The mullet has been worn proudly by working Australians for generations. We cannot let it go without a fight.

The mullet is perfect for those of us who work outside. Short hair around the face can’t get in the eyes, so it doesn’t slow us down. Extra length at the back keeps the burning sun off the neck and protects against skin cancer. The old phrase ‘business at the front, party round the back’ is not the whole story. More important for outdoor workers is: ‘work hard at the front, work safe round the back.’ Paying the hairdresser for a mullet should be as tax deductible as a hard hat or steel-cap boots.

Can this really be the mighty western Sydney? Where the mullet was once all but compulsory?

There has been much talk of civil liberties being lost in the battle between law enforcement and bikie gangs. Many are understandably concerned about threats to the right of free association and so on as new laws are deemed necessary to control outlaw motorcycle clubs. But there is a greater liberty at stake. Alarmingly, the mullet is now threatened. Pubs and clubs from King’s Cross to Campbelltown are refusing entry to men with mullets on the spurious grounds that the mullet may signify membership of a bikie gang.

Come off it!

Just as not all young Asian men are members of the triads, and not all young black men are members of street gangs, neither are all young white men with mullets members of an outlaw motorcycle club. Offensive cultural stereotypes can not be accepted as a dress code. Where do these people get off dictating which hairstyles their customers are allowed to have?

Having a mullet does not indicate one is uncouth or a redneck. The mullet is there to prevent a red neck. The mullet may well be a sign of a cultured and erudite young man. Possibly a fan of fellow mullet aficionados Shah Rukh Khan, Coleridge, or former US president James Polk. Judging a man by his mullet is bigotry, not a valid means of hotel security.

Also of concern are the unforseeable and possibly catastrophic effects the disappearance of the mullet may have on human reproductive practice. A thick, flowing mullet is the closest thing the male of our species has to the brilliant plumage of the peacock. A Darwinian signal of health and street smarts. Dare we play God? If the mullet is banned, can we be certain that women will still be able to select the fittest partner?