In this blog we've coverage numerous good deeds done through T-shirts. We've even covered cases where people in positions of power seek to crush the expressions of a few because they felt the T-shirt was 'offensive' or could spark something more troublesome.
Here, I'd like to dig a little deeper into the subject of suppressing T-shirt designs. I'm not referring to cases where public opinion dictates how a company conducts business through T-shirts. A recent example of that is Nike removing their 'Boston Massacre' T-shirts from sale. A common theme in Boston used in the past as a rallying cry. But, with the recent Boston Marathon bombings, the populace is still rightfully raw about the subject. I predict the pain will pass, and Boston will re-adopt the 'Boston Massacre' slogan and a rallying cry. Maybe not for anti-bad guy reasons, but for sports, as it once was used.
The most common cases of suppression of free speech through T-shirts which supposedly contain offensive material, which is argued as our First Amendment right, occur in our public schools here in the USA. And, most commonly, I see junior high school students being at the forefront of this conflict between self-expression and suppression of that expression. The other, and more disturbing case of suppression, occurs from city officials declaring they know what's best for the city by imposing laws on what constitutes an offensive T-shirt.
Before we can question the right to suppress offensive T-shirt designs, we first have to define the terms.
What is an offensive T-shirt design?
If we're looking into the public school realm, offensive leans to sensitive subject matter in relation to the Gay issue. Or, racial issues. In the case of race, its usually someone showing support of their own heritage or showing respect for another. Those are usually shut down rather quickly, as the school does not want to risk any racial-induced riots or fights. I can understand. In my youth, in my latter years of high school, we had an infusion of Vietnamese kids come into our school. Mind you, we weren't that long removed from the Vietnam war, er, conflict. TV and movies were still showing Vietnam as the bad guys. We had a few kids band together with T-shirts with crudely written hate messages with unfortunate racial slurs towards the Vietnamese. Things came to a head when a big fight broke out near the buses at the end of the school day. It was got really scary there until the fight was stopped by teachers and school officials.
The Gay issue in public schools is very unique. I think for as long as there has been public school, there have been anti-gay statements made within the schools. The word 'fag' was so over-used that it became this ubiquitous term used to denote anyone who was stupid, dumb or dorky. If someone wasn't liked, for whatever reason, they were labelled a fag. I don't mean homosexual in nature, just in a general dumb-ass nature. With that in mind, kids today are incredibly savvy when it comes to proclaiming their beliefs via a T-shirt in response to the Gay issue. As an 8th grader recently showed last month, wearing a message that indicated she didn't approve of Gays was challenged by a school board. They felt it was hate speech, but the ACLU stepped in and forced the school to change its position on the grounds that the student's beliefs said that being Gay was not correct. Not acceptable. It was evil. Wrong. Her T-shirt made that point. She was not claiming hatred or acts of violence against Gays, only that she didn't approve of being Gay. There's your First Amendment right working as designed. Even if the message sets your blood on fire, its the student's right to make that declaration. Its your beliefs versus the other person's beliefs. Its only positions of power that can suppress the beliefs of one in favor of another.
If we're talking about city officials, the word offensive usually has a sexual origin to it. Its these people in positions of power who will create laws to force one agenda over another. In recent memory, city officials in southern Florida towns have taken upon themselves to decry the abomination of sexually oriented T-shirts, and force retailers to position these T-shirts into newly created 'adult' areas for 18 yeas and older for viewing.
I'm going to step out on this subject with common sense and declare these suppression of rights, to display in store and sell these so-called offensive T-shirts, a very poor choice for two core reasons.
First, once the offensive T-shirt is legally viewed by an adult, and purchased by an adult, said adult can wear the T-shirt in public, in direct and unhindered view of children (gasp - oh the horrors). We're talking about the same T-shirt which could see the store owner fined (substantially) for displaying it in their store in direct, unhindered view of children. That reason alone shows a desire to punish the store owner for daring to even sell the T-shirt. I'm sure city officials would love to fine and jail anyone wearing an offensive T-shirt in public, but they are at least smart enough to know when they are overtly trampling the First Amendment and common basic civil rights.
Second, with the curious, and unnatural aversion to sexually oriented T-shirts, why is not the same attention drawn to violent themed T-shirts. Its my position that violence is much more corrosive to our youth than sex. Have you actually seen some of the cartoons today's youth watch? Try making it through just one episode of Sponge Bob Square Pants without cringing in view of the exaggerated violence. One only has to dial the time machine back a few ears to the Power Rangers. In its zenith of popularity, children were wearing clothes, had lunch boxes and all manner of merchandise of their heroes. I personally witnessed children mock beating the shit out of each in their desire to replay those wildly violent battles they saw on Saturday morning cartoons.
I find it truly mind boggling that people are more accepting of allowing our youth frequent and unhindered access to violence, but fall to near seizure mode when considering how to explain the world of sexually oriented material to a child. I'm not calling into question the violence consumed by children, as I grew up watching the Roadrunner cartoons and I consider myself a respectable and stable person. I'm no one special in that department though. In the USA entertainment culture, it is incredibly difficult to to navigate life without seeing some level of violence in entertainment. I hope that's not an argument for suppressing sexually oriented T-shirts.
So, what have we learned? Have we defined what offensive means? No, because offensive is subjective. Offensive is defined by those in positions of power. As a king may dictate laws of the land, edicts are established, based on the those currently in power, to suppress views and beliefs of others. In some cases, those rules are in place to maintain a sense of peace, but in most cases its to further a personal agenda which is believed to be for the betterment of society.
In closing, let me try a definition of offensive. I believe any T-shirt with imagery or slogans which promote Fraud, Force or Coercion towards another person is offensive. Those acts are morally and legally wrong, too, but to wear a T-shirt which promotes that is offensive. That said, I don't consider "Cereal Killer" an offensive T-shirt. Its punny.
What are your thoughts on the matter?
No comments:
Post a Comment