The ALS ice bucket challenge has spawned a slightly different one. It's called 'Pull Your Damn Pants Up!', urging young, black men to....pull up their pants. This in turn spawned a remarkable debate called 'heated' but which in fact is a model for how not to discuss anything. You can see the video and the CNN debate here.
The origins of pants below your butt are unclear. It has been attributed to slavery, but also to prison, where it is said to be a homosexual sex sign (warning- very graphic language). Wherever the custom comes from, it is a disrespectful display in the eyes of other black men, let alone anyone else. In the CNN debate there are two gross falsehoods used, and I want to address each one.
The first, by one of the commentators, is that he went to an Ivy League school, and he wore his pants below his butt as a teen. This sort of argument is a false generalization from the specific. For example, I once knew a man who got straight As and HE never studied. Well, yes, but there is no denominator for your assertion. How many men who don't study get straight As, and what proportion of straight A students don't study. Using a single unusual outcome to justify bad habits and behavior is a pernicious and pervasive form of 'argument' today.
The second is an assertion that to say black men are labeled because of the way they wear their pants is blaming the victim (in this case the Ferguson shooting). The video does mention the profiling of black men, but the essence of the question is whether how you wear your clothes and your hair should affect how people see you.
In a time of multiculturalism and broad efforts at acceptance it seems inappropriate to say 'yes, we are indeed affected by hair and clothes'. But we are. All of us. I am fond of saying that everyone is someone's stereotype. To some, the sight of a man in scrubs driving a great big Mercedes is the epitome of the fat cat doctor. To others, having long hair and a t-shirt connotes stoner slob. Our clothes and hair can make us look like prigs, like slobs, like thugs. And that is not a racial labeling but a dress and comportment labeling.
There is an aphorism- 'women who wear low cut blouses have no right to complain when men stare at their breasts. That's right. You can claim it is your right 'as a woman' to dress alluringly and however you want. And it is society and the individual's right to judge you for it. If you wear hot pants, or shorts that say 'Juicy' do not expect anyone to take you seriously. That goes for any words written across your ass. Why not just say 'please stare at my ass'? This applies for all manner of clothes for both men and women. Sleeveless undershirts with armpit hair hanging out, filthy pants, untied shoes, oversized pants, bars hanging out of blouses, gynecologically tight leggings. All these items say 'low class, uneducated moron'.
How about facial piercings? Or women with crew cuts, or pink hair? Men with dread locks? Every one of these is highly defining. So are the marks of a certain type of conservatism. Seeing a man with short hair, clean shaven and a button down shirt will connote a certain type of religious conservatism.
These assessments have nothing to do with race. It has nothing to do with sex. You are being judged by your choices in clothing and accessories. And I and everyone else has every right to do that. Indeed, for our safety, for the prosperity of our businesses, for the safety of our money, for the education of our children, we have an obligation to do that. Being culturally and racially neutral does not mean abrogating the essential evidence of one of our sight any more than it should require that we accept as a personal choice horrible bathing and hygienic habits.
You have every right to behave as you please within the limits of law. You have absolutely no right to expect that others will or should like it. Everyone should follow the dictates of his or her own values and conscience, but don't expect others to approve or like it.
Pull your damn pants up! Stop wearing garbage clothing! Don't dress like an overdone prig! For God's sake, just stop it!
Ted
The origins of pants below your butt are unclear. It has been attributed to slavery, but also to prison, where it is said to be a homosexual sex sign (warning- very graphic language). Wherever the custom comes from, it is a disrespectful display in the eyes of other black men, let alone anyone else. In the CNN debate there are two gross falsehoods used, and I want to address each one.
The first, by one of the commentators, is that he went to an Ivy League school, and he wore his pants below his butt as a teen. This sort of argument is a false generalization from the specific. For example, I once knew a man who got straight As and HE never studied. Well, yes, but there is no denominator for your assertion. How many men who don't study get straight As, and what proportion of straight A students don't study. Using a single unusual outcome to justify bad habits and behavior is a pernicious and pervasive form of 'argument' today.
The second is an assertion that to say black men are labeled because of the way they wear their pants is blaming the victim (in this case the Ferguson shooting). The video does mention the profiling of black men, but the essence of the question is whether how you wear your clothes and your hair should affect how people see you.
In a time of multiculturalism and broad efforts at acceptance it seems inappropriate to say 'yes, we are indeed affected by hair and clothes'. But we are. All of us. I am fond of saying that everyone is someone's stereotype. To some, the sight of a man in scrubs driving a great big Mercedes is the epitome of the fat cat doctor. To others, having long hair and a t-shirt connotes stoner slob. Our clothes and hair can make us look like prigs, like slobs, like thugs. And that is not a racial labeling but a dress and comportment labeling.
There is an aphorism- 'women who wear low cut blouses have no right to complain when men stare at their breasts. That's right. You can claim it is your right 'as a woman' to dress alluringly and however you want. And it is society and the individual's right to judge you for it. If you wear hot pants, or shorts that say 'Juicy' do not expect anyone to take you seriously. That goes for any words written across your ass. Why not just say 'please stare at my ass'? This applies for all manner of clothes for both men and women. Sleeveless undershirts with armpit hair hanging out, filthy pants, untied shoes, oversized pants, bars hanging out of blouses, gynecologically tight leggings. All these items say 'low class, uneducated moron'.
How about facial piercings? Or women with crew cuts, or pink hair? Men with dread locks? Every one of these is highly defining. So are the marks of a certain type of conservatism. Seeing a man with short hair, clean shaven and a button down shirt will connote a certain type of religious conservatism.
These assessments have nothing to do with race. It has nothing to do with sex. You are being judged by your choices in clothing and accessories. And I and everyone else has every right to do that. Indeed, for our safety, for the prosperity of our businesses, for the safety of our money, for the education of our children, we have an obligation to do that. Being culturally and racially neutral does not mean abrogating the essential evidence of one of our sight any more than it should require that we accept as a personal choice horrible bathing and hygienic habits.
You have every right to behave as you please within the limits of law. You have absolutely no right to expect that others will or should like it. Everyone should follow the dictates of his or her own values and conscience, but don't expect others to approve or like it.
Pull your damn pants up! Stop wearing garbage clothing! Don't dress like an overdone prig! For God's sake, just stop it!
Ted
One caveat: each culture has its own standards of what is acceptable, even among the high class. In Latin America, wearing a low cut blouse and tight fitting jeans simply means you are a woman under 60. I heard of one American who visited Ecuador and after a while asked his host, "Why do all the women down here dress like prostitutes?" Not all do, but conversely not all who dress in the clothes that most stores sell are either low class or prostitutes. As one woman told me, "For us, it's not a sin to show our bodies."
ReplyDeleteWomen in Latin American cities dress quite differently from how the indigenous rural folks in those same countries do. In turn, Latin American urban women dress quite differently from how women dress in many parts of the Middle East. I saw this in Sharm el-Sheikh in the Sinai Peninsula of Egypt: on the beach, a group of women in Burkas walked past a woman in a bikini modeling for a photographer taking photos. Judging by the expensive sunglasses the model had on, I'd guess she was probably higher class than the subdued women in burkas at their husbands' sides who all walked by her.
A century ago, any western society would have been scandalized by a woman in a bikini or mini-skirt, thinking her a low class woman of loose morals. That's not the case in most places today.
Caveat aside, I agreed with the post. We all judge - and are judged - by physical presentation of the human body. Too many - way too many - in the west present an outer dress that reveals an inner spiritual poverty.
-D-