Home > Gwinnett > Rick Badie / My Opinion > Archives > 2005 > November > 17 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USStreet gear ban not necessarily racist
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Thomas Hutton likes Kangol hats, and he likes to wear them the way they were intended: turned backward. Mack Daddy style.
One night, he threw on a Kangol and bounced over to Barnacles near Gwinnett Place mall. He got stopped at the entrance. Turn your cap around, a bouncer told him. The sports bar off Market Street prohibits patrons from wearing do-rags, and caps must be worn to the front.
Begrudgingly, Hutton obliged. As soon as he got inside, though, he flipped his cap backward again. Two hours later, a bouncer busted him. Hutton was given an ultimatum: Turn the hat around or leave.
He left.
Hutton of Lawrenceville told me about the incident in an e-mail.
“Rick, does this sound like racism to you?” he asked. “Or am I just overreacting?”
Certain fashion styles conjure up images that aren’t altogether positive. All too often, do-rags, flipped lids, baggy sweats and chains get aligned with thuggery, violence and malice. They send the wrong message.
This season, the NBA adopted a minimum dress code that requires players to wear casual business attire when they participate in league or team activities. Out with the do-rags and gold chains. In with the sport coats and dress slacks.
The NBA is trying to clean up its image and the message it puts forth. Just because a majority of the players happen to be black doesn’t make its actions racist. It’s smart business sense.
Which brings me to Barnacles. It has a dance floor that cranks up at 10 p.m. Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights. Because of that, you must be 21 to get in after 9 p.m.
Until then, though, this is a family-friendly joint. A place where Mom, Dad and the brood can eat and play a few games.
“Latinos, blacks, Asians, whites — we get it all,” Ed Subko, the day manager, told me at lunchtime. “We don’t want families to come in here and see people all gangstered up. If they do, they aren’t going to come back. If you walk in here with your family, and everybody’s got their hats turned backwards and do-rags on, would you come back?”
Probably not. Street gear conjures up images of lots of things. Family isn’t one of them. You can call it a style, but it’s still thuggish. Nobody wants to be around it. It gives the impression something unpleasant could jump off at any time, and in any place. Something you don’t want to witness or be a part of.
Like the NBA, the policy at Barnacles definitely targets a fashion that’s been cultivated and embraced by a particular group of people — blacks. But there still appears to be even-handedness. The staff apparently knows not to discriminate, to apply the policy to everyone.
How else could you explain Hutton’s experience? He got stopped twice — at the door and in the establishment. And he’s a white man.
At Barnacles, you either adhere to the rules. Or stay away.
Which, by the way, is exactly what Hutton plans to do.
• Rick Badie’s column appears on Sundays, Tuesdays, and Thursdays. Reach him at 770-263-3875 or by e-mail: rbadie@ajc.com.
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By BobG
November 17, 2005 10:49 AM | Link to this
Sometimes I think people, primarily blacks, devalue the word “racism” by using it too much when “bigotry” or “prejudice” would be the correct description. But a white guy crying “racism” because someone took issue with his wearing of apparel commonly associated with the black culture? I am going to have to think about that for a minute….
By Deborah Lee
November 17, 2005 12:39 PM | Link to this
I think that Barnacle’s dress code is more like, “NO NERDS ALLOWED”. The guy must of stuck out like a sore thumb. Nothing is more pathetic than a white guy trying to look black. I think that the hat backwards trend is not a black thing but a biker thing up north so that when you rode your bike your hat did not fly off. We know he didn’t ride his bike to Barnacles. Hats are used to keep the sun off of your head or the heat in. I guess people also use them for a fashion statement or on a bad hair day or to hide baldness. Barnacles should have a policy of no hats. I am sure that the space is climate controlled and if Mr. Hutton wants to make a fashion statement he can go to Mary’s in Atlanta.
By Bruce Wilcox
November 17, 2005 01:25 PM | Link to this
When does it end, whats next coat and ties required for all dining. Maybe the county should impose a dress code, better yet, a uniform. Any attempt at free expression will be banned like smoking. The county should step in and help private business to ensure we all dress alike, act alike and talk alike.
Thou Shall Conform would make a good motto for the county. It’s laughable that the South prides itself on it’s Rebel Heritage yet now keeps imposing rules on behavior, lifestyle, dress and individual freedom.
The NBA pays it’s employees (players) well, if they feel this will change their image fine, but Barnacles?
Out with the do-rags, flipped lids, baggy sweats, bring back alligator shirts, pressed pants and loafers, make us one again.
By dee
November 17, 2005 01:39 PM | Link to this
People need to understand that there are consequences for actions. If you dress like a punk, you will be considered a punk. Punk knows no racial boundaries. If you don’t care what people think, you will be fine. If you do, then you need to rethink your actions
By Greg Rodgers
November 17, 2005 03:25 PM | Link to this
Hmm..
Samuel L. Jackson made this a very common fashion statement. Of course, this is outside of the many young black males that have been wearing these hats like this since the mid 80’s.
Anyway, I don’t think there is a problem with this rule. It’s fully understandable. Many clubs will not even let patrons wear hats let alone where them correctly.
As a black male of the age of 38, seeing doo rags, baggy pants and kangols is very common to me. However, “let’s not get it twisted” that this style of dress has become thuggish over the years.
If you don’t like the dress code go somewhere else.
By Xavier
November 17, 2005 03:34 PM | Link to this
I think the bans take on a racial tone when you notice that there are no bans on other ‘thug-like’ gear ie biker gear. They mention how a family would feel walking in and seeing hip hop fashion…..I imagine they would feel the same way I feel walking into a sports bar and seeing a bunch of bikers with confederate flags on their backs.
By Salvatore
November 17, 2005 04:17 PM | Link to this
Hey Xavier, good call on the biker gear. The difference being that bikers wouldn’t usually call “racism” on the establishment … they just wouldn’t patronize it. Which is exactly what anyone should do. Barnacle’s has the right, as a private establishment, to dictate dress codes. You have the right, as a human being, to not be a customer.
By Michael H. Smith
November 17, 2005 06:07 PM | Link to this
When in Rome, do as the Romans. Else wise, go to Paris.
By Bruce Wilcox
November 17, 2005 08:56 PM | Link to this
Stop focusing on the word ‘racism’, I’m sure Mr. Hutton meant ‘profiling’. Both are a form of discrimination it’s as simple as that. When people are classified by the color of their skin, the clothing they wear or the language they speak, it’s sad for a country who promotes freedom.
I wonder if Barnacles kicks out families after nine when it decides to become a nighclub? It would seem to be the only fair thing to do.
By Dave Oliver
November 17, 2005 09:26 PM | Link to this
Give me a break. Dressing like a thug is a black and hispanic culture thing. Of course the dress do not necessarily mean that your are a thug; you just look the part. If a white guy wants to look like a black thug without the color let him swing. There are definitely lots of cultures in the USA and the Blacks and hispanics have the Hip Hop, and thug style dress all sewn up and do not need help from the whites.
By Bruce Wilcox
November 17, 2005 10:04 PM | Link to this
James Dean, Elvis, leather jackets and smokes rolled up in the sleeve, cowboy hats and boots, rednecks, hippies, bikers, skinheads, spiked hair, goths, Beatle haircuts and jackets, bell-bottoms,do any of these mentioned apply to the black and hispanic culture?
I guess for whites it would be dismissed as a fad, for anyone else it’s gangster. Please give me a break.
By Michael H. Smith
November 18, 2005 01:28 AM | Link to this
You’re on a roll Mr. Wilcox – as usual – so slow down a wee bit with this Barnacles thing. Try to find some prospective. Barnacles is privately owned and has the right to set standards like acceptable attire as Salvatore correctly stated and you or I have the right to go some where else if we don’t like what the owner sets as a dinning standard. This race thing should have long ago been settled. There is only “one race�, it is called “human� – not black or white or brown or yellow or red or any of the many possible combinations mixed. Are you listening Mr. Feagans?
Now Mr. Oliver and Mr. Wilcox with all due respects, of all the various items in discussion : Leather jackets and smokes rolled up in the sleeve, cowboy hats and boots, rednecks, hippies, bikers, skinheads, spiked hair, goths, Beatle haircuts and jackets, bell-bottoms, thug style, and Hip Hop.
Whether any of us agree or no, any human being regardless of “ETHNIC NOTORIETY� as defined by human attributes of skin color, culture, geography or vernacular used, has the right to indulge in any one, or all of these social forms of expression. Nevertheless every single item on this itinerary is and remains a “human thing�. Personally I’ve seen most all social forms of expression mentioned herein displayed by nearly every person identifiable as human being at some point in time.
Might I be so bold as to take a liberty in suggesting the real issue here focuses on Rights, Responsibilities and Consequences (i.e. one has the right to do anything one wants so long as one take responsibility for, and faces the consequences of, one’s own actions — In the base context: If you act like a thug, expect to have society and the law treat you as a thug.
By Bruce Wilcox
November 18, 2005 02:44 AM | Link to this
Mr. Smith I do apologize for, as you say, being on a roll again, but certain things disturb me like discrimination on any scale. The idea that Barnacles is private when it’s opened to the public is a contradiction, it cannot be both. Just as it can’t be a family dining spot and a nightclub.
Take the smoking ban, if I owned a tavern and wanted to allow smoking I couldn’t, but according to many responding I should be able to because of the fact that I own it.
My last comment on the subject. Maybe we should just return to the ‘separate but equal’ days of old and let business decide on whom it will serve on what they define as acceptable.
By dee
November 18, 2005 08:57 AM | Link to this
Actions have consequences. Every single one. And if the majority of people don’t like your actions, you will be an outcast. Doesn’t matter whether you are a biker, redneck, hip hop, goth, prostitute or whatever - you have to live with what people assume about you. And if you worry about it, then you need to conform. This is just plain common sense passed on to me by an elderly person, you know one of those stereotypes you like to laugh at.
By Rick Badie
November 18, 2005 09:41 AM | Link to this
Hi there. My column on Barnacles’s “do-rag” policy really got the conversation going. I want to share something with you all that a Lawrenceville woman named Maria Hodges e-mailed to me. She had wanted to post her comments in the blog, but for some reason, couldn’t get online. So I’m doing it for her. Have a good weekend, everybody. Be safe. PEACE.
Hodges’ comments: “I am a 57 year old white woman and was very insulted when two different people called my close-fitting hat a do-rag. I was wearing it because my hair fell out from chemotherapy treatments. I guess I was insulted as the do-rag has a bad “rap,” as you described so well, but I was doing my best to remain attractive while very ill and not too presentable. A a society, we are still judging people by what they wear and how they act until given the time to get to know them. I think that is just human nature, however.”
By dee
November 18, 2005 10:50 AM | Link to this
I think in regard to the lady with cancer, that people can tell the difference. I can tell when people are sick. I am sorry if anyone offended her, but I think most people would be able to tell.
By dee
November 18, 2005 11:57 AM | Link to this
This topic has really disturbed me. I guess what bothers me is the lack of respect of people. You have to ask if someone was taught respect in their home. Do you have self respect? If you wear your pants to show your bottom or a portion of it, is that respectful to others and to yourself? Maybe I’m in the wrong century, but respect goes a long way with me
By Bruce Wilcox
November 18, 2005 12:08 PM | Link to this
Why dee because Ms Hodges’ is white? I believe you missed the whole point, better read it again.
Ms Hodges’, no one could have said it better and I sincerity hope you’re on the road to a speedy recovery. Thank you.
I now rest my case.
By Spicer
November 18, 2005 12:38 PM | Link to this
I think that this afternoon I will put on my highest stilleto highs and my shortest skirt and my lowest blouse looking like I stepped out of a 50 cent video and go to Barnacles and see if they have a problem with my attire?
By dee
November 18, 2005 12:39 PM | Link to this
No, Mr. Bruce, because she is sick and any one with any sense at all can tell a person is sick or has hair loss. YOU missed the point. Why does everything always have to be one sided with you? You seem to want to blame white people. Isn’t that racist?
By dee
November 18, 2005 12:49 PM | Link to this
Okay, I’m through trying reasoning and morality among the insane. Wear what you want and let your freak flag fly.
By Xavier
November 18, 2005 01:36 PM | Link to this
I think one thing we may be missing here is that in this situation, it wasn’t a black person claiming Barnacles was racist. It was a question from a white person.
Secondly, not too long ago there was a thug by the name of John Gotti, he was from a long line of thugs (not necessarily familial lines but you get the point). He wore suits…were they thug suits?
I don’t think Barnacles is being racist, but I do think they are discriminating against a certain culture. Funny thing is, the culture they don’t want is the one they make their money off when they become a ‘nightclub.’ Actually, that’s not that funny….more culture pimpin’
By Dave Oliver
November 18, 2005 01:54 PM | Link to this
It never fails when a subject arises someone like this Dee person has a grip because of an illness. Good gracious alive no one in their right mind would pick on a sick person no matter how they cover their head. I think you just wanted to stir the pot Dee. One more time, I will say that do-rags, crooked hats, pants that the wearer holds up or continually pulls up, pants that are ten sizes to large in the legs are worn mostly by blacks and hispanics. Of course like Mr. Hodges has already proven, some whites will try to imitate any style regardless of how they protray themselves. As for the Example of the Beatles, etc. Give me a break, that does not fit the THUG mode like the head gear and clothing now worn on the street by the young immature blacks and hispanics. Look at Falcon # 7. Has that dude ever had a good hair day? If so, you can’t tell by the funny head gear he manages to dig up and wear when doing his Duh, Duh’s during his TV Sport interviews. We may all belong to the same race, the human one, but we sure belong to different cultures. I quit.
By me
November 18, 2005 01:56 PM | Link to this
For the comprehension impaired: You can do what you want, but people have the right not to like it and ultimately exclude you from their club or whatever.
By Xavier
November 18, 2005 02:10 PM | Link to this
Mr Oliver, Are you saying that because of the way someone dresses, you can tell whether they are mature or immature? Your earlier arguments hinted toward a dislike of the hip hop culture\dress (refuse to say thug or gangsta since it only applies when a group of people want to demean, John Wayne never made a movie without shooting someone, but he’s never been called a gangsta actor) but the more you comment, the more you sound like a racist. Is it your wish that we all fit a mold? We all become cookie cutter like our subdivisions. The diversity of cultures in this city, state, and country are what makes this a wonderful place to live. I find it disheartening that you are so quick to generalize and stereotype.
By dee
November 18, 2005 02:34 PM | Link to this
Mr. Oliver, with all due respect, do you know who said what? I was talking about the sick lady, I wasn’t the sick lady.
By me
November 18, 2005 02:57 PM | Link to this
Mr. Badie, how about a new subject, I’m tired of this one.
By Michael H. Smith
November 18, 2005 06:59 PM | Link to this
Yes Mr. Wilcox, Barnacles is open to the public and privately owned but not “private�, so long as the Barnacle rules are within the law and apply equally to any person I see no discrimination. The smoking ban is different because it is the government forcing its’ authority on privately held land and/or a privately owned establishments. So yes a business should be able to do nothing more than put out a sign notifying the public the establishment permits smoking and allow no one under the age of eighteen inside. The smoking ban is nothing less than government violating individual and property owner rights. People who hate smoking have more than a plenty of options to pursue and by far a majority of places they can dine to not have smoke “forced upon them�.
Furthermore I hope I never see the day this country returns to the days of “separate and unequal�. But in many ways that is occurring, in schools and profoundly “separate and unequal� exists in our nation’s immigration policy where equal protection does not mean equal prosecution of “any person�.
This much is sure and I’ll end on this note. People need to stop speaking below their intelligence. A person is not a color, a language nor a culture and AJC newspaper writers should stop toting the baggage of discrimination while talking about the dream and start writing the Dr. King colorblind reality into their columns.
By Mad As Zell
November 21, 2005 10:59 PM | Link to this
Enough already about the race thing. We all get it: race is a big issue in Atlanta.
Does everything in Atlanta have to be viewed through a black or white-colored lens. What about the shades of gray, brown and yellow?
Blacks and whites are not the only races and ethnic group in Atlanta you know.