Gordon Robinson | New Year resolutions

It’s the time of year when New Year resolutions should be recommended.

So here goes.

How about we resolve to stop policing other people’s garment choices, especially when those other people are women? Recently there was a furore when Rihanna went bra-less at Barbados’ ditch-the-Monarchy-and-name-Rih-Rih-a-national-heroine ceremony. Suddenly there was an intense discussion surrounding to wear or not to wear a bra. Seriously?

Is THAT the region’s biggest challenge right now?

Believe it or not (by Ripley), the brassiere is the latest in a long line of restrictive undergarments (emphasis on “under”) that women born in “western” culture have been forced to endure over centuries. Throughout history, these women have subjected their bodies to clothing that change their natural shapes, such as corsets and brassieres, because of the pressures of society.

Brassieres have no positive effects on the body but instead prohibit natural bodily functions. Like corsets before them, which were considered compulsory for middle- and upper-class women, they are one way for men and society (dominated by men) to try to control women.

In the continent from whence we were captured and enslaved by “western” culture, men and women were regularly bare-chested. Then we were taught by colonial and slave-masters that, if we wished to be “civilised”, our women should cover up as much and as uncomfortably as possible. Men’s nipples were exempted from this fashion code.

INVENTION OF THE BRA

On November 3, 1914, Mary Phelps Jacobs received a USA patent for the garment she had invented while preparing to go to a dance. Mary was a (er, um) “full-bodied” gal who was frustrated with the dresses of the time that were all made for slim, boyish figures. Worse, they highlighted plunging necklines.

In her autobiography, Jacobs repeatedly referred to the result as “awkward”. While preparing for a Manhattan debutante ball in 1913, the 19-year-old just couldn’t deal with the combination of sleek evening gown and corset that tended to reject the shape of her (er, um) “under” body. “The eyelet embroidery of my corset-cover kept peeping through the roses around my bosom” she wrote in autobiography The Passionate Years.

“Bring me two of my pocket handkerchiefs and some pink ribbon,” she told her maid. After some quick sewing, pulling taut and tying, the effect was similar to a corset’s but, without the whale bones, sleeker and more comfortable. Jacobs wrote the new undergarment “was delicious. I could move more freely, a nearly naked feeling, and in the glass I saw that I was flat and proper.” She called her invention a “brassiere” (from French for “upper arm”).

Ain’t that all Rihanna was trying to do over 100 years later?

By the 1930s, the bra was undoubtedly an improvement on the corset but, over time, as fashion evolved and women determined to take charge of their lives and bodies, it was realised that bras were just another type of debilitating torture.

The Old Ball and Chain, who, like me, comes from the “old school”, feels obliged to wear one in public but disposes of it swiftly as soon as she enters the home. From her mother-in-law, another free-spirited sort who was an expert at bra disposal, she learned how to do it without removing a single outer garment. Trust me, it ain’t easy!

I’ve never believed in formal dress codes. I only wear a jacket and tie in court because it’s a rule. Otherwise, no thank you very much. I’m not saying we should look shabby or ragtag but comfortable clothes, especially in the tropics and especially as an officially appointed (by Gene Autry) Fatboy, are my preference.

In the over 30 years that I knew the legendary Heinz Simonitsch, I’ve seen him in trousers less than five times. He always wore nicely tailored shorts and an immaculately detailed T-shirt. Nobody told him he was inappropriately dressed. So why would we jump all over a woman who wore a beautiful dress; looked beautiful in it; was obviously not ashamed of the body that God gave her; and decided to be comfortable in that body regardless of the occasion? Is there a different standard for men than women?

The fact is that times have changed as have fashions and “appropriateness”. Corsets gave way to bras. Now maybe it’s time for bras to give way to comfort for those who want to be different.

While we’re at it, how about we resolve to stop abusing people with whom we disagree? After Rihanna’s induction, iconic broadcaster, Fae Ellington, posted that she considered the outfit inappropriate.

Well, who tell her say so? Tante Merle and her entire crew set upon Fae with the most distasteful and inappropriate abuse instead of simply disagreeing and saying why. The most offensive name-calling and personal insults were thrown her way.

Lookie here, Fae is entitled to her opinion that’s probably shaped by the values and attitudes with which she grew up in a different Jamaica. Generation X may no longer hold those values dear and the world may well have passed both Fae and I by, but she’s entitled to hold on to her values and to express them whenever and wherever she pleases. It’s called Freedom of Speech.

MANAGE THE PANDEMIC BETTER

Thirdly, can we resolve to manage the pandemic with the object of balancing citizens’ lives and livelihoods instead of just politicians’? Maybe we could try DOING the lives-and-livelihoods thingy into being instead of just trying to talk it into being.

Government and Opposition have been talking a lot. But what have they DONE? As soon as the first wave was kinda under control, Government called a general election nine months early. PNP said “Bring it on!” Both campaigned irresponsibly (especially on Nomination Day). Then, as if THAT super-spreader wasn’t enough, PNP held its own general election to find a new party leader. What should Government have done instead? Wait for vaccines which everybody knew were coming soon like a new James Bond movie. What should PNP have done? They could have found a new leader with an electorate of fourteen.

When the inevitable spike occurred they shouted “Look! A second wave! OMG!”

For pity’s sake!

We had just recovered from the second wave when Government flung the doors of the entertainment industry wide open, possibly to appease large tourism interests who wanted to party continuously for days. The Opposition welcomed the move. The result? A third wave more devastating than the first two put together.

All political leaders sounded shocked and saddened.

Sure!

So, this time, can Government and Opposition think of us? “How” you ask? Elementary, my dear Watson. Nobody wants any more lockdowns, which is what we are inviting with impending Local Government elections. Government needs to postpone ALL elections until the pandemic is over and Opposition needs to agree. That would be consensus in the national interest. Then Government and Opposition can take the time to jointly work out a constitutional solution to fewer elections (except called by the people such as recall elections) which is easiest to achieve by abolishing the redundant anachronism known as local government; convert each local government division into a constituency; and achieve a Parliament that, even if we keep Westminster (which I would prefer not to do) will have enough backbenchers motivated to keep government on its toes.

This would be the fulfilment of Fenton Ferguson’s truism “All politics is local”.

My wish for every Jamaican is that 2022 is better than 2021 and that you find happiness…

Peace and Love!

- Gordon Robinson is an attorney-at-law. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com