A recent Dunkin Donuts ad featured pitchwoman Rachael Ray wearing a scarf that looked like a keffiyeh - at least according to eagle-eyed conservative pundit Michelle Malkin. Unsurprisingly Malkin views the keffiyeh as not simply a fashion item, but as "a symbol of murderous Palestinian jihad."
The scarf used in the ad was not in fact a traditional cotton keffiyeh (the Arab headdress worn by men - can also be draped around the neck and shoulders), it was a silk scarf with a paisley type design. This didn't stop conservative bloggers from demanding the ad be removed.
A spokesperson for Dunkin Donuts denied that Ms Ray's scarf was guilty of "symbolism" :
“In a recent online ad, Rachael Ray is wearing a black-and-white silk scarf with a paisley design. It was selected by her stylist for the advertising shoot. Absolutely no symbolism was intended. However, given the possibility of misperception, we are no longer using the commercial.”
The petty objections of Michelle Malkin to a scarf that merely resembles a keffiyeh, is about as small minded as it gets.
This is how Malkin attempts to rationalize her concern:
"Fashion statements may seem insignificant, but when they lead to the mainstreaming of violence -- unintentionally or not -- they matter."
Mainstreaming of violence? She doesn't give any examples of how fashion statements have led to the "mainstreaming of violence," because it's a subjective conviction on her part, and a far-fetched one at that.
Fashion statements with political edge come in many shapes and sizes - all the way from keffiyehs to Che berets and T-shirts with anarchist slogans. Political fashion is undoubtedly an irritant to those with opposing beliefs. It may even spark words, perhaps even the occasional brawl between individuals - but to suggest that such fashion statements contribute to the mainstreaming of violence is pushing it. Clothing with obvious gang tags and associations is more likely to contribute to violence than keffiyehs.
What Malkin's alarmist rhetoric does succeed in doing, in addition to putting a chill on creative freedom, is to provide satirical fodder for cynical detractors who love nothing more than ridiculing America. Not unlike Iraqi WMD, on closer inspection the Rachael Ray ad was found not to be in possession of a keffiyah - but it took the hit anyway.
A single hyphenated word I spotted on a comment thread accompanying the Rachael story perfectly sums up this tempest in a teapot:
"re-tard-ed."
The scarf used in the ad was not in fact a traditional cotton keffiyeh (the Arab headdress worn by men - can also be draped around the neck and shoulders), it was a silk scarf with a paisley type design. This didn't stop conservative bloggers from demanding the ad be removed.
A spokesperson for Dunkin Donuts denied that Ms Ray's scarf was guilty of "symbolism" :
“In a recent online ad, Rachael Ray is wearing a black-and-white silk scarf with a paisley design. It was selected by her stylist for the advertising shoot. Absolutely no symbolism was intended. However, given the possibility of misperception, we are no longer using the commercial.”
The petty objections of Michelle Malkin to a scarf that merely resembles a keffiyeh, is about as small minded as it gets.
This is how Malkin attempts to rationalize her concern:
"Fashion statements may seem insignificant, but when they lead to the mainstreaming of violence -- unintentionally or not -- they matter."
Mainstreaming of violence? She doesn't give any examples of how fashion statements have led to the "mainstreaming of violence," because it's a subjective conviction on her part, and a far-fetched one at that.
Fashion statements with political edge come in many shapes and sizes - all the way from keffiyehs to Che berets and T-shirts with anarchist slogans. Political fashion is undoubtedly an irritant to those with opposing beliefs. It may even spark words, perhaps even the occasional brawl between individuals - but to suggest that such fashion statements contribute to the mainstreaming of violence is pushing it. Clothing with obvious gang tags and associations is more likely to contribute to violence than keffiyehs.
What Malkin's alarmist rhetoric does succeed in doing, in addition to putting a chill on creative freedom, is to provide satirical fodder for cynical detractors who love nothing more than ridiculing America. Not unlike Iraqi WMD, on closer inspection the Rachael Ray ad was found not to be in possession of a keffiyah - but it took the hit anyway.
A single hyphenated word I spotted on a comment thread accompanying the Rachael story perfectly sums up this tempest in a teapot:
"re-tard-ed."
Tags:
































































