Nation Mobilizes Against Distressed Denim
BEDFORD, N.Y. —Martha Stewart dressed as a homeless person for Halloween, and America reacted as though she had personally evicted everyone in the country.
The 85-year-old lifestyle entrepreneur wore torn clothing, smudged her face and held a sign asking for food. She then apologized after online critics concluded that the nation’s housing crisis had somehow been worsened by a woman who normally recommends twelve-dollar napkin rings.
Apparently, Halloween now requires a background check, an ethics review and written consent from every profession represented by the costume.
Dress as a pirate? That’s insensitive to maritime workers. A vampire? Offensive to blood donors. A ghost? Consider the bereaved. A billionaire? Please provide documentary evidence of inherited wealth.
Martha’s actual crime was forgetting that Americans are permitted to ignore homelessness for 364 days but must display intense concern whenever a celebrity mentions it on October 31.
Why the Martha Stewart Costume Backlash Went Viral
Dale Pruitt, 61, who lives two streets over from the Bedford farm, said he first saw the photograph on his wife’s phone at breakfast. “I figured somebody had finally cleaned up that property and the help was out front asking for leftovers,” Pruitt said. “Then my wife told me it was Martha. By lunch I had an opinion about denim.”
Pruitt said he has never volunteered at a shelter or donated to a local housing group. He added that he “felt it very strongly,” and that he had told four people at the hardware store so.
This is how it works now. A photograph appears, a feeling arrives, and the feeling gets filed under activism before anyone has touched a single can of soup.
A Costume Gets More Attention Than a Crisis
Stewart said she wanted to raise awareness of homelessness. Her critics called the outfit insensitive. Both things can be true, but only one generated enough outrage to keep the internet employed all weekend.
People who had not discussed housing policy since their last rent increase suddenly became experts in the symbolism of distressed denim.
The photograph included a plea for food. In a functioning country, that might prompt questions about food insecurity. Online, the urgent question was whether the cardigan had been ethically distressed.
It didn’t help that her Halloween post also promoted candles. This gave critics a splendid opening: a wealthy woman combining marketing with suffering! Next they’ll discover that politicians raise campaign money while discussing poverty. It also overlooked the fact that Stewart is the same woman who hands out cash to trick-or-treaters, which is more than most of the people yelling at her have ever handed out to anyone.
A Hudson Valley Civic Pulse survey of 1,100 adults found that 71 percent felt “deeply troubled” by the costume. Nine percent could name a homeless shelter in their own county. Pollsters said the two groups overlapped almost completely.
Yet the strange thing about the backlash is how little it asks of anybody. Scolding Martha is free. Funding a shelter costs money. Demanding an apology takes six seconds. Volunteering requires shoes, transportation and occasionally speaking to another human being without a phone between you.
And Martha apologized. Twice. Evidently, the first apology lacked sufficient remorse per square inch.
Halloween Costume Sensitivity Rules Nobody Asked For
The Department of Halloween Sensitivity, which exists wherever three people can form a group chat, is now expected to issue approved costumes: a pumpkin with no agricultural implications, a cloud that does not endorse climate change, and a plain beige rectangle representing absolutely nothing.
None will be acceptable by Thursday.
Minutes from an emergency session of the Bedford Porch Standards Committee, obtained Monday, show members voted 6-1 to condemn the costume and 7-0 to form a subcommittee on condemning. A motion to open a shelter in the parish hall was tabled because the room was reserved for the cookie exchange. The lone dissenting member asked whether anyone had looked up what a shelter bed costs. The question was entered as “noted.”
What Homelessness Policy Actually Needs
Homelessness is serious. That’s exactly why the national response should involve housing, treatment where needed, safer streets and practical help, rather than pretending a Halloween photograph is the central obstacle to progress. The annual point-in-time count measures the problem every January. It has never once measured a costume.
Stewart’s costume may have been awkward. It was not a housing policy. The people who are angry are entitled to be angry. They are not entitled to confuse their anger with having solved anything.
And if Martha really did bring more attention to homelessness, America might consider doing something shocking with it, like reading what the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness has already published on what works.
Help somebody.
Five Humorous Observations on the Martha Stewart Halloween Backlash
- You ever notice we’ll argue for six hours online about a costume, but ask us to carry one bag of groceries to a shelter and suddenly everybody’s got a bad back?
- Martha apologized twice. Twice! In my house, that’s called a marriage.
- Somebody out there has a spreadsheet of approved Halloween costumes, and I promise you that person has never been invited to a party.
- Twelve-dollar napkin rings. Who is buying these? I can’t hold onto a napkin. I use my sleeve like a pioneer.
- The woman hands out actual cash to trick-or-treaters, and nobody says a word. One costume, and she’s a villain. Those kids got a better deal from her than I’ve ever gotten from my congressman.