We drove past a quartet of teens yesterday parading down the street wearing, I assume, some of their newly unwrapped Christmas clothes. Bare skin aplenty.
B, being the rabid sun smart advocate he is, commented, "the message just isn't getting through, is it?"*
"People aren't going to cover up completely until they have options for clothing that is fashionable, cooling and affordable," I replied.
His response? "That will never happen. The goal of the fashion industry is to make people feel bad about themselves. In order for sun smart behavior to be adopted, it's going to take a paradigm shift or legislation, like with bike helmets and seat belts."
"I don't agree," I said. "I find a well made garment that is cut for my body type gives me confidence and makes me feel better about myself."
"Maybe for today," he said. "But they want it to be short term. Then it's out of style and you need the next thing to feel good about yourself."
"Again, I don't agree," I said. "I think true fashion tries to be timeless and classic. Fads are a different thing. Fads want people to feel bad about themselves, not fashion. You want a wardrobe of classic pieces, then, if you feel it necessary, you can sprinkle in fadish accessories to freshen the look. If sun smart clothing could be made that was attractive and affordable, it would stick."
We went around and around like this for a while and came to no agreement.
Wanna weigh in? Fashion as friend or foe?
*A bit of background: research finds full clothing coverage superior to using sunblock and B follows the Australian Cancer Council SunSmart behavior recommendations when the UV is above 3 (it's currently 12). This means hat, long sleeves and long pants between 9am and 6pm. Always. No exceptions. I find this unreasonable. Either one has to 1)stay inside, 2)be super hot and driven back inside, or 3)pay outrageous prices for clothing engineered to cover and cool.
