shaming

pop culture  /  PotD
Who Are You Calling White Trash?
August 6, 2016
charles i. letbetter - who are you calling white trash

I worked with these liberal elites for 28 years at CBS News, and they were always throwing around the term ‘white trash,’ by which they meant poor southerners who didn’t go to Harvard. I’m not sure why that makes them trash. —Bernard Goldberg

 

charles i. letbetter - who are you calling white trash

Our desperation to create division between classes has never been stronger. “White trash” is a label that needs to go away.

I look around the living room this morning and have to shake my head. There’s a litter box next to the couch. Children’s discarded school uniforms are scattered across the floor. I assume the mates for those shoes are around here somewhere. The couch is supposed to seat six, but at the moment Kat and the dog are all that actually fit. My desk is cluttered with everything from a broken weather vane to children’s books to a leatherman resting on top of a Beatles CD on top of a Madonna CD. Yeah, we still have CDs. As I contemplate the mess we call home I can’t help but wonder, “Are we white trash?”

I came across this article by Holly Genovese on AuntieBellum and was struck not only by how much her words hit home with me, but with several other people I know who had seen the same article. Ms. Genovese comes from a small town in Pennsylvania that apparently has a less-than-desirable reputation. Despite all her education and academic success, it was her hometown’s reputation that dogged her professional incline. She says:

It is one thing to have your hometown judged by your peers, but it is quite another to realize that qualities you possess, habits born of a lifetime that you don’t even realize you have, make you read as unqualified or unfit for your chosen profession.

Damn. I know exactly how that feels and many of the people I know and love have similar experiences. This isn’t cool.

Growing Up Human

I was born in rural Kansas. At the time of my birth, my father pastored a very small church part-time while working flight line assembly at Boeing, Wichita during the week. He didn’t make much money. At times there was barely enough food. Still, we got by. My childhood was happy, filled with the usual ups and downs that come with growing up in the 60s and 70s. I didn’t think of our family as poor because everyone else around us was at a similar socio-economic level if not worse.

Then, I went to college. I was the first person on my father’s side of the family to actually graduate with a degree. I considered moving out of state and pursuing an advanced degree but many of the adults I respected at the time, from my parents to one of the state’s U.S. Senators, questioned whether such a move would actually pay off in the long run. Not that they doubted my talent or ability one bit, mind you. They were thinking in terms of whether the advanced degree might actually make me unemployable in Oklahoma. Had I stayed in Oklahoma, they might have been correct.

There is a danger to staying in one place too long, especially when one is poor. Not only do we become too comfortable with our surroundings, we don’t realize just how far removed we are from the rest of the society. I won’t deny that there’s a social gap between those from rural areas and those raised in the city, but is that enough to make any of us “white trash?”

No Place Called Home

Ms. Genovese recounts her experience and I found it far too relatable:

The more formal education I acquired, the larger the gap between my family and I became. My parents are incredibly proud of me and have never been anything other than supportive. But everyone from cousins to former employers have insinuated that I am arrogant because I left my small town for the city and enrolled in a Ph.D program. Why couldn’t I get a real job in the Harley Factory? What could you even do with a history Ph.D anyway? And most common of all, was I ever coming home? Slowly I realized the answer to that question had to be no.

A week after we moved from Oklahoma I knew there would be no moving back. Ever. I saw the change in facial expressions when someone would say, “You’ve got an unusual accent. Where are you from?” and I would answer, “Oklahoma.” No one was impressed. Some struggled to not laugh out loud. Sometimes I would try shaking things up a bit and say I was from Kansas, but that response wasn’t any better. Both states are considered “white trash” among those in more academic and professional urban circles.

Moving down to Atlanta wasn’t any better. One advertising executive was rather blunt. “You’re a long way from home, son,” he said with a southern drawl that came draped in a Confederate war flag. “Do the rest of your people speak English or do they live on a reservation?”  The insinuation was obvious. While New Yorkers might consider Georgians white trash, Oklahoma was even further down the white trash scale. What did we do to deserve such treatment?

Class Shaming By Any Other Name

Again, we relate to Ms. Genovese:

I will never fully belong in the world of academia, and frankly, I don’t want to. But I also no longer fully belong at home. And I can’t complain (nor do I want to). … I am the dream, the local kid who did good. But nobody tells you what it’s like, the incredible loneliness that accompanies that kind of class jumping that many people dream of.

The pictures at the top of this article were taken at my 30-year high school reunion, which is now a few years past. Those young women were my classmates. They’re all bright, intelligent, and beautiful as anyone else. Okay, so when the DJ plays YMCA, they can’t resist hitting the dance floor. I’ve seen the same thing happen in a fancy New York ballroom. Most all my classmates (at least, the ones for whom I can still account) are hardworking people deeply involved in their communities. They may not all have advanced degrees, but they know what works for where they work.

I dare any Harvard graduate to change a truck tire without getting their tweed jacket rumpled or bottle-feed a new orphan calf without getting their  loafers covered in bovine excrement. We may not have any Fortune 500 CEOs among us, but that doesn’t make our social class any less important.

Pick-A-Part

I would like to blame social media for giving rise to the dearth of shaming that takes place, but we all know it was there long before the Internet. “White trash” was a term thrown around even when I was a kid. Such behavior wasn’t right then and it damn sure isn’t acceptable now. This same disregard for the value of every human that gives rise to class shaming is also responsible for the rampant racism, size shaming, gender shaming, sexism, and ageism that puts us all at odds with one another.  Whether the term we’re using is “white trash” or “slut” or “fag,” the effect is the same. Each term of derision serves only to divide us, to separate one from another, to weaken our society by pitting one against another.

None of us are perfect. Sure, some of my high school classmates foolishly voted for one of the worst governors in the history of the word. At the same time, I know at least three Ivy League grads who gave their money to Bernie Madoff. Where you grew up and where you went to college does not make one any more likely to do stupid shit that we later regret. Some of us like Big 12 football. Some of us like yacht racing. One group may not understand the other, but that doesn’t make either group better.

We  are never going to all agree on anything. Differences of opinion are important for us to learn and to grow. If our country is to genuinely move forward we must realize that our biggest threat comes not from external terrorists, but from those who would tear us apart from the inside, calling one group stupid, or white trash, or ignorant, or any other divisive term. We need to stop.

And by the way, when OU takes the field against Houston that first Saturday in September, I will be singing Boomer Sooner at the top of my lungs, almost certainly off-key and not giving a single fuck. If you think that makes me white trash, just deal with it.

Continue Reading

Current Issues  /  Fashion  /  Mythology  /  pop culture
Modesty Doesn’t Become You
May 16, 2016
charles i. letbetter - modesty doesn't become you

It is strange that modesty is the rule for women when what they most value in men is boldness. —Ninon de L’Enclos

 

charles i. letebetter - modesty doesn't become you

Modesty should never be a mandate, but only a personal choice for those who understand their own power

Modesty is a topic that tends to get my dander up, so to speak, because I see it misapplied and inappropriately mandated and used as a bullying weapon far too often. Modesty has been used to shame, to subjugate, to imprison, and to deny rights to women for centuries and that we continue to put up with such nonsense leaves me angry. There are three specific instances that are raising my blood pressure this morning, even though not all recent.

In fact, the first happened a couple of months ago. Kat, as you may or may not have noticed, has relatively small breasts. We’re both cool with that. They have their advantages, one being that she doesn’t typically need to wear a bra. In some cases, wearing a bra can even be painful. So, she doesn’t. However, during a performance review at work a couple of months ago, she discovered that one of her co-workers, not a client or anyone of authority, but a co-worker had complained that sometimes the shape of Kat’s nipples are visible beneath her clothing. Normally, we call such an attitude petty and let it go.

Then, this past Saturday, KTLA meteorologist Liberté Chan was going through the morning weather report when morning news anchor Chris Burrous, a man whose own hair style was stolen from a 1950s evangelist, handed her a sweater during the live broadcast because, “we’re getting emails.” This is just so incredibly foul one has to see it for it to be believed.

https://youtu.be/NuhXbGwcUwo

Chan, who know that those who complain lose their jobs, laughed off the whole episode and Burrous later apologized, but neither is sufficient to excuse both the behavior and the reasoning behind it.

Finally, we published an article yesterday, Life Isn’t That Bad, and shared it with a few friends who expressed feeling a little hopeless about all the bad news in the world. In one instance, a woman, who is not a mutual acquaintance, commented: “Smart message. Terrible blouse.” I had to drop back and take a look at the article. I chose yesterday’s imagery because of Ella’s smile, not what she was wearing. Turns out, she’s wearing a sweater, not a blouse, and had chosen to leave it unbuttoned, daring to show some cleavage.

Modesty is a big thing among many religious zealots and in certain parts of conservative culture as a whole. Some entire countries demand that women dress modestly and provide for severe punishment if they don’t. Even the Puritans who inhabited the English settlement at Jamestown held some pretty tyrannical views. Mandatory modesty is global and a part of everyday life for many.

There’s just one HUGE problem with all this forced modesty: Everywhere you see it, without exception, it is being done in an attempt to shame, dominate, subjugate, and objectify women. Women are not told to cover up because doing so empowers them. Women are not told to be modest because it gives them more authority. Women are not told to be modest because it helps their voice to be heard.

No, women are told to be modest because they are “distracting,” which demeans them to being nothing more than shiny, pretty objects. Women are told to be modest because their dress style is “inappropriate,” which means someone is shaming them. Women are told to be modest because “only your husband should see you like that,” which is both dominating and subjugating. Every time women are told to be modest, in inference is that they are doing something wrong, even if all they are doing is existing.

What especially sickens me is that this disempowering nonsense is being taught to young girls from the moment they first learn to dress. There is an absolutely disgusting movement among conservative evangelicals called Secret Keepers. I was concerned the moment I heard the name, because keeping secrets is a tool used by rapists, specifically child molesters who are trying to keep their victims silent. “Secret Keepers” immediately sounds to me a group of children who have been molested. What it is, though, is a movement designed to impress girls as young as eight years old with the concept that their bodies are not their own and that modesty helps keep them “pure” for their eventual husbands. Get a load of some of their nonsense:

Bellies are very intoxicating and we need to save that for our husbands!

Lean forward a little bit. Can you see too much chest or future cleavage? Your shirt is too low.

It all depends on whether God has chosen to bless you with breasts or not.

There you go. Already, girls are being told that not only are their bodies not their own, but that they are little more than objects to be possessed by husbands and that their budding sexuality is distracting. Where this leads, ultimately, is the concept that victims are responsible for their own rape. They were “asking for it” because of how they dressed, or how they walked, or how they otherwise were sufficiently immodest.

We already have more than enough trouble combating the pervasive rape culture that has dominated our society for centuries. Women everywhere need to know that they can wear whatever they hell they want, where and whenever they wish, without being placed in physical danger. Women, and young girls, need to know that they can stand up for themselves and their ideals without the threat of violence against them.

Furthermore, women need to know that they, at the very least, have the same right to be dominant, to be forceful, to be bold, to be adventurous as any man who ever lived. If that boldness means one needs to take off their shirt to make a point, go for it. There is absolutely NO reason women should be shamed for doing exactly the same thing that we encourage men and boys to do.

I know there are already countless articles on this topic all over the Internet, so I won’t go on at length. Those were just the things stuck in my craw this morning.

Ultimately, though, I’m looking forward to the day we can view something like the video below as just another weather forecast. Fair warning, if you’re viewing this at work you probably do not want to scroll down.

Continue Reading

Current Issues  /  Fashion  /  PotD
A Better Size System For Fashion
April 6, 2016

Life is too short, and I’m Italian. I’d much rather eat pasta and drink wine than be a size 0. —Sophia Bush

 

charles i. letbetter - a better size system for fashion

Size labels won’t fix the problem of weight shaming, but it may change how we think of ourselves

This isn’t a new conversation, but the fact that we are still talking, regularly, about body size and weight shaming is itself a symptom of a larger problem that doesn’t have a simple solution. The human race has, as far back as anyone can tell, judged people by their size. At certain points in our history, being larger was considered more attractive because it was a sign of wealth that one had enough food to eat. Our obsession with being thin did not happen until the twentieth century, but body size has always been an issue.

While doing a bit of research, I came across a very interesting quote:

I felt like a loser. I was unhappy as a child most of the time. We were terribly poor and I hated my size.

Do you know who said that? One of the most unlikely people ever: Don Knotts, the late comedic actor known for his thin, wiry frame. A guy who felt bad about his size.

While the topic is not a new one, and not going to go away because of anything I write here, it has taken on a different direction of late. First, comedienne Amy Schumer is upset because she is in Glamour magazine. I know, that doesn’t sound like a horrible thing, but the problem she has is that she was included in the magazine’s special plus-size edition. Schumer wrote on her Instagram account:

“I think there’s nothing wrong with being plus size. Beautiful healthy women. Plus size is considered size 16 in America. I go between a size 6 and an 8. @glamourmag put me in their plus size only issue without asking or letting me know and it doesn’t feel right to me. Young girls seeing my body type thinking that is plus size? “

Glamour responded:

“First off, we love Amy, and our readers do too — which is why we featured her on the cover of Glamour last year. The cover line on this special edition — which is aimed at women size 12 and up — simply says ‘Women Who Inspire Us,’ since we believe her passionate and vocal message of body positivity IS inspiring, as is the message of the many other women, of all sizes, featured. The edition did not describe her as plus-size. We are sorry if we offended her in any way.” 

Still, more than a few people have noted that the very act of producing a special “plus size” issue further marginalizes anyone who doesn’t fit the stereotypical thin shape society expects from women.

Then, almost simultaneously but on a different part of the planet, Model Iskra Lawrence dealt handily with a troll who attempted to fat shame her. Lawrence, who is a bit of a gym rat, didn’t hesitate to post a picture of herself covered in bags of chips (known as crisps across the pond) and letting the troll know she’ll eat what she damn well wants. Scroll on down Ms. Lawrence’s feed and you’ll find some impressive pictures of her in the gym doing squats with more weight on her shoulders than I know I could manage.

Fighting against weight shaming is an eternal battle that, because of how some people respond to their own negative feelings of self-worth, is likely to never go away. Yet, I cannot help but think that we aggravate the problem with how we label both clothes and people. As mentioned in the Schumer/Glamour dustup, anything size 12 and higher is considered “plus” sized, but even women who wear size 4-10 often find themselves being ridiculed for not being a model-worthy size 0 or 2.

While changing the labels won’t make the problem go away, perhaps if we re-think how clothes sizes are named we can, at least, provide both men and women with something that doesn’t immediately demean them when they take an item off the store rack. Why not replace numbered sizes or even the more general small, medium, large, etc. with labels that provide a more general definition without being insulting. Here’s what I’m thinking for new labels:

  • Casual would be similar to what we now consider a medium size. Hips might be more full, waistlines more forgiving, but within a range appropriate for the average person.
  • Fit might be a more appropriate label for those who take body tone seriously. Waistlines might be tapered, but not too small, shoulders would be more accommodating, and trouser legs would be full so that those calf and thigh muscles would have room.
  • Sensible seems to make sense for the next size range up, as this would encompass those whose skeletal structures would never allow them to fit into smaller clothes no matter what they tried. Millions, if not billions, of people fit into this range that is not trim, but still quite healthy with nothing to be ashamed of.
  • Abundant might be more appropriate for that size range higher than what is currently a size 16. Admittedly, for those who fit into the largest of sizes, nothing really takes away the stigma that comes from being compared to those who are smaller. Yet, by using a label that at least has a less-offensive connotation perhaps we can minimize the hurt to some degree.
  • Attenuated could work for smaller sizes, which can be just as difficult emotionally as larger sizes. Women, especially, whose metabolism runs high are never going to fit well into Casual-sized clothing. Kat is one of those people who typically has to shop in the Misses or Teen section to have any hope of finding something that fits. And that’s despite consuming healthy portions of my cooking.

These are obviously just suggestions and I don’t expect anyone influential to pay any attention. Getting the entire fashion industry to change anything is extremely slow and difficult. Yet, we need to start somewhere and realize that our labeling conventions are helping to shame millions of people who have no cause to be concerned about the size and shape of their  bodies. Size labels seem like a good starting point.

Continue Reading

Art  /  PotD  /  Social Commentary
Shame, No Shame
October 1, 2015
charles i. letbetter - shame, no shame

chalres i. letbetter - shame, no shame

All Wash(er)ed Up (2010)

In the face of patriarchy, it is a brave act indeed for both men and women to embrace, rather than shame or attempt to eradicate, the feminine.—Alanis Morissette

[one_half padding=”4px 10px 0 4px”]I grew up being taught that everyone had a responsibility to work hard. Both my parents worked long hours. I had my first paycheck at 14. Sitting around idly isn’t something I do well. I fail to understand this act of binge-watching television series because after about an hour everything in my body tells me I need to be up being productive. We were taught that it didn’t matter what you did, that all jobs contributed to the greater good and deserved people’s respect. Looking down on, or shaming someone, just because of their occupation was about as rude and ignorant a thing one could do.

So, as I’ve grown up and gotten a taste for how the world actually is, I am continually disappointed when this particular sin of shaming other people shows up, typically denigrating a friend for something they’ve done to feed themselves and/or their family, complete with name-calling and harassment. As this has happened within my circle of friends three times in the past five days, I’m calling bullshit on the shame patrol. There is no shame in working hard, no shame in getting one’s hands (and body) dirty, no shame in sweating hard, and certainly no shame in doing jobs you don’t especially like just to keep the lights on and food on the table.

One of the earliest impacts on my sense of work ethic was a WWII veteran named Warren Hartsocks. A short, stocky man who never lost his buzz cut, Hartsocks had dropped out of school to join the military. The US Army taught him to be a mechanic and that’s what he proceeded to do the rest of his life. If you came across Hartsocks during the day, he was likely wearing a well-stained wife-beater t-shirt and baggy grey pants, equally stained. He was missing most his teeth, eternally had an unlit stogie in the corner of his mouth, had a vocabulary that would make a sailor blush, and in the summer his body odor could get pretty strong. People called him a dirty, foul-mouthed mechanic and tried to avoid him, but he worked hard for every dime he made, was a gentle soul, and took the time to teach me how to fish. [/one_half]

[one_half_last padding=”4px 4px 0 10px”]The list of occupations society often shames is too long, but here’s a list of the ones that I see most often:

  • Retail workers, because, you know, those clothes at the mall just jump on the rack by themselves.
  • Construction laborers; that house you live in just built itself.
  • Mechanics, like you can change a fucking tire by yourself.
  • Strippers, cam girls, etc., one of the truest forms of capitalism’s supply and demand.
  • Grocery baggers, who carry your chips and ice cream so you won’t snag a nail.
  • Janitors, because lord knows you’re too busy to empty the damn trash yourself.
  • Farm workers, laboring sunup to sundown because you just have to have strawberries in December.
  • Meat packers, constantly covered in blood.
  • Food service employees, because minimum wage would make them too rich.
  • Truck drivers, on the road too long to get you those damn strawberries.

I can only think of one occupation that deserves shame: Politicians. Our country’s founders envisioned elected office to be one of public service, not privilege or power, and certainly not one that led to wealth. The concept was that a person would give a period of time to serve the people from their elected districts, not pander to ridiculous ideologues and corporations with deep pockets. Politicians inherently serve only their own interests at the expense of the rest of us. They have taken us from being a democracy to an oligarchy. Public office was never designed to be a position of profit, but one of giving to one’s country.

Too many days I go to bed totally disappointed in the human race. We shame those who work the hardest and praise those who contribute to our demise. Perhaps the real shame is on us all.[/one_half_last]

Continue Reading

PotD  /  Uncategorized
The Independence of Equality
June 30, 2015

charles i. letbetter

Think Pink (2010)

“With the spread of conformity and image-driven superficiality, the allure of an individuated woman in full possession of herself and her powers will prove irresistible. We were born for plenitude and inner fulfillment.” ― Elizabeth Prioleau, Seductress – Women Who Ravished the World and Their Lost Art of Love

[one_half padding=”4px 10px 0 4px”]When 70s model Kelly LeBrock purred the words, “Don’t hate me because I’m beautiful,” women everywhere suddenly rushed out and purchased Pantene™ shampoo. While the line was fully intended as a reverse-psychology ploy to sell beauty products, the problem LeBrock and every other attractive model faced then, and faces now, is that people do hate them because of their beauty. There is this mistaken idea that being beautiful somehow discounts one’s intellect. Sadder still is the fact that too often that anti-beauty bias comes from other women.

I can’t speak for every model, of course, but have the advantage, having photographed the young woman in today’s photo on numerous occasions, to know that she is a strong, intelligent, extremely creative,  entrepreneur who, yes, is very attractive and, yes, has enough self-confidence to stride naked into a room full or horny men and leave with their balls in her Gucci® handbag. There is no putting her in a box. She appreciates a sincere compliment, but will verbally eviscerate anyone who tries to patronize her, especially in a sexual context. The fact that she is attractive is a bonus that compliments who she is, not retail wrapping that attempts to define her.

Where we run into problems is that taking pictures of one’s personality is rather difficult. Capturing intelligence on film is playing to a false stereotype at best. I could, in theory, take pictures of her working, but that would require considerable explanation and in the end does no better job telling one who she is than does the picture above. I grow rather tiresome of the crowd that seems to think that physical beauty and being a respectable person of intelligence and depth are two separate things. To disparage beauty for intelligence is just as wrongly biased as those who would mistakenly disparage women in favor of men. Both are equally wrong and equally damaging.

Part of being independent is being able to step up and say, without quiver nor anxiety, this is who I am. Period. No justification, no apologies, and no conditional qualifying should ever be necessary. A woman who dresses in Prada is no better than one who duct tapes the inside seam of her pants together each morning. One of the most brilliant mathematicians I’ve known, a person whose command of numbers makes my head spin, was bare-ass naked when I first met her and didn’t give a rat’s ass what I thought about the matter. We forget that bias too easily runs in both directions and shaming a person for being attractive by assuming she is lacking in intellect is one of the most dangerous mistakes one can make.[/one_half]

[one_half_last padding=”4px 4px 0 10px”]The proposed Equal Rights Amendment has been introduced to every Congress since 1924 and fell only three states shy of ratification in 1982. For reasons I fail to even begin to understand because they are so inherently foolish and ill-considered, these words are not yet law:

Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.

The fact that it has taken nearly a century and we still are not any closer to seeing those words in the Constitution than we were when they were first introduced is beyond shameful, an example of just how firmly entrenched social biases become. While we’ve made progress in the area of women’s rights, until those words become immutable law everything we think exists, every step forward we think we’ve made, is temporal and can be erased. The concept is so very simple, and the benefits so astonishingly plentiful, so as to make this amendment’s lack of ratification yet another very embarrassing stain on the United States’ record of civil rights.

At the same time, those who would champion women’s Independence hurt their own cause when they allow something such as position or physical beauty to become the basis of judgment. This isn’t a new battle, either. Consider these words from the 16th century:

“If I follow the inclination of my nature, it is this: beggar-woman and single, far rather than queen and married.”
― Elizabeth I Tudor

If even Queen Elizabeth I felt that the judgments of place and standing impeded upon her Independence, we cannot expect attitudes and practices to change simply upon the force of a social campaign. Attitudes must change, children must be taught, and we must stop looking at beauty and nudity as the antithesis of intelligence and worth.

Being Independent must give one the right to be exactly who and what they are, even when that means being fabulous.[/one_half_last]

Continue Reading