[Vol. 45] Respect Isn't Measured by the Stitch
"What was she wearing?" politics isn't only a feminist issue.
[TW: Mention of topics relating to sexual assault]
Hello all!
Ok, so I wore a crop top out to the barbershop the other day. It was interesting.
At this point in the crop-top game, I feel fairly comfy walking around my neighborhood with my belly button out. But the barbershop is a different story.
You best believe I held my breath walking in there.
In the end, it was a breath held in vain. Although I did get some weird glances down at my stomach before I sat down, mostly it was chill.
Anyways, as I was walking home, fresh cut and all, I thought about something that made my stomach tie up in knots:
Whenever I wear something “different”, like a crop-top, I expect disrespect.
Whenever I wear something outside the bounds of conventional masculinity, I mentally prepare myself for someone to pull some shit – to call out something homophobic, to laugh and point, to lash out.
Now what’s that all about? How is that ok with me?
The more I thought about it, the more it bothered me. Simply because I chose to wear a shirt that’s cut a little higher than the rest of em’, I felt more … unsafe?
How could 5 inches of poly-cotton change how I expect to be treated so drastically?
That’s what we’re going to talk about today – clothing, the power it holds, and how we all suffer from what I like to call “the respect cut off” – man, woman, nonbinary, gay, bisexual, straight, all of em’.
Clothing is fucking powerful. It’s never been just “stuff”.
But I wouldn’t dare take credit for something that came to me straight from the writers of The Devil Wears Prada. Miranda Priestly’s “lumpy blue sweater” diatribe says it all, and I highly recommend a watch (even if you’ve already seen it).
The clothes on our back are so much more than just clothes on our back.
Last week in the newsletter, I went down the rabbit hole with the history of the high heel. They went from combat gear to masculine aristocrat fashion must-have to unisex closet staple to fallen-from-grace footwear to (last but not least) a decidedly feminine fashion accessory.
If you got whiplash from reading that run-on, same girl.
The thing is, I could’ve gone even deeper – I just skimmed the surface with that research – and the high heel is just one of countless fashion items people wear on a daily basis.
Long story short: The things hanging in your closet or chilling in a crazy pile on your bed (I see you) carry immense history, culture, mental associations, gendered stigma, etc. And we carry all that shit around with us every time we put these things on.
But how do we forget to respect what’s underneath all that?
Underneath all that history and stigma – underneath every shirt, sweater, crop top, skirt, dress, and thong – is a human being.
Respect isn’t measured by the stitch, it’s paid (and owed) regardless of how you’re dressed.
Shouldn’t that be obvious?
Feminists the world over have been asking this very question (exasperated, I imagine) for a long, long time – especially in response to a more infamous question:
“But what was she wearing?”
We’ve all heard the question asked. Whether in response to a friend’s retelling of getting catcalled on the street or on national television by some senseless reporter, we’ve all heard the question asked.
“But what was she wearing?”
It’s the very same question that sparked Amber Rose’s SlutWalk, as well as an art exhibit showcasing the clothing of victims of sexual assault, and countless other artistic and political demonstrations against victim blaming and rape culture.
When I was growing up, I didn’t see myself in these issues.
I cared because I had girls and women in my life that I loved, not because I thought it had anything to do with me.
As Miranda Priestly herself would say, “Oh ok, I see, you think this has nothing to do with you.” (Seriously you should rewatch that clip).
For some reason, I couldn’t connect the dots.
I didn’t see it when I was secretly cutting my old sweaters into crops in my room, just about having a heart attack anytime someone came near my door.
I didn’t see it when I day dreamed in class and imagined what it would be like to wear a dress, or a skirt, or high heels, and immediately felt guilty for even thinking those things.
I didn’t see it when I was punched in the face in Paris by a homophobe, only to have my first thought back on my feet be, “I wonder if it was because I was wearing this pink shirt.”
No, it’s not the same thing, but the root of the issue is.
Depending on what identity you inhabit, you’ll experience “the respect cut off” differently and at different levels of severity – that’s a given.
A girl wearing a mini-skirt and queer boy wearing a high-cut crop top are not living the same experience, but (and it’s a big but) they’ve both been conditioned to expect disrespect.
When we let how someone is dressed determine how we’ll treat them, we all lose.
Queer kids and adults relegate their self-expression to their locked bedrooms, afraid to experiment openly.
Young boys and men internalize a bar of idealized masculinity that they’ll never be able to reach.
Young girls and women are forced to choose between what they want to wear and what’s “safe” to wear.
So next time someone’s outfit stands out to you on the street – a short skirt, an exposed midriff, a dress on a masculine body – remember that underneath the clothing there’s a person; a human being.
You don’t have to love them or their outfit, but you do have to respect them …
1) Because you know nothing about them, and therefor cannot judge them.
2) Because they’re clearly brave enough to wear whatever the fuck makes them happiest, irregardless of your respect.
FRIDAY 05/28 – Lucky the Leprechaun is Outed
I never thought I’d say this, but this section’s become one of my favorite parts of writing the newsletter.
1) It forces me to keep up with the headlines
2) It’s pretty entertaining (well … it would be if it wasn’t so real)
So let’s get right into today’s headlines, shall we?
Yup. Lucky the Leprechaun, the Lucky Charms cereal mascot, is gay.
If ya didn’t know, well, now you do.
Of course General Mills, the cereal’s parent company, didn’t out him – no, they would never do that to one of their own. The outer (if that’s even a word) was conservative Newsmax anchor Grant Stinchfield.
In a weird rant against Kellogg’s new Pride-month cereal, “Together With Pride”, Stinchfield mocked the company for its collaboration with GLAAD, an LGBTQ+ - focused media monitoring organization, by claiming General Mills beat them to the punch with Lucky the Leprechaun (watch the video here).
“He wears high heels shoes, prances around in tights - leads me to believe, probably, that little Lucky Charm leprechaun might be gay,” Stinchfield said.
Now look, I know it was a joke (and one made in poor taste), but honestly why shouldn’t Lucky the Leprechaun be gay? Before we get into the meat and bones of this story, I’d just like to go on record and officially welcome Lucky into the world of queer celebs – make yourself at home bud.
Ok, moving on.
Stintchfield ended his rant with a virtual call to boycott “woke companies” like Kelloggs (and he threw in Coke and Ben and Jerry’s too, just for good measure). I’d pull out the laundry list of all the other conservative/religious groups that have called for the same thing, but instead I’ll just highlight for you a few comments under the Fox article announcing the cereal collab. You’ll get the gist.
Look, I laughed when I saw this cereal too.
I thought, ‘Do we really need this? They’re rainbow colored and covered in edible glitter … isn’t that a little on the nose?’
If it weren’t for the donations Kellogg’s will be making to GLAAD via cereal box sales, I would’ve called this collaboration performative at best.
But here’s the thing: That’s not why conservatives are laughing.
They’re mocking the cereal and getting pissed off at Kellogg’s not because they think it’s performative, but because they don’t like the message it sends.
You know, the message that their kids should be allowed to explore their sexuality and gender identity freely. To some people – those commenters I highlighted, perhaps – this cereal box isn’t just a joke, it’s a threat.
And so for those folks, and for all the little queer kids out there who’s parents won’t let them have “that gay cereal”, I’ll be buying a box as soon as I can find one.
Who knows, maybe I’ll even make my own someday 😂
P.S. I’ll also be buying some Lucky Charms, because apparently that’s gay as fuck too.
Find me on Instagram: @till_kaeslin
Check out the newsletter’s home on Instagram: @thatsgaynewsletter
Whew! And that was That’s Gay, Volume 45.
See you in Volume 46, folks!
Want Volume 46? Not signed up yet?
Share this newsletter and help my baby grow!