said. “Sometimes I didn’t hear from them for weeks. One time I didn’t hear from them for eight weeks.”
Despite the initial support from the school’s leadership, the headmaster ultimately rejected Anthony’s proposal. The school only disputed one of his 16 arguments – the 15 others went unrecognised in the school’s response – and on that basis, his entire proposal was thrown out.
Anthony met roadblock after roadblock, attempting to appeal the decision.
He approached the school board first, who said they couldn’t overturn the headmaster’s decision on the matter. Anthony then spoke to the Non-State Schools Accreditation Board (NSSAB), who said it could not deal with the issue.
To Anthony, it seemed there was no one willing to do anything about it – except him.
Finally, in November last year, Anthony was advised by the Queensland Human Rights Commission (QHRC) there was a potential breach of the Anti-Discrimination Act. A date for a hearing at the QHRC was set, but it was after the 2024 school year had started.
Anthony applied for interim orders from the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT) to allow his son to attend school while the matter was before the QHRC.
But on the Friday before the first day of school – what would have been a joyous, momentous occasion for Anthony as a parent – QCAT ruled in favour of the school and denied Anthony request for interim orders.
“We had to make a really difficult decision over that weekend,” Anthony said, “to either hold my son down and forcibly cut his hair against his will, which seems abusive and barbaric, or pull the kids out from the school.”
Anthony went with the latter and pulled his kids from the school.
“I’m not a lawyer,” Anthony said, “but I’ve learned that the right person doesn’t always win the argument – it’s the person who argues the best.”
Discrimination in Australian private schools
Australian legislation ensures Australians are not discriminated against based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality or ability. But the interpretation of the law can be tricky when it comes to discrimination in private schools.
Prabha Nandagopal is a Sydney-based human rights lawyer and founder of Elevating Consulting Partners. Much of her work focuses on gender equality, particularly intersectional gender equality, in Australian workplaces.
She believes Australia is currently experiencing some significant advancements on gender equality.
“This is a watershed moment for gender equality in Australia – the publication of gender pay gaps, and the new positive duty legislative obligation,” Nandagopal said.
“So schools need to come to the party. They need to get on board and play their role in breaking gender stereotypes, creating a more equitable and inclusive learning environment, and supporting the next generation of change agents in gender equality.”
Schools in Australia – both government funded and private – have dress codes and have a right to create and enforce these standards. However, private school uniform policies are often stricter than government schools, serving to “homogenise” the study body and often following traditional, binary ideals of how men and women, or boys and girls in this case, should look.
But discrimination and human rights legislation works differently in private schools to government-funded schools, Nandagopal explained, and this can perpetuate gender stereotypes within private schools.
“There’s no right to attend a private school like there is with the public school system,” Nandagopal said.
“When you enrol your child, you are signing up to their specific codes of conduct, policies and procedures.”
Nandagopal said these old school rules don’t reflect the changing ideals of gender that society is currently living through.
“The law and the interpretation of the law needs to keep evolving,” she said. “It must keep pace with contemporary values and attitudes that are going to change overtime.
“It’s a reasonable expectation for kids to go to school well-groomed with neat hair – I don’t disagree with this – but length of hair shouldn’t be a factor in determining neatness.”
Nandagopal said it’s up to school leadership to make the change – and this might not happen without pressure from broader social movements.
“Schools need to start turning their mind away from things that limit students from expressing their gender identity and gender expression – to feel more comfortable, to be their most authentic selves in the school ground,” Nandagopal said.
“While the protection of the law is so limiting, you need to look at the other advocacy options – the grassroots movement, the social campaigns.”
What is legal vs what is right
Now, Anthony is balancing working from home and homeschooling his two children, as he and his wife consider what’s the next best move for their children’s education, as well as the David and Goliath legal battle that’s ahead of him.
“It’s a very disruptive time, but it’s also just really scary that these private schools can do whatever they want,” Anthony said.
“The process has been so painful that people don’t fight against it because it’s so hard.”
Anthony has the choice to escalate his case further, a move that will cost him $25,000 in legal fees.
Unable to find that amount of money, his other options include finding a pro bono lawyer, starting a Go Fund Me page or – the option that’s looking the most achievable – representing himself in court.
But the advice he has received from lawyers is simple: “If you represent yourself, you will lose.”
“There’s what’s legal, and then there’s what’s right,” Anthony said. “Just because it’s legal that schools can do that, it doesn’t mean they should.”
While Anthony is preparing for a legal loss, he’s hoping shining a light on the issue will invoke some sort of change, no matter how small, for the generation to come.
“I’d like to make a change to help the next generation, because my generation caused a lot of these problems. But we’ve got an opportunity to make it better and in some ways we’re just not.”
*not his real name
**not her real name