CITIES ACROSS America, including Newark, New Jersey and Atlanta, Georgia, are currently beginning to consider banning baggy pants. Proponents of such ordinances claim that wearing baggy pants is part of the "gangster culture" and promotes juvenile delinquency. They also claim that the baggy pants cause an eyesore by revealing the underwear of those who wear the fashion.
By banning baggy pants, cities claim that they can improve the behavior of their citizens and create a better environment for everyone. But these ordinances are an unconstitutional intrusion on the freedom of speech of individuals who wish to express themselves through baggy pants.
Baggy pants are a form of protest against the domination and oppression minority communities face from the white-dominated culture and power structure within society. The local governments that are attempting to put these ordinances into place should instead focus their energies on trying to fix the fundamental social causes of the problems that baggy pants supposedly promote.
This current controversy over baggy pants is remarkably similar to the controversy last semester over the dress code at Jaberwoke. During that controversy, Jaberwoke imposed a dress code that many contended was meant specifically to target minorities. The dress code prohibited hats without brims, baggy clothing, sweatpants, plain white t-shirts and camouflage unless worn by a member of the Armed Forces.
All of these clothing styles are worn prominently by minority groups, and many claimed that the dress code was a thinly-veiled attempt to keep minorities out of Jaberwoke. As bad as those regulations were, they were implemented by a private business that had the right of private enterprise to run their establishment in the way they see fit.
In contrast, the Supreme Court has repeatedly defended the rights of citizens under the First Amendment to non-verbal speech and expression. The court has upheld the right of individuals to do things as drastic as burning the American flag because it is a form of non-verbal speech. Part of the rationale for these decisions is that individuals should be able to do whatever they want as long as they do not harm anyone else.
One of arguments against baggy pants is that exposing underwear harms those who see it, but this is not a sufficient harm to other people to justify limiting the freedom of individuals who wish to express themselves through baggy pants.. Allowing city governments to regulate clothing creates a dangerous precedent of government intervention into the private lives of its citizens and abandons the purpose of democratic government.
These ordinances not only restrict the freedom of speech of individuals, but they also specifically target minorities. Along with a responsibility to defend the freedom of expression of individuals, governments also have a responsibility not to discriminate against minorities as enumerated under the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
From a sociological perspective, the fashion of baggy pants originated as a response to the traditional white-dominated fashion of mainstream America. Minorities and other groups chose to dress differently and create their own fashion sense in order to protest against the oppression they were experiencing from the dominant white culture. According to Andrew Bolton, curator at the Costume Institute of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, fashions tend to be decried when they "challenge the conservative morality of a society," Bolton said in an interview with the New York Times. By not allowing these individuals to express their opinions through fashion, these ordinances are denying citizens one of their most fundamental rights and trying to maintain the current social heirarchy..
The real solution to problems supposedly caused by baggy pants is to address the underlying causes of those problems. Baggy pants do not cause drug use, youth delinquency or gang activity. The real cause of these problems are poverty, unemployment and lack of opportunity. These are the things that local governments should focus on trying to fix instead of simply focusing on a single fashion trend.
A more realistic view is that baggy pants do not cause these problems, but rather that baggy pants are a protest against a failure to address these problems. Those who oppose baggy pants should realize that there is no quick fix to the problems of inner cities and a real solution involves creating greater opportunity for the youth and the community as a whole.
Sam Shirazi's column appears Mondays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at sshirazi@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
SULLIVAN: Ramp up physical accessibility on Grounds
By Scarlett Sullivan | 5 hours agoThe University must take responsibility for the inaccessibility of Grounds and work to promote accessibility for all students despite misguided laws.
EDITORIAL: Scapegoating students will not stop hazing
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoInstead of retroactively responding to extreme hazing allegations, we, and especially the University, must begin asking more probing questions about the role of fraternal organizations on Grounds.
EDITORIAL: Celebrating and reflecting on The Cavalier Daily’s independence
By Editorial Board | April 18, 2024Our independence grants us the ability to ask the hard questions and to say what University representatives cannot.
