How On Earth Did I Miss This One?

Actually, I didn't miss it ... it just fell in a stretch of days for which I'd already had posts planned. But lest we fail to give it its proper due, last Sunday, January 15th, was National Hat Day.

Hats are one of our oldest forms of dress, and serve many uses: they provide protection against the sun in summer, keep the head warm in winter, cover bald spots*, designate a person's rank or social position, and serve ceremonial uses, such as the miter or biretta** worn by a clergyman.

Few men nowadays wear hats unless they're baseball caps with sports team logos or silly slogans on them***. Nevertheless, I predict that hats are about to make a major comeback with the coming of the new administration; here's a look at some of the stylish headgear you'll be seeing as the Trumpsters take charge ...

Get yours now. "Make America Great Again" engraving is optional.

Have a good day. See you tomorrow for Great Moments in Editing and Signage. More thoughts then.

Bilbo

* Not that I would know anything about that.

** No, Second Amendment enthusiasts, not Beretta. A biretta is a hat worn by a Roman Catholic clergyman, whereas a Beretta is a handgun.

*** And who decided it was okay to wear them backwards, or crooked?

Sex, No. Violence, Yes. Crazy? For Sure!

I read an interesting article on Alternet a while back titled Five American Sex Norms Europeans Probably Think Are Insane. I think they're right. Hell, I think most of them are insane.

I'd like to talk about just one of those five points*: Extreme Violence in the Media Is Fine, Just Don’t Show a Nipple.

In 1999, the Senate Judiciary Committee published a report titled Children, Violence, and the Media. According to statistics cited in the report, by the time an average American child reaches the age of 18, he or she will have seen 200,000 violent acts and 6,000 murders on television. Now, one can quibble with these numbers, but there's no arguing about the prevalence of violence, much of it extreme and sadistic, on television ... two of my least favorite shows are Criminal Minds and Law and Order: Special Victims Unit, both of which feature shocking violence, much of it directed against women and children.

Shows like these are very popular, and arguments against their violent content are few, far between, and generally ignored. If you want to hear real outrage about horrible things on television, you have to show a female nipple.

Some of you may recall the mighty howls of outrage that erupted across the country in 2004 when, during the halftime show of Super Bowl XXXVIII**, a "wardrobe malfunction" caused one of singer Janet Jackson's nipples to be exposed for approximately a half-second on national television. The horrifying incident led to widespread condemnation of indecency in broadcasting, and the Federal Communications Commission fined CBS $550,000^*** for the exposure of the offending nipple.

If they'd only aired something decent and responsible, such as showing a sadistic villain torturing Ms Jackson while she screamed in terror and agony, it would have been okay.

I often wonder why it is that people get hysterical over the sight of an exposed breast, when they're okay with violent imagery⁺. I'm repulsed by many crime shows on television for their glorification of extreme violence and sadism, but I have no problem with admiring a lady's body if she choses to show it. I've been to topless beaches in Europe (which, in my mind, tend to be overrated as sources of ... uh ... titillation), and I believe in the Picket Fence Theory of feminine dress: it should protect the property without obstructing the view. If you want to go topless or dress minimally, that's fine with me ... but don't be offended if I look.

Let's get upset about the right things. Why fret over exposed breasts when your socialist Muslim Nigerian president is invading Texas and getting ready to confiscate your guns and put you into FEMA internment camps?

I wonder if there's a potential market in this country for tinfoil nipple shields to go with the tinfoil hats?

Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.

Bilbo

* So to speak.

** That's "38," for those of you who don't do Roman numerals.

*** The fine was later overturned in 2011 a decision of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, and an attempt to reinstate it was refused a year later.

⁺ I suspect part of the reason is that weapons, especially firearms, are considered holy in this country, and criticizing their depiction and use is blasphemous.