Less Than Credulous Trusting no one, we find out for ourselves

You’re Going Out In That? You Should Be Ashamed!

October 18th, 2009 3:06 pm by Jonathan

Yesterday it was reported that department store chain Target buckled under pressure from the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles to remove a Hallowe'en costume from their racks. The costume in question consists of a mask resembling a space creature, an orange jump suit with the words “Illegal Alien” printed on it, and an oversized green card bearing the words “Green Card.”

The reasoning behind the complaint is that the costume negatively depicts terrestrial-based immigrants and aliens, and that it only enforces the negative views and stereotypes many have about people from other countries trying to make headway in The United States. Target has even gone so far as to say that the costume was accidentally included in this year's line, and that it was never intended to be made available.

Have we completely lost our spirit of fun? I've looked at the costume for a long time now, and even at first blush I did not get the impression that this was a slight against any particular minority culture. While I groaned more than I chuckled, all I saw was a visual pun – a physical representation of a play on words. I'm probably going to get flack for this, but I anticipate a day when I can no longer buy polish for my boots because I might use the stuff to negatively portray a person or group (I'm not saying I would, I'm just saying that we should remove the possibility all together). If we are going to shed whatever strains of xenophobia we have (no matter how subtle), in order to celebrate and fully enjoy an all-inclusive Hallowe'en, then I think it's time we take a long hard look at the mainstream costumes that are out there, and join hands in forming a coalition that tells these corporations that we refuse to spend money to negatively impact minorities or those disadvantaged in our gentle society.

I've been looking at other costumes available through Target; ones that are popular, widely accepted, and purchased without forethought. I have to say, after my research, I am ashamed of you people for being so insensitive. Here is my (personal) list of offenders:

The Vampire:

This is a classic. If you've ever been out and about on October 31st, or wandered through the mall on any other day, you've probably seen people dressed like this. Pale skin, dark clothing, afraid of sunlight, with an insatiable thirst to feed on live humans or animals for the nutrients their blood provides.

Why this is offensive:

There is a rare condition known as porphyria, which makes individuals very sensitive to direct sunlight, and also leaves those affected with low blood-sodium levels, and (in some cases) blood-iron deficiency, which causes a craving for those things which contain what they are lacking.

Who to contact to complain about insensitivity: Porphyria Foundation

Positive portrayals: Paula Frías Allende and King George III

The Werewolf/Wolfman:

These are also classics, having been portrayed in The Howling series of movies, as well as numerous Lon Cheney films. A seemingly normal person is transfigured by the full moon into a beast that terrorizes and reminds us why we have to keep our basest of desires in check.

Why this is offensive:

Hypertrichosis or Hirsutism. These are conditions by which people have excessive, and in some cases, what is known as “terminal hair.” This is a condition that knows no gender, race, or any other qualifiers. In extreme cases, the sufferers are covered from head to toe in a thick layer of hair.

Who to contact to complain about insensitivity: Hairscientists.org

Positive portrayals: Larry Ramos Gomez (He may be getting a reality show soon, which, like “Little People, Big World” will not have a single hint of exploitation.)

Characters From the "Twilight" series

Why this is offensive:

Not all Mormons shop at Hot Topic

Who to contact to complain about insensitivity: The Church of Latter Day Saints and every teenager you know

Positive portrayals: Still researching this one

The Pirate

Why this is offensive:

This costume promotes fun and anarchy, which is only feeding into and encouraging people to support Somalian privateers, offenses against the music and software industries, and bringing about the demise of the lime industry.

Who to contact to file a complaint about insensitivity: BSA and Ecoterra

Positive portrayals: Captain Morgan

Now that I've bothered to make you aware of the unwitting and subliminal insensitivity that many people have been portraying during the Hallowe'en season (the list can go on and on, if one looks hard enough), I hope everyone will think carefully before going out dressed up as their favorite "monsters" and promote inequality, misogyny, violence, and overall undermining of a progressive society bent on change. I think it's high time for a shovel-ready movement to abandon these antiquated notions of what is scary or fun, in the name of scoring a few pieces of candy. I want a world where I can go into a store and not see monster costumes, or exploiting outfits - because we've become so enlightened that we can see these archetypes not as laughable or freakish, but for the sensitive and struggling groups and individuals that they are.

Do you know of an insensitive costume? Are your neighbors dressing the kids as Kim Jong-Il this year? Henry Ford? The Dutch oppressors of Indonesia? Daffy Duck? Elizabeth Bathory? Please send us your opinions on what's really offensive (including this article), and any pictures of costumes that you find truly insensitive (or hilarious).

The Plight Of The Candycapped

October 7th, 2009 2:28 pm by Jonathan

Just in time for Hallowe'en, Cardiff University recently released an article saying that a study showed a direct link between the consumption of sweets by children and violent tendencies later in their lives. The British Journal of Psychiatry studied the long-term effects of those who consumed candy regularly versus those who did not. According to the study, of the 69% who were violent by the age of 34, all had eaten candy nearly every day of their lives, compared to the 42% who were rather imbellic.

Now, despite the seemingly skewed statistics (or lack of complete statistics, as they are presented) the article sums up that there is a direct link to children being given candy as a means of keeping them quiet or sated and the development of tendencies to satisfy immediate gratification later on in life. If a child cries or complains, feel free to give her or him sweets to calm the tantrum, but understand that the child may grow up to use more nefarious means to get what she or he wants when the world isn't going right.

Lots of candy during the formative years = a violent society later in life.

I take issue with this on a number of levels. Firstly, instead of having those with violent tendencies own up to their mistakes (not everyone has a chemical imbalance caused by sweets that is irreversible and must have constant psychiatric supervision), or looking toward poor parenting (I'll touch on this in a little bit), we are looking to the manufacturers of confections and the stores that make them available to the general public.

Maybe, here in the United States, we should appoint a Candy Czar (who will, I predict, resign within a month of appointment when it's discovered that she/he once gave candy to a minor) to make certain that sweets are given warning labels based on sugar intensity, flavor, and portion size. Maybe those ratings could be devised by a federally-funded third party that works in conjunction with the FDA to audit what is allowed on store shelves and what a proper age is for someone to buy certain candies without a parent or guardian being present. Perhaps we can keep candy locked up (much like razors in many stores here), or allow only a certain amount of sugar to be purchased in an allotted period, much like certain over the counter medicine is in many states. There should be panic in the streets! Parents should arm themselves in protective gear and crowd control devices in case roving bands of elementary school students start to exhibit violent tendencies or become overly exuberant when out trick-or-treating this year, either from too much candy, or from being denied candy. (Don't forget to look for popular gang colors in the kids' costumes, as well. To help the parents reading this, black, orange, red, green, and purple are good indicators.)

I am not a parent, and probably will not have an opportunity to raise a person from childbirth to adulthood. However, I have been a child (and still have the mentality of one, as both my proponents and detractors will tell you), and observed the methods my parents (and others) have used throughout the years, and have looked back at what I and others used to do as kids.

Kids can be terrors. You set boundaries, and children always want to know why those lines are drawn, and what's on the other side. Kids cry, yell, and (when they think no one is looking) will explore to see what is denied them by the powers that be, and will go to great lengths to get what they want. This is burgeoning human curiosity, and something to be commended.

However, when this curiosity is not sated, or the reasons for restrictions are not explained in full (or in a manner that a child can understand), then the rebellious behavior increases. Many parents would see it as a win-win situation just to give the damn kid the candy and have peace and quiet, rather than yelling and crying or destructive behavior.

I don't want to limit this to candy, either. Candy seems like a concern because it is present almost everywhere we go. It is tangible and attainable by people of virtually any age with loose change in their pockets. It's colorful, sweet, and often advertized in an appealing manner in print, on-line, and during commercial breaks on television when broadcasting shows intended for children. Candy manufacturers are not preying upon children. There is no evil candy conglomerate working in association with The Illuminati and The Rand Corporation to corrupt the youth of the world and have them as a sugar-addicted army bent on crushing all existing authority; ready to carry out any order blindly for a taste of a chocolate bar (or one of those very sour candies, if you are the author of this article). Candy companies know their target demographic, and want to do what most companies in any industry want to do: make money.

Do you want to help fight the evils of sugar? Do you want to curb the potentially violent tendencies of children (especially yours, even though I'm certain you know they are darlings without any faults directly or indirectly related to how you raise them)?

Then stop combating the large corporations who make candy, the television networks who advertise candy, and companies who may make and publish games, movies, and books for children featuring candy, and take responsibility into your own hands! “No” means very little to most children, except as a cue to scream louder and be more persistent. This is where you need to start thinking and reasoning. I'm not talking about cheap bargains like offering the child a new toy if he or she stops crying about wanting candy for five minutes, or anything like that. You've lost the war and given your child the reins at that point. You need to reason with your child. Let kids know why you are denying them things like a ton of candy, hours in front of the television, or a later bed time. Explain it in a way they can understand, and encourage them to question why you do things as a means of understanding and (in some cases) compromising. Heck, all parties may even learn something about each other.

However, this can be very taxing, in which case I advise you to cut a few lines of Pixy Stix on the Sit N' Spin and let the little tykes have at it. Then tell them you'll show them how to smuggle condoms filled with peanut butter cups via a demonstration using a Mr. Potato Head figure (that hatch is not just for storing the pieces and accessories). Tell them if they do a good job, that you'll take them to the store and get them anything they want, if they go out and bring you the neighbor's credit card. Oh yeah, tell them where the neighbors keep their candy before you send them out to ply the knowledge and trade you taught them, through the power of good and responsible parenting!

Now, where are my cigarettes? I swear I'll just kill someone if I don't have one now.