unit 05 — people-watching
Preface: I’m simply going to state observances and relate them to historically associated behaviors. I’m not comfortable extrapolating socioeconomic or plausible familial assumptions about individuals’ backgrounds because I know it to be folly and don’t have the time required to address every possible caveat.
Person 1
She’s leaning forward in her chair on the patio outside the bar, far enough forward to raise her short, tight-fitting shirt just high enough to reveal [what’s traditionally known as] a tramp-stamp. It’s of tribal design. Her hair is cut to chin length, damaged from too many years of bleach treatments. The roots still show. She wears it messily in a sort of care-free way scrambled atop her head. Her make-up, heavy and bleeding from her eyes, indicates she’s still in last night’s clothes. That explains the hair.
It appears to me she is likely sexually promiscuous and went out the previous night to “get some.” If I had to guess, it was a successful endeavor. Though externally confident and brassy, something in her demeanor/appearance betrays her and, I suspect, reveals underlying self-esteem issues. Her dress, hair, make-up, tattoo, hair – I’ve seen them all a thousand times before. Maybe a million. It’s what I would define as the cookie-cutter image of a “sexually desirable girl” – dressed for objectification, imitating media icons. Though I suspect the only things she cuts are herself – maybe not for a long time, and only in the dark light of blackout – and the occasional line of coke.
Person 2
He’s slumped over in the corner, eyes covered by dark shades, wearing a shirt that’s too baggy and long for his thin frame. It’s stained and wrinkled with a few holes in its fabric. He’s wearing athletic shorts – also baggy and long—and a cap – the kind one might acquire as a promotional item.
He doesn’t appear concerned with his appearance – but not in the good way, the way one might not care what others think. I don’t believe he cares about himself. It’s true he may just be financially destitute and living under inspired circumstances, unable to afford nicer clothes, but based on context – the bar – I don’t think that indicates self-worth. I don’t believe spending what little money you have, if indeed the case, on getting drunk is an investment in the self. It’s self-destructive. It just appears defeated – as though he’s given up on himself. I think it’s a bit sad.
Person 3
The bartender is dressed inconspicuously in black from head to toe. She’s clearly spent time styling her hair. It’s blonde with shades of light brown, bouncing in curly tendrils as she cheerfully mixes the next drink. Her make-up is clean, and she has an overall fresh look about her – warm and inviting. She’s in pants and restaurant grade shoes – dressed for utility.
I think her overall appearance gives the impression of someone who takes pride in her appearance, and her work. I suspect – as I observe her retrieve a pack of cigarettes from her shiny, strappy, label-glittering purse – that she appreciates “nice” things and is willing to work hard for them. I think her appearance is important to her, in the most agreeable sense of the idea, but not as important as professional faculty while on the clock. I think all of these things demonstrate conventionally desirable character and inherent self-worth.
As my preface implies, I think these extrapolations indicate less about my value/belief systems and more about a compilation of catalogued experiences. I don’t place personal value judgments on any of these folks – just stating, in my experience, the highest percentage yield from each respective persona.
To begin, I’m curious about the reasoning behind your preface. You say that you don’t feel comfortable making familial/background assumptions about the people you observed, but the tenor of your writing seems to make some assumptions based on appearance—where do those assumptions come from if not your own values/beliefs? I don’t mean values and beliefs as in valuing family or independence, I mean it in terms of social constructs that have been built into our society through stereotypes. Particularly with your first observation, language such as “tramp-stamp” and qualifying that her hair was damaged from “too many years” seems to me to imply cultural devaluation of this type of physical appearance. This crosses over to how you seem to view her as sexually promiscuous, and connect these things together to assume that she has “underlying self-esteem issues.” Is it possible that she could just have a differing value system or personality from your own background, and maybe this could translate into how you view her appearance? I don’t mean to challenge your opinions, I’m just curious about your perspective of keeping your own values and beliefs separate from how you view people. In my experience, it is very difficult not to be informed by the background of your own value constructs, but if you have a different experience I’d be interested to hear it.
You are welcome to challenge my opinion and bring up many interesting points. I think that’s what makes a class designed in this sort of fashion so engaging.
What I said in my preface is that I wasn’t comfortable extrapolating certain kinds of information (as defined in the preface) that the assignment may have asked us to attempt, because, in my own experience, there are too many possible reasons a person might present themselves as they do. Ie: Drug addicts don’t only come from one set of backgrounds. I have seen this sort of behavior develop from every niche of social life and would not be comfortable relegating a persons past development to a specific influence based on current appearance. It doesn’t seem accurate. I hope that helps explain?
Regarding the use of the term “tramp stamp,” I included the parenthetical “traditionally known as” for a reason. While maybe not a part of my vernacular, I suspect folks at large know exactly what location on the body the tattoo existed when when referred to in such a way? The same is true of my description of her hair. It wasn’t intended to devalue her in a anyway, but was simply an observance. I think we all know what bleach-damaged hair looks like, no? Brevity is everyone’s friend.
The reason I suspected sexual promiscuity — which is not inherently bad, or good, or anything — was that she was clearly wearing clothes from the night before (and overheard her say as much, as well as a fair bit about still being able to smell the ass of the man she had her fingers in the night before), her make-up looked like she had slept on/through it (again, I think we all know what that looks like), and she had bed-head.
I say I don’t make any personal judgments on her, or the other folks, because I don’t. I think there separation between stating observances and making a value judgment — again contained in my preface. Personally I thought she was hilarious and would totally “kick it” with her.
I would agree that it is difficult not to be informed by personal background, but I also know that I’ve experienced a more-than-decent amount of marginalization in my own life and make a concerted effort not to reduce other folks to projections of me.
Anyway, I hope that all serves to explain where I am coming from — at least somewhat — and that you didn’t feel in any way personally slandered.
Thank you for responding, and no I did not feel personally slandered at all. I was more just curious because I have experience with researching the use and connotations of language, and how those inform cultural values, so I was wondering if this had an influence on your word choice. I understand your reasoning, and I assumed that you were more just relying on phrases and imagery that is easily recognizable. I was partially bringing it up because I feel that those images exist from stereotypes, and I was curious what your perceptions of them were. Thanks for elaborating though!