Haters gotta hate. Or is it hatters?

[tonyb]

This column had me taking off my hat long enough to scratch my head.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_facto...rnet_haters_assume_they_all_wear_fedoras.html

I understand her underlying point, and don't disagree with it in its entirety. But why the dig at men in fedoras? I don't dismiss the (slim) possibility that there's something here I just don't "get," but it's likelier that there's really nothing to get.

What in God's name does a guy's hat have to do with his public and private behavior, or his attitude toward women?

It seems the lady doth protest too much. She is quick to point out the bigotry in others, and blind to it in herself.

 

[suitedcboy]

She makes less than no sense.

 

[bowlerman]

For starters, here are 1100 posts to the contrary:
http://www.thefedoralounge.com/show...I-ever-heard&p=1583168&viewfull=1#post1583168

 

[Baron Kurtz]

I don't think she's got anything against fedoras. She's just using it as a trope. A slightly bizarre trope - that everyone's association with fedoras is some kind of sleazeball - but I suppose this might be one way that fedoras are viewed.

 

[tonyb]

I don't think she's got anything against fedoras. She's just using it as a trope. A slightly bizarre trope - that everyone's association with fedoras is some kind of sleazeball - but I suppose this might be one way that fedoras are viewed.

You mean sorta like the kid-in-the-baseball-cap-on-backwards trope that seems so prevalent around this joint?

 

[ofcoursemyhorse]

She's just giving herself permission to be disliked.

I do like that the main thrust of her article is that if someone disagrees with you, well clearly they must be someone who rubs one out in public on the subway, and thus their opinion invalidated.

It's amazing what constitues journalism these days.

 

[tonyb]

She's just giving herself permission to be disliked.

I do like that the main thrust of her article is that if someone disagrees with you, well clearly they must be someone who rubs one out in public on the subway, and thus their opinion invalidated.

It's amazing what constitues journalism these days.

Well, the bar is lower these days, true enough.

I can understand many women's displeasure with the way (some) men regard them. The "comments" section on many a news website is the land of loons and bigots and loudmouths (speaking of low barriers). The level of racism, sexism, etc., etc., thinly veiled when it's veiled at all, is breathtaking.

But I'm still left wondering just what "guy in fedora" is code for these days, at least in this writer's head, and in her audience's. It ain't good. I get that much. But I still don't see the association between "fedora" and "sleazeball."

Some guys in hats can come across as more than a bit affected, and some look a tad "costumed" (you know, the hat wears the man, instead of the other way around), but scuzzy? I just don't see it.

 

[AtomicEraTom]

Yeah, I'm not sure what she's getting at, here. The article itself was lousy, and the point, while understood, I'm not sure how it correlates to fedoras.

 

[ofcoursemyhorse]

Agreed with Bowlerman on this. Her article is typical of whats wrong with journalism these days just brimming with negativity and anger. Which would be more acceptable if it directed towards anything even remotely substantive. She doesnt deserve the attention or acknowledgement she's clearly begging for.

I'd just let this topic fade away.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

That's the one.

You mean sorta like the kid-in-the-baseball-cap-on-backwards trope that seems so prevalent around this joint?

I suspect that the writer is making the common mistake of equating their own experience (the writer may have encountered a sleazy loon in a fedora) with a generally accepted "normal" experience. Kinda like if I were to say that most homeless people are Irish or Scottish, because in London, for whatever reason, that has been my experience. Of course to take such a position is ludicrous - other people will see different trends - but it seems that many people can't see past themselves, and this floods their writing with misplaced generalisms. That, and the assumptions inherent in the implicit suggestion that the writer knows what kind of guy someone is by virtue of their clothing and not by virtue of their actions.

 

[tonyb]

I suspect that she is attempting to add "color" to her writing, so she conjures up some visuals -- guy rubbing his crotch on the subway, cat-calling creep in a hat, etc. Maybe those types exist in her world, but I can't recall ever encountering it myself. I'd bet dollars to donuts that she just made it up. It's a sort of literary sleight of hand that betrays the hack columnist, no matter his or her point of view.

 

[AtomicEraTom]

Can't even help but roll my eyes at this one......

All I can think during this article as the author discusses how more and more people are wearing fedoras and the style can't come back, is "Wait, if more and more people are wearing them, isn't the style coming back?"

http://seriouslyguys.com/2012/01/09/the-mcbournie-minute-put-down-the-fedora/

I'd assume its this mentality that she's coming from.

What I find absolutely fascinating is that she's writing an article lamenting random internet folks who hate on women out of nothing but ignorance. But in her mind its totes fine labeling an entire populace of hat wearers as douchebags based on her own ignorant perception.

The irony is mind-numbing.

 

[Walt]

Both of the articles cited here simply prove that the world is overrun with pseudo-journalists and pseudo-writers who are terrible at writing and are mostly skilled at making fallacious arguments. The only value I find in it would be if I could have had it to use in formal logic classes I took long before the Internet era to use as examples in class of the standard fallacies. Sadly most of the people that do the writing these days don't know how skilled they are with their faulty thinking.

I find their opinions to be neither interesting or relevant. I couldn't care less as to what they have to say. Much better discussions are to be found here on the Lounge than what some fashion "expert" or "fedora-phobe" has to say….

 

[bowlerman]

to paraphrase a point Rusty made last time this kind of thing came up, I think we owe her no further validation of her piece by responding. Let's close this one.

 

[Walt]

to paraphrase a point Rusty made last time this kind of thing came up, I think we owe her no further validation of her piece by responding. Let's close this one.

I'll second that motion!

Looks like at least some loungers responded to her story at the source. That's the best place to respond to her since of course she'll also never read it here. I found she has a pattern of anger and fear issues so I found it more entertaining to comment on one of her other articles instead at the source.

 

[-30-]

Amazing!

Even while brain dead, her hand keeps writing.


Regards,
-30

 

[Edward]

She should run for Parliament. She'd fit in well.

 

[Mulceber]

The article made decent points, it just had nothing to do with fedoras, which is what's perplexing. Apart from the title, hats were mentioned precisely once in the whole article, and only in passing. I'm with Tony, I think there's something we're missing.

 

[tonyb]

The article made decent points, it just had nothing to do with fedoras, which is what's perplexing. Apart from the title, hats were mentioned precisely once in the whole article, and only in passing. I'm with Tony, I think there's something we're missing.

The shame of it is that she does nothing to advance her argument by engaging in similar tactics as the "haters."

Her point? I suppose it's "people aren't always nice, and some of 'em are downright nasty, but you gotta put up with 'em anyway, and letting 'em scare you away, or responding in kind, is just giving 'em what they want."

So what does she do? She responds in kind. Sheesh.

 

[Mulceber]

And inadvertantly trolls an entirely unrelated group of people.