Julie Huff
The Silhouette
Facebook news feeds are littered with selfies. We see them on Twitter, Pinterest, and Instagram. They’re everywhere. I’m not sure why people feel the need to catalogue their image at every turn, but one thing is certain: selfies have become an internet phenomenon. Some argue that selfies are no more than a narcissistic attempt for people to cry, “hey, look at me!” without actually saying the words. They’re attention-grabbers. But selfies have hit a new low.
Jason Feifer, a Brooklyn-based senior editor of Fast Company, has created a tumblr blog called “Selfies at Funerals.” Care to guess what it’s about? Yup, that’s right. Feifer compiles images of teenagers taking pictures of themselves at funerals. Often, teens are seen with “duck faces” or posing for the camera with various hash tags such as “Love my hair today. Hate why I’m dressed up #funeral.”
The blog first came to public attention last October and has since created a barrage of media uproar. Many are upset that teens seem to show such little respect for the deceased. The selfies indicate that rather than mourning the loss of life, teens instead place themselves at the forefront of a somber event by highlighting their blatant vanity and narcissism through a self-taken photo. Indeed, many feel that funerals are not an appropriate occasion for any picture, let alone a selfie.
Feifer has been accused of attempting to mock funerals and their attendees, namely teenagers, but in fact his tumblr seems to have had a slightly different effect: rather, the selfie-taking teens have become the target of mass criticism and disapproval. Teens have been attacked for what many consider their conceited and egotistical behaviour.
In an interview with CBC Radio, Feifer challenged the public’s outcry and defended the pictures, saying that he never meant the tumblr to be a cultural critique. He stated: “I don’t think this is a condemnation of a generation. I don’t intend it to be. It certainly is an observation of the way this generation is using social media. They’re also the first to do it – they’re the first to have it – and I really strongly believe that if my parents’ generation, my grandparents’ generation, had been the ones growing up with these tools, with this amount of technology and ability to share, they would have done very similar things.”
Some defend the selfies. Mortician Caitlin Doughty claims that they may be the only way teens know how to express their deep sense of sadness and mourning. A hundred years ago, family members commonly took pictures with caskets propped unceremoniously on a wall. Today, the ever-changing world of technology constantly alters the way we communicate, and selfies have become a universal way to interact with others. Moreover, she suggests teens take the pictures out of boredom. They are forced to attend the funeral of someone they don’t know, and retreat to the bathroom to take pictures of themselves when they find that their boredom has become all-consuming.
But enough with the excuses. Regardless of whose funeral we are attending or our relationship with the deceased, there should be a universally understood level of respect owed to the dead. Not only are funeral selfies disrespectful of the deceased, but they are also offensive and hurtful to their loved ones. Have teens become so desensitized that they are completely unfeeling in regards to death?
But I can’t help thinking that perhaps teens don’t mean the selfies to be offensive. They are just so used to taking pictures of themselves wherever they go that they don’t stop to think about what affect a funeral selfie may have. Yet teens seem to know that there is something wrong with the pictures – if they didn’t, one example of a funeral selfie wouldn’t ask, “This is a funeral selfie, am I going to hell?” Or worse still, snapping a shot with the deceased behind them; “My friend took a selfie at a funeral and didn’t realize his dead Grandma was in the background. I can’t breathe.”
The maelstrom of media backlash will hopefully soon come to an end (and the funeral selfie phenomenon along with it) due to Feifer’s decision to end the tumblr when what he considers the ultimate selfie was taken: On Dec. 10, 2013, Obama took a selfie along with the Danish and British prime ministers at Mandela’s memorial service. Granted, the occasion wasn’t a funeral per se, but you get the point.
While social media has quite clearly changed our lives in regard to the ways in which we express ourselves, funeral selfies are a selfish, conceited and disrespectful way to portray our feelings. I argue that these selfies show the world how much teenagers care about themselves rather than the person whose funeral they are attending. After all, a funeral is meant to be a day that celebrates the life of the dead, mourns their passing and provides an opportunity for their friends and family to say goodbye. Surely teens can give the attention to others for one day. Although maybe unintentionally, Jason Feifer’s blog uses an occasion we are all familiar with to illustrate a cultural phenomenon and cleverly critique society today. While not all funerals are somber events, the fact that the tumblr elicited such a remarkable reaction from society and the media shows that proper “funeral etiquette” is universal. So next time you’re at a funeral, think twice before you decide to whip out your phone and snap a quick pic. You never know who might be behind you.
[Dedicated to JWF for his unfailing support and encouragement – thanks a million times]
Julie Huff
The Silhouette
My friends and I have long claimed that a woman’s wardrobe is not complete without one pair of Lululemon pants and a scuba hoodie. I have spent most Tuesday mornings scanning Lululemon Athletica’s website for their weekly product uploads and Sunday nights scouring the “We Made Too Much” section (that’s Lulu’s fancy way of saying “on sale”). But over the past year, my Lulu addiction has slowly diminished.
Simply put, their clothes are not what they used to be. Lululemon’s signature luon fabric and Groove pants are what made them famous, yet customers have lately been experiencing sheerness with their once-beloved pants. Last March, Lululemon was forced to pull thousands of Wunder Unders and Groove pants off their shelves, causing stocks to take a “downward dog” and CEO Christine Day to step down (although she will not leave until they find a replacement). But it is not only women who find that Lulu leaves much to be desired. Even men have noticed a quality decline in the Game On boxer briefs and five-year basic Tees (yes, I read the men’s reviews, too).
What has been the cause of this mishap? Some suggest that Lulu has gotten too big for its britches. Founded by Chip Wilson in 1998 and based out of Vancouver, B.C., Lululemon Athletica was celebrated for being an all-Canadian company. But Lulu has begun to outsource. Although the tags on their clothes boast that they are designed in Vancouver, they also state that they are actually made in Vietnam, China, and other parts of Asia. While outsourcing is not necessarily the reason why Lulu’s quality has declined, it certainly seems to be a contributing factor. Lulu is blamed for having become too greedy. They’re using cheaper fabrics, yet their prices continue to rise.
Last week, Lulu experienced yet another setback. On Nov. 5, Bloomberg TV interviewed Wilson in an attempt to respond to the latest issue with the luon pant: pilling. Women claim that their pants pill between the thighs after only a few uses and washes. This seems to be an issue only with pants that have been made recently, as women say that their ten-year-old luon pants show little signs of wear. But it is not this design flaw that has taken center stage. Instead, it is Wilson’s response to the latest scandal that has incited a roar of media backlash. When Wilson was asked why the pants are pilling, he replied:
“Quite frankly, some women’s bodies just actually don’t work for [the pants]. It’s really about the rubbing of the thighs, how much pressure is there over a period of time and how much they use it.”
Wilson implies that Lululemon is not made for “plus-sized” women. While this may not be so, Lululemon Athletica is indeed made for athletes, and not all athletes have a gap between their thighs. Wilson’s remarks suggest that only thin women are athletic, therefore only thin women can wear Lululemon. Instead of promoting a healthy lifestyle, Wilson employs the image of a thin woman to endorse his company.
For some women, being fit does mean a slim body type. But the fact is that healthy and athletic body types come in all shapes and sizes. Women who are “plus-sized” (what Lulu considers size 14 and up) can be equally athletic as women who are, say, a size 4. As a company who claims that it endorses health, fitness and wellbeing, Lululemon should exemplify this definition through a myriad of body types instead of casting only one image as a representation of their company. Wilson has been accused of “fat shaming” women. After all, what kind of message does Lululemon convey by suggesting that only thin women are athletic and healthy?
After being confronted by the media, Wilson addressed his interview with Bloomberg and “apologized.” He stated:
“I’m sad for the flagyl 250mg repercussions of my actions, I’m sad for the people of Lululemon who I care so much about that have really had to face the brunt of my actions. I take responsibility for all that has occurred, and the impact it has had on you.”
But Wilson’s “apology” leaves me bereft. He’s not apologizing to his customers or the public, but rather apologizing to his employees. Wilson needs to stop blaming women for Lululemon’s declining quality and instead take responsibility. Perhaps he should read Lulu’s manifesto and pay specific attention to these words: “The world moves at such a rapid rate that waiting to implement changes will leave you two steps behind. Do it now, do it now, do it now!” Yes, Lululemon. Improve the quality of your product now. Do it before customers become so frustrated that they leave.
Although customers’ complaints prove that women are sorely disappointed with Lululemon’s quality decline, they are not ready to give up on the yoga-inspired company. Indeed, Lulu has a cult-like following and has inspired a “Lululemon culture” that seems to be aimed toward the elite. Lululemon is a status symbol. Their high prices and high quality products once attracted certain “elite” customers, and while they still do, Lulu needs to be careful because their products don’t seem to be so high quality anymore. The fact that customers have cried out for Lulu to improve their product instead of just walking away from stores highlights how well loved the company is. Lululemon needs to listen to their customers’ plea.
My final words: The fact that Lululemon has not maintained the quality of their clothing is a bad reflection of the company, but the fact that customers keep going back despite their disappointment is a bad reflection of the customers. Lulu seems to be unwilling to adjust their clothing to fit a more diverse group of women, but women shouldn’t try to change their bodies to fit a certain type of clothing. Women need to find clothes that fit them and make them feel good. Lululemon Athletica was great before. They can be great again. But women shouldn’t have to wait around for them to change. Move on, shop around, and try something new.
