musings

Offensive fashion statements… or, who was that hooded, masked man?

As Patrick Starfish would say, “Good morning, Krusty Krew.” This morning, in contrast to yesterday morning, I am actually itching to write something of substance. Before I get cranked up with today’s post, I want to thank those of you who took the time to listen to my musical offerings yesterday. I truly appreciate it when anyone listens and comments on my recordings. I don’t put them out there very often because I hate making videos and I never know how they’re going to be received. But it does bring me great joy to sing songs and share them with others. So if you took the time to click on my channel, thank you very much. It means a lot to me, even though I did lose one subscriber on YouTube (bwahahahaha!). It’s okay. I’ll stay humble and stick to my day job.

Now, on with today’s controversial topic, which I hope readers will read and consider with an open mind.

Yesterday evening, I came across two news articles that caused me to react in different ways. After thinking about both of these issues, I realize that they’re two pieces of the same “puzzle” that faces everyone on the planet today. The first article that upset me was in the Washington Post. It was a piece by Robin Givhan about how face masks are “here to stay” and have now become a fashion accessory which may, very soon, become as essential as undergarments. Givhan writes:

Fashion always finds a way. Human beings are undaunted in their search for ways to stand out, to communicate, to thrive in a treacherous environment. And so the face mask — once purely functional, once perceived as an exotic accessory — has evolved at breakneck speed into something more.

It’s more essential because the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has recommended that Americans wear a mask when interacting with others. It’s more aesthetically pleasing. It’s also a more complicated cultural proposition. And, of course, the face mask is political because both the president and the vice president have refused to wear one on highly public occasions and because some protesters have insinuated that masks are un-American.

As the country moves toward reopening, masks are assuredly part of our future. And in some ways, their evolution is the perfect encapsulation of how much life has changed in a blink of an eye — and how challenging, both intellectually and emotionally, it will be for us to go forward.

I have written in previous pieces about how, personally, I don’t like seeing face masks being normalized and turning into fashion statements. I realize that I can’t stop them from evolving in such a way. Some people like wearing them and feel safer with them with them on. However, count me among those who have no desire to be mandated to wear a face mask for the rest of my life. In fact, I don’t even like that the masks are being pushed on everyone via peer pressure. I would hate to see them become like seatbelts, which most everyone is compelled to wear nowadays.

When I was a child, seatbelts were entirely optional. I have many memories of riding without them in those days, lying in cargo areas in my dad’s many vans or riding in the back of pick up trucks. At one time, my dad had a Volkswagen pop top camper, which had a bar across the ceiling that we had to push to get the camper top to go up. I used to swing on that bar like a monkey when I was a kid. It was very unsafe and unthinkable today, but great fun back then. I don’t regret the experience of swinging on that bar as we cruised down the interstates.

Now… as a sensible adult, I understand why all U.S. states and many developed countries require people to wear seatbelts. New Hampshire, the one seatbelt law hold out, currently doesn’t require seatbelt use for adults, but does require people under age 17 to wear them. It also looks like New Hampshire will soon require seatbelt use for everyone. However, generally speaking, I am opposed to “nanny” laws in principal. I think people should wear seatbelts because it’s the smart thing to do, not because they might get a ticket. I also wear one because if I don’t, my husband turns into Pat Boone.

I have seen face masks being compared to seatbelts. I don’t think they’re the quite same thing. Riding in a car without a seatbelt has always been inherently dangerous. Being in public without a face mask has not. Moreover, facial expression is a big component in effective communication and identification. A lot of things can’t be feasibly done in public if a person is wearing a mask… things that bring joy, like eating, drinking, lip reading, and smoking (although smoking is not something that brings me joy) or playing woodwind instruments or horns. Although speaking and singing are possible while wearing a mask, they aren’t as easy to do. Breathing isn’t as easy to do while wearing a mask, either.

I imagine that when summer is fully upon us, people who don’t routinely wear masks will realize what being forced to wear one at all times could mean. The thought of it really depresses me, especially since there is still some debate as to how helpful the masks really are. Face masks in 90 degree weather sound like a recipe for a lot of sweat, smelling of one’s own bad breath, and possible tan lines, not to mention kind of a creepy dystopian feel to society in which we won’t be allowed to see each other’s smiles in every day society.

I was a bit perturbed after reading Givhan’s article about how masks are becoming a fashion statement, especially since so many people commenting seem to be all for it being a permanent fixture. I don’t think a lot of people have thought about it very deeply. I intend to resist that trend as much as possible and only wear masks when I absolutely have to in order to avoid harassment or legal trouble. I posted about it on Facebook and my friend Sara, who is a nurse at the Mayo Clinic and has to wear a mask all day, fully agreed with me that wearing masks full time should be a no go. Especially since the coronavirus epidemic hasn’t been an issue for that long. Some people are now pushing for laws… and I know that I’m not the only one upset about the prospect of face masks being as necessary as underwear. In fact, another article drove home the idea that requiring face coverings at all times could be a very slippery slope.

Just before I was about to go to bed, I noticed a news item posted by a friend in California. A man in Santee, California went into a grocery store wearing a white, cone shaped hood. The San Diego Union-Tribune referred to the hood as a “KKK hood”, which it probably was. However, the man was not identified by name by the newspaper. In fact, other than a picture of the guy demonstrating his choice to wear the hood, along with shorts, t-shirt, and shoes, not much information about the man was provided at all.

I shared the article on Facebook, and a few friends automatically labeled the guy a racist. And, to be honest, he probably IS a racist. However, there is no way to know for sure. I suspect the guy wore the mask to make a point about the requirement to wear face masks. The rules are pretty broad right now. Your nose and mouth are supposed to be covered. The white hood accomplishes that. Because a hateful group of racists have co-opted the white, cone shaped hood into a symbol that immediately identifies one as a white supremacist, it’s taboo to wear a hood that looks like that in public. This guy chose to wear one anyway. He technically followed the rules by covering his face and mouth, but he did so in a way that was sure to offend other people.

I brought up the fact that since I’ve lived in Europe, I’ve noticed the Confederate battle flag being flown or otherwise displayed in various places here. When I’ve shared my observations with American friends, they almost always react with shock and dismay. To many Americans, the Confederate battle flag (which was actually only one of many used by Confederates during the Civil War) is ALWAYS a racist display. I grew up in the South and saw that flag all the time while growing up. Hell, when I was in South Carolina going to graduate school, there was a Confederate battle flag on top of the Statehouse. It was later relocated to the grounds of the Statehouse, where it stayed for years before it was finally put away for good. Yes, many people see that flag as a racist symbol, but others still insist that it’s about southern pride and a spirit of rebellion.

I once had an Italian Facebook friend. I guess we’re technically still friends, but he left Facebook last year, claiming that people didn’t want to engage in healthy debates with him. I’m sorry he left, especially since we have lost touch. Although he could be very obnoxious and even kind of mean at times, I liked the perspective he presented. He is an intelligent and articulate guy, and I miss getting his input on some topics. One time, he explained why it’s not really uncommon to see the Confederate battle flag displayed in Italy. That flag doesn’t have the same connotations to many Europeans as it does to Americans. A lot of people in Europe see that flag as only a symbol of southern rebellion. In fact, there’s a Harley Davidson garage located not two kilometers near where we live, and they proudly fly the Confederate battle flag. I’ve also seen it on a cab driver’s bumper in Ireland. To many Europeans, it doesn’t stand for racism like it does in the United States.

While the white hood and, especially, the swastika are definitely taboo in Europe, as they are in the United States, I would imagine that those symbols, when taken to a place where they have no meaning at all, would not inspire outrage. When it comes down to it, they’re just symbols, and they only have the meaning that people give them. Personally, I think we should pay more attention to the racist attitudes that actual people have rather than the symbols used to promote those attitudes. It’s also not lost on me that when those symbols are presented, they identify those who have those sentiments. That makes it much easier to choose not to associate with them… although a lot of them are simply ignorant, and their ignorance doesn’t necessarily make them horrible people. At least not in my opinion.

Does “God” feel the same way about Confederate battle flags and white hoods made of cloth?
Isn’t this a blip? My father was a proud flag carrying conservative, but he never hesitated to wear ugly clothes inspired by the American flag. I think Americans should probably think longer and harder about this issue.

Back when football player Colin Kaepernick was regularly in the news for “taking a knee”during the “Star Spangled Banner” to protest racism, a lot of conservatives were upset because they saw his actions as disrespecting the American flag. Curiously enough, “God”, the popular Facebook page, even referred to the American flag as a “piece of cloth” and the national anthem as just a song. I remember blogging about this subject, and to make my point, I included the photo below.

I am not at all condoning the actions of the “very fine people”. However, one could argue that the Confederate battle flag and, in fact, other symbols made of fabric, such as white, cone shaped hoods, are also just “pieces of cloth”, as “God” claims the American flag is.

So anyway… all of this led me to conclude that the guy who walked into the grocery store in his white hood is possibly more of a pissed off Trump supporter, rather than a flat out racist. He’s pissed off because he resents government overreach, and he sees having to wear a face mask at the grocery store as a violation of his personal liberties. He may also be pissed because Trump may very well (hopefully) get his ass kicked during the elections this November, and that may mean more left swinging laws. Remember, Trump and Pence don’t willingly wear masks, either, and Trump has gone as far as to encourage citizens to rise up against their state governments and demand that restrictions be lifted so life can get back to “normal”.

So instead of grudgingly wearing a regular face mask like a good citizen would, he decided to cover his face in a different way. He wore a white, cone-shaped hood, which to many people is an extremely horrifying symbol of racism and hatred. He made a lot of people very uncomfortable. However, he wasn’t violent and didn’t physically hurt anyone, and after being asked repeatedly to remove the hood (and probably what was his nose and mouth covering), he did comply. He paid for his items and left the store without incident, although local law enforcement is “looking into the matter”. Santee, California reportedly has a “checkered past” when it comes to racism, and its mayor has gone on record to denounce the hooded shopper’s actions.

It occurred to me that ultimately, the white cone hat guy was expressing himself. Granted, he was expressing hatred, disrespect, and disdain, which are ugly, antisocial expressions. But when it came down to it, he was expressing himself, which in the United States, he still has the right to do. Then I thought about it some more. Judging by the photo in the news article, I’m about 99.9% certain this dude probably is a racist on some level. But– is it possible he wasn’t? What if he was just a smart assed troll trying to rile people up? What if he was from another country and wasn’t aware that the hood would offend (highly unlikely, but technically possible)? Maybe someone paid him to wear the cone shaped hood on a dare? Not knowing anything about the guy, I can’t know for sure what his story is, although I think it’s perfectly reasonable to assume he’s a racist. Or maybe he’s just a frustrated, pissed off American making his feelings known in the most offensive way he can think of, not unlike when Melania Trump wore her “I really don’t care, do U?” jacket. I am certainly not condoning that the man chose that way to express himself… but I can see how that explanation could be a possibility.

The fact that the man wore the offensive KKK-esque hood into the store, technically complying with the order that he cover his mouth and nose, may seem like a bad thing. But, as I sat at the breakfast table talking about this with Bill, I concluded that his actions were not necessarily such a bad thing overall. Because it’s getting people thinking and talking about this issue. If face masks do become the law for the foreseeable future, people are probably going to have to come up with some guidelines. The guidelines aren’t going to suit everyone, and it may take some time to come to a consensus. By then, maybe a vaccine will be created and we can move beyond this pandemic without forcing another nanny law on the populace.

The first article I referenced in this post is about how the face masks are becoming “fashion”. Well, fashion is frequently distasteful. That’s part of the reason fashion is a thing, just like any art is. Art isn’t always beautiful or simple. Sometimes, it’s ugly and offensive. And if we want to mandate face masks for people, we should probably be prepared for those who will use their masks to make their feelings known through offensive fashion statements. I know a lot of people got a kick out of Mindy Vincent, the lady in Utah who made a face mask out of cloth that had penises on it. Plenty of people found that funny, especially when she told people that if they could tell her face mask has penises on it, they were too close. But other people, no doubt, were offended by it. Mindy Vincent has been selling the masks and has reportedly donated a lot of money to charity. That’s probably a good thing, depending on the charity. Some people would probably criticize her for that, too… or for the charity she’s chosen to donate to. The nice thing about America is that we can still have these thoughts and discussions… at least for now.

It’ll be interesting to see what becomes of the hood wearing guy and whether or not his stunt will have any legal repercussions, especially if we do have to wear the fucking face masks from now on.

Standard
poor judgment

Will the swastika design ever be okay again?

Many thanks to Wikipedia user Wojsław Brożyna, for use of today’s  image.

120px-Four-swastika_collage_(transparent)

Please note: This is a volatile enough subject that I must preemptively state that I’m not advocating for the display of hateful symbols. I present this topic only as food for thought.

For thousands of years, the humble swastika was a symbol of peace, prosperity, and good luck in Hindu and Buddhist cultures.  This earliest known use of the ancient character dates back to 10,000 BC, in Mezine, Ukraine, where it was found in archaeological remains.  For most of its existence, the swastika was regarded as a positive symbol promoting auspiciousness and bounty. But then came World War I, when the swastika was co-opted by other organizations.  Then there was World War II, Adolf Hitler, and the Nazi Party, which carried out the Holocaust.  Now, swastikas are regarded by most people in western culture as a symbol of terror, racism, and hatred. 

In Germany today, it’s illegal to display swastikas or any other symbol related to Nazism.  Many people from the west recoil when they see a swastika, even though it’s still revered in Eastern cultures.Yesterday, I read a news story about a ride at a German amusement park that opened in late July.  It’s operated less than three weeks, but is now shut down because its design looks like a couple of swirling swastikas.  The ride, called Eagle Fly, was designed by an Italian company and had just been installed at Tatzmania, an amusement park in the Black Forest town of Löffingen.  The park’s owner, Rüdiger Braun, had not noticed the ride’s resemblance to swastikas when he made plans to have it built.  When the unfortunate design was pointed out to him, Braun was quick to take the ride out of service, where it was reconfigured so that the gondolas no longer resemble swastikas.  There will now be three gondolas per axle instead of four.

I don’t think it’s a bad thing that the ride is now reconfigured.  Germans are understandably very sensitive about swastikas.  It’s forbidden to display them in Germany, and someone no doubt would have complained about the design.  Mr. Braun probably would have been fined and forced to change the design, anyway.  However, when I was reading about this mishap, once again, I was reminded of how much emphasis we put on symbols and their ability to offend.  I wondered if the ride’s designer had really intended the gondolas to be configured in such a way that they’d remind people of the Holocaust.  I also wondered how many people immediately thought of Hitler when they saw the ride in operation.  Obviously, Mr. Braun hadn’t noticed it himself.

I shared this article on Facebook.  My German friend, Susanne, is very familiar with Tatzmania before it was named such.  She is originally from Freiburg, and Tatzmania, which used to be called Schwarzwaldpark, is located not far from there.  She wrote that Schwarzwaldpark used to be pretty awesome, but then it was purchased by new owners, who kind of ran it into the ground.  She hoped that the new owner would bring the park back to its prior “super” level, although having a ride that resembles swirling swastikas may have gotten things off on the wrong foot. 

Susanne shared another story with me about clothing racks at a Berlin outlet of the German store, Kik.  The racks looked like swastikas, and a teenager had criticized it.  Later, it was said that the teen was banned from the store for making that comment.  Kik representatives later said that teen had not been banned and furthermore, the clothing racks were not meant to symbolize anything hateful.  They were simply intended to hold up clothes.  Officials from Kik also plainly stated that the company is opposed to racism, xenophobia, and neo-Nazism.

It occurred to me that even though I’ve read a lot about the Holocaust, I probably wouldn’t have even noticed that the clothes racks were shaped like swastikas.  Maybe it’s because I’m not Jewish.  I also doubt that the people behind the racks’ design meant to offend more than they meant to present a practical design for displaying clothes to paying customers.On my old blog, I’ve written a couple of posts about how I’ve seen Europeans displaying the “stars and bars” version of the Confederate flag, especially on the Autobahns. 

A few years ago, I saw several battle flags on display at a truck stop in northern Italy, not far from the Swiss border.  One of my Italian friends explained that the Confederate battle flag has been adopted by some southern Italians who relate to it, not because they believe in slavery or white supremacy, but because of the “battle” between the northern and southern regions of Italy.  They identify with the southern United States and its rivalry with the north.I also saw a Confederate battle flag in Ireland.  It was on the back of our cab driver’s car.  I doubt it had the same significance to him that it did to Bill and me.  He probably just thought it was a cool symbol of rebellion.  That symbol doesn’t mean as much to him because he’s Irish, and American history isn’t a priority to him.  It would have been strange to tell him that the battle flag on his car is offensive to many Americans, even though I’m sure it got a lot of double takes from my countrymen.  After all, Ireland isn’t my country, and I was a guest.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again.  I think revising the attitudes behind hateful symbols is much more important than quashing the symbols themselves.  In my opinion, symbols only have the power that people give to them.  Does that mean I think it’s a wise thing for someone to display Confederate battle flags and swastikas willy nilly?  No, it doesn’t.  But I also think people should use common sense and determine context before they get too excited about some things.  

This isn’t a new topic for me.  I’ve written lots of times about how much I dislike the idea of banning words and burying symbols.  I think all words have a use, even if the use is mostly negative.  I’ve read too many slave narratives and listened to too much Stevie Wonder to be in favor of banning the so-called “n word”.  Taken in context, that word has a purpose.  It should never be used to hurt others, but it would be crazy to remove it from historical documents.  That word has been used to hurt and denigrate Black people for hundreds of years.  No, we shouldn’t continue to use it to hurt and denigrate, but erasing it from history would also be wrong.  It’s an ugly part of history, but it’s still a part of history.  If we remove it simply because it’s offensive, then people might forget about its impact. 

But also consider that even words like “fag” and “retard”, considered “hateful” in some societies today, also had practical uses before they were co-opted by the hateful.  In fact, in countries other than the United States, those words are used all the time and aren’t considered offensive.  They don’t mean the same thing in England or Italy as they do in the USA.  And if we ban those words and symbols, those groups will simply come up with new ones.I did share my basic thoughts on the swirling swastika ride on Facebook. 

I think one of my Jewish friends was slightly offended that I wasn’t more outraged by it.  I certainly mean no disrespect to my Jewish friends.  The Holocaust was absolutely a horrible time in history.  But swastikas were ripped off by Nazis.  For thousands of years, they had no negative connotation at all.  If the world doesn’t end in the next couple of hundred years, there may come a time when people no longer see it as offensive.  It will be just another part of history. 

I think many westerners think only about their own cultures and perspectives when they see or hear certain things.  It may be helpful to broaden one’s perspective regarding words and symbols before allowing them to be too upsetting. Isn’t there enough legitimately awful stuff in the world to be offended about, rather than something that brings to mind something offensive, even if it really wasn’t meant to be?

Standard