Tuesday, April 29, 2008

I am apalled by your scarf

It's hard to get worked up over fashion. Style is personal, and quite subjective, so who could object to someone else's wardrobe? Some people love Crocs, and some hate them. Some are deluded enough to think they look good in Uggs, but it's no skin off my back.

Now, though, I'm taking a stand. As much of a stand as one can take writing on a web log with limited readership (there are dozens of us!).

It seems that Arab scarves are growing in popularity. Keffiyehs, if you will, or shemaghs. And this trend is pretty upsetting.

For whatever it's worth, I think the look is actually pretty attractive. While I don't have the vocabulary to describe fashion, there is a definite appeal to girls wearing scarves, and it doesn't get much scarfier than keffiyehs.
That the scarves are aesthetically pleasing does not imply that they are appropriate. I look fantastic naked, but you don't see me walking around the student center in my birthday suit.

In researching this post, I found a lot of justifications along the lines of "this year's fashion is based on global influences" and "these scarves are an anti-war statement".

Oh really? Global influences?

If this is a question of globalizing fashion, where are the Indian saris? Where are the Japanese kimonos? Where are the Aboriginal loincloths?

It is not at all bad to select one non-Western item and incorporate it into Western fashion. I, personally, loved the Karate Kid headbands. However, to take a non-Western item and relabel it as "global-influenced" - as if this is not one item, but actually a whole range of styles spanning the non-Western world - is insulting to the intelligence.

It's a clever marketing ploy, because anyone who objects to global influences must be narrow-minded and xenophobic, right? If I don't like Arab scarves, I must be a small redneck who fears change. Heaven forbid I point out that the Emperor is wearing no clothes.

And oh really? Anti-war?

Setting aside politics and pro- or anti-war debate (seriously, I'll delete your comments without hesitation), it is quite certain that there are people out there who want to kill you. To kill you.

I can see how anti-war protesters might associate keffiyehs with protesting, like a show of solidarity with their like-minded pacifist brethren from the other side. However, the connection between keffiyehs and peace-loving Arabs is far weaker than the connections created by images like this:
This is what you look like when you wear a keffiyeh.

Sure, you can explain away the whole "this is what terrorists wear" thing by reminding people of the peace-loving Arabs who wear the same scarves. However, much like a bad joke, if you have to explain it when the first impression isn't what you expected, maybe it's time to rethink the whole thing.

I was torn while writing this post, because the last thing I want to do is be the sort of small-minded xenophobe that I've been conditioned to believe the author of such a post must be (confusing, ain't it?). I can see where these hipster kids are coming from, with their slavish devotion to style and naive ambition to appear sympathetic.

That lasted maybe 3 minutes, though, because I realized what's really rubbing me about these keffiyehs. Forget the Iraqi "insurgents" and the Palestinian "militants". The oh-so-worldly teenagers walking down College Ave with smug satisfaction and fashionable keffiyehs look like Janjaweed.

Oh, my bad. Is Darfur so 2007?

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Well written. Such an argument is certainly more cynical/realistic than it is racist, but that shouldn't stop everyone from knowing what a racist you really are.

I hear the things you say. I feel like Ed Norton's brother in AHX.

Anonymous said...

Don, instead of my usual snarky/jackass comment, I'd like to voice real thoughts on this post.

I take issue with two of your points.

Firstly, "if you have to explain it when the first impression isn't what you expected, maybe it's time to rethink the whole thing"

Why do you say this? Our spandex outfits or hairless legs almost always give the wrong first impression and almost always require an explanation. Being a narrow-minded, unworldly person myself (I don't even know if Arab is a country, religion, or skin color), I see those scarves and think, "cool, a sexy French scarf." I'm probably in the majority with my ignorance, too. My point is that the "masses" wear these scarves without attaching cultural meaning to them, while the furor is the result of a small, outspoken minority who does attach meaning based on origin.

Secondly, "to take a non-Western item and relabel it as "global-influenced" - as if this is not one item, but actually a whole range of styles spanning the non-Western world - is insulting to the intelligence."

I think this claim is bunk. You have a broad category (global-influenced), of which this scarf is just one member. You wouldn't claim that to call a purple dress "colored" is an assertion that all purple dresses span the range of colors. I agree it's a marketing ploy. I disagree that it's not a fair claim to make.

Lastly, I agree with you that people who claim to make a statement of solidarity with such scarves are disillusioned. Wearing a leather Rancid jacket does not a punk rocker make. Wearing a scarf does not a pacifist make, either.

Anonymous said...

The photograph of the terrorist and the photo of a girl wearing a similar scarf look nothing like each other.

You sound like Michelle Malkin. I haven't read any of your other posts so perhaps you are a fan.

But geez, do you really think people who these scarves are terrorist sympathisers? Do you think they really are terrorist apologists?

I think you've let your fear take over.

Anonymous said...

"I must be a small redneck who fears change."

Honesty. You're doing it right.