Skirting the issues

It was a nice, lightweight skirt – perfect for the hot, muggy Louisiana climate. This innocent skirt, however, was enough to get its wearer fined for indecent exposure, as defined and prohibited by a recently passed ordinance in the town of Clinton, La.\nIt’s true, though, that the person wearing the skirt wasn’t the type of person you’d normally expect to do so. Jay Herrod – yes, he’s a man – who works as a landscaper, claims to have a very uncomfortable heat rash. On his doctor’s advice, he wears skirts in the heat, which minimize rubbing and allow sweat to evaporate much more quickly than shorts would. “If you went through what I went through, you’d do it too,” Herrod said in an interview with Baton Rouge-based WAFB news. \nThe ordinance was not enforced with malicious intent, and there are a few extenuating circumstances that add to the case against Herrod. For example, when Herrod is riding around on his lawn mower in his clients’ yards, or when there is a particularly strong gust of wind, passersby may get a glance of more than they want to see of him. \nBut the man deserves a break. The new law, which makes it illegal to intentionally expose one’s genitalia or undergarments in public, was supposedly created to crack down on “sagging,” or wearing pants so low that they expose underwear – and sometimes a little more.\nNothing that Herrod did was blatant, intentional exposure – besides, he’s been wearing the same non-traditional clothing for years without ever having caused a public outcry. His clients don’t seem to mind because Herrod does his work well, and his clothing selection doesn’t seem to have interfered in any of that. \nA few accidental sightings are nothing compared with the entertainment industry’s “wardrobe malfunctions” and the overt sex and nudity that are broadcast daily to millions of viewers in TV shows and movies. This unnecessary, small-town conflict is receiving wide coverage, having reached major national news outlets, as Herrod prepares to plead his case before the town aldermen. \nIt’s great that people are taking up his cause, but it seems like this entire ordeal is a waste of both community resources and media coverage. Why are we even discussing the Constitutional right to wear skirts when we have so much else to worry about? Are kilts going to be the next point of conflict? Will we have to specify acceptable skirt length for men now? And if so, should women be allowed to continue to wear shorts and skirts that cover about as much area as a rubber band?\nThe government needs to leave Herrod alone and focus on education and health issues, or at least something slightly more relevant than skirt offensiveness. And there are other fights for justice that the media needs to bring to public consciousness – how about the monks in Tibet, for instance?\nFrom reading the paper or flipping on the news, it is obvious that there are more pressing matters than this one out there. I guess we’ve gotten in the habit of only skirting the important issues.