Super Marine

A: YES - in MCO 1020.34G, Chapter 1, Paragraph 1004, Section 7a(1)(c) [for female Marines: Section 7b(1)(b)7 ] it states that "If applied, dyes, tints, bleaches and frostings, which result in natural colors, are authorized.  The hair color must complement the person's complexion tone.  Color changes that detract from a professional image are prohibited."

Essentially, you can color your hair as long as you don't wind up looking like an anime character. It has to be a realistic hair color for your skin type, as well. Might seem racist, but it makes sense, and falls under what would be a normal, professional look, anyway. Hard to argue against that one.

A: YES - MCO 1020.34G, Chapter 1, Paragraph 1004, Section 7a(1)(a)2 states "No male Marine will be required to have his hair clipped to the scalp except while he is undergoing recruit training or when such action is prescribed by a medical officer. This does not prohibit a male Marine from
having his hair clipped (or shaved) to the scalp if he so desires."

This denotes TWO major points:

Firstly, if you come into work without a haircut, or for whatever reason, someone tells you that you have to have your head buzzed to the scalp, they are absolutely WRONG. NO ONE  (to include supposedly over-motivated Cpls or Sgts) can make you shave your head. NO ONE. It is a DIRECT violation of this order, and is an NJP-able offense (under articles 80, 81, 92, 93 and 124) of the UCMJ). The ONLY person who can make you shave your head after Boot Camp is a Medical Officer.

Secondly, you may shave your head if you want to, and NO ONE can stop you. It IS within regs.

 

Though this would appear to make it okay to put your hands in your pockets while standing still, the Permanent Marine Corps Uniform Board has issued a statement saying "Effective immediately, in a garrison environment you may not put your hands in your pockets other than to retrieve something from said pockets, at anytime."

The order still allows you to do so when in any "field environment," which would include being at a rifle range, or being deployed to certain areas.

A: DEPENDS (but mostly, yes) - The same rule that governs what rings are acceptable also govern watches. The quote from MCO 1020.34G, Chapter 1, Paragraph 1004, Section 5a(2) states "Inconspicuous watches are authorized for wear in uniform." Strangely enough, the same word, "inconspicuous," is used to describe authorized rings in Section 5a(1).

Now, no one is going to expect everyone in the Marine Corps to buy tactical, matte black wedding rings just so that they conform to the Uniform Regulations. That's ridiculous. Obviously, silver and gold rings are authorized, and are therefore, by definition, considered "inconspicuous." This would mean that a ring would have to go above and beyond being simply silver or gold, and since engagement rings (which frequently have diamonds in them) are also explicitly authorized, a watch would really have to be exceptionally eccentric to be considered out of regulations.

Had it not been for the ring regulation being worded exactly the same as the watch regulation, it would've given more room for interpretation, which would generally allow your superiors to tell you what to do. But the language in this order means that they cannot force you to remove the watch simply because it's silver and shiny. It has to go above and beyond that in order to be considered unauthorized.