Video 1 - Gardener
Video 2 - Lifeguard
Video 3 - School Board Member
Video 4 - Dermatologist
Video 5 - Insurance Representative
Video 6 - Athlete
Video 7 - Tanning Enthusiast
Video 8 - Person of Color
Video 9 - Pediatrician
Video 10 - Fashion Consultant
Video 11 - Motorcyclist
Video 12 - Person with Cancer
Excuse me, but who does this law apply to? To the kid? To his parents? To his boss? 'Cause I'm the boss. If I hire a kid to rake leaves, do I have to supply the cover-up clothes? Do I have to make sure the kid wears them? And who gets fined? Me or the person who owns the property? What does OSHA say about this? If I have to watch and make sure these kids keep their hats on, the cheap labor will not be worth it.
There have to be exceptions. I can't be a lifeguard if I have to wear coveralls. I mean, what do I do, undress when I have to save someone? The person would drown. And what about me? I'll be hot. And nobody will get to see me in a bathing suit.
I commend the representative for this bill. But I would ask where the responsibility for enforcement will lie. I hope it will rest in the home. The school, and the entire school district, have been asked to assume too many parental responsibilities. Our teachers can't use their valuable time checking to see if somebody is engaging in unsafe sunning. And what, may I ask, about students who can't afford cover-ups? Will the school be required to purchase them? This is a complicated and potentially very expensive problem.
The incidence of skin cancer has increased dramatically in the past two decades, probably because of our modern obsession with sun tanning. The correlation between most skin cancer and sun exposure has been established for years. The people with the highest risk are the ones with fair skin, blue eyes, light hair, lots of moles. In other words, the ones who burn easily and don't tan. I've seen estimates that 50 to 80 percent of a person's UV exposure occurs before age 18. And only 15 percent regularly wear sun screen. A bill like this might drastically reduce the incidence of skin cancer.
We have to start to contain our skyrocketing health care costs. The insurance companies are very concerned about saving the consumer money. Sure, we could offer lower rates to fully dressed people if we could tell who they were. People might be frustrated at first, but then they'll start to appreciate the benefits, just like they did when wearing seat belts became law. If we can eliminate a few thousand cases of skin cancer by making kids cover up, we'll have the resources to deal with other pressing health problems.
This law can't apply to me. I'm trying to break an outdoor record. I can't do that in cover-ups. My muscles can't be bunched up and confined; they have to be free. And the heat and the weight of all those extra clothes. And the wind resistance. Even a hat makes extra wind resistance. I know a guy who lost a race 'cause his headband caught the air and slowed him down. Really.
What's important to you? Your car? Your music? Your friends? Well, my tan is important to me. It tells me who I am. I work hard on it, and people say, "Nice tan," and I feel good. I know it's a small thing, but it's my self-esteem. I need this tan, and nobody has the right to take it away from me. And you know what? If they make it illegal for me to get to the beach, I'll go to a tanning booth. They're not illegal yet.
This law is too broad. I don't tan and I don't burn: I am immune to it. So, why should I have to drape myself in all kinds of ridiculous extra clothing? Make a law for the pale people. Leave my people alone.
We think that children are immune to cancer, that it's an old person's disease. Well, childhood is where it starts. Sunburn at an early age increases the incidence of melanomas: the more frequent and earlier the sunburn, the more likely the chance of skin cancer. Personally, I would like to make sure that this law has teeth and that it specifically targets students in schools where they can be taught about the relationship between sun exposure and skin cancer.
The Western standard of beauty hasn't always been the even tan. Historically, pale skin was the standard. Pale skin meant you had others to do your work, tend your fields. It meant wealth. And because the wealthy people were setting the standard, it also meant beauty. Rich people who didn't have pale skin lightened it with powder or other make-up. This same set of values appeared throughout the world, wherever there were pale people, from the Mediterranean to the Far East. Dark skin became a sign of inferiority, which figured into slavery and racism in the New World. Now, of course, dark skin, a tan, is the sign of the leisurely life. Now we have the white people flocking to the beaches or the tanning salons to darken their skin, some even painting on artificial tans. A pale skin means you're some kind of peasant working in the basement.
I don't wear a helmet because it's the law; I wear it because I don't want to get hurt if I fall. I ride my bike because it's a great way to get to work; other people ride because it's their personal self-expression. They don't want to wear a helmet, I don't think they should have to. Same with sunblock and big-brimmed hats. If that's how somebody wants to dress, fine. But don't force people.
Do you know what it's like to have cancer and what it puts you through mentally? The fear? Do you know what treatment is really like? How hard it is? And you're telling me that covering up is just too much hassle? Do you know what it's like to be me? I would give anything, anything not to have it. If there had been a law, I would have covered up, and you're telling me that covering up is just too much hassle. You have no idea, no idea.
Copyright | Credits | Accessibility