Whatever Happened to RainFurrest?

There used to be a fairly large #furry convention in Seattle called #RainFurrest. RainFurrest conventions occurred annually beginning in 2007 and ran through 2015 for a total of 9 conventions. Attendance for the inaugural 2007 convention was 370. This grew steadily until it reached its highest attendance of 2,704 attendees in 2015. Unfortunately, 2015 was the last RainFurrest convention to occur. What happened?

RainFurrest 2015 was a 4-day event that began on Sept. 24, 2015 and ran through Sept. 28, 2015. From what we have been able to uncover, a myriad of problems that occurred at this final convention is what brought about the end of RainFurrest. While not all of the information that lead to RainFurrest’s demise has ever been published, enough information exists to get a good idea as to what probably occurred. What it essentially boils down to is multiple types of inappropriate behavior & activities that some of the convention attendees had engaged in while at the convention’s venue: the Hilton Hotel located near the Seattle-Tacoma airport (known as Seatac).

The full extent of what had occurred at RainFurrest 2015 came out in small chunks, the first of which appears to be a letter to attendees from the RainFurrest board that was posted on Reddit. While the letter begins by mentioning many of the good things that occurred at the convention, it includes a list of problems identified by the RainFurrest board that occurred at the hotel:

  • For the last few years, the Hilton sustained more damage during RainFurrest than it did from every other event at the Hilton the entire rest of the year. This doesn’t even include damage to guest rooms or other incidental wear and tear like the elevators.

  • This year’s incidents include two plumber calls, a flooded bathroom that soaked the offices underneath, towels stuffed into a hot tub pump, and multiple petty vandalisms and thefts. A final damage report is still being compiled.

  • We had to send three people to the hospital and call the police twice.

  • By Sunday morning of con this year, the hotel was so exasperated that they were threatening to evict attendees for single noise complaints.

But this wasn’t all. Hilton’s headquarters sent a letter to RainFurrest that included a long list of complaints:

* Two attendee drug overdoses that required medical response and hospitalization for both attendees;
*Over 2000 spend nitrous oxide cartridges which are used as an illegal inhalant were found discarded in a guest corridor after the group checked out;
*A drug arrest in the adjacent parking lot of a person that police believe had ties to the RainFurrest group;
*A RainFurrest volunteer staff member was reported to have sexually assaulted a female attendee (the responding Sheriff charged the man);
*A guest room smoke detector was tampered with and discarded in a guest corridor;
*An elevator inner door cable was broken by an attendee trying to force the door open;
*A RainFurrest security staff member was seen using marijuana;
*Hilton received a phone call and follow up e-mail from an attendee complaining about rampant drug use and alcohol consumption that was allowed by RainFurrest staff.

While we’re not sure when Hilton’s headquarters sent their letter, it was probably sometime in October, 2015 as suggested by a Feb. 5, 2016 post on the RainFurrest website explaining that RainFurrest organizers had been looking for a new venue for 2016 since October, but had failed to find one. A snippet of that post is listed below:

“As many of you know, RainFurrest has been in search of a new venue since October 2015. We have discussed and explored facilities in many wonderful areas, finding options with a number of excellent venues in Greater Seattle and western Washington state. Our hard-working hotel team has fought for every possible option that would suit what our fans want out of RainFurrest. Tonight, the last of those options has closed to us.”

Hence, RainFurrest 2016 never occurred. After the search for a willing venue in western Washington (which is closest to Seattle) had been exhausted, attempts had even been made to move the event to Spokane, which is in eastern Washington; but according the Tank Winters (a.k.a., Trapa), someone had sent letters to the hotel in Spokane that encouraged them not to sign a convention contract with RainFurrest. (That is further explained in the video that we posted below.) RainFurrest was then completely shut down in or before February, 2017, which is when the final tweet was made on the RainFurrest Twitter account saying farewell.

The following video is from a 2016 convention panel in Vancouver, B.C. with Tank Winters (a.k.a., Trapa) who was one of the organizers & board members of RainFurrest. He gave a rather detailed look into what happened at and after the final 2015 RainFurrest convention, as well as the attempts to have a 2016 convention at a different venue.

Another YouTube video was posted in early 2017 summarizing everything that had occurred at RainFurrest 2015 and why the convention could not find another venue. Some of the things in this video are exaggerated, but it still gives an idea as to what was occurring:

A longtime RainFurrest attendee & helper also posted a video blog regarding his thoughts on RainFurrest in Feb. 2016.

From everything we’ve seen, the number one problem that got RainFurrest shut down was drug use by some attendees at the final 2015 convention. Residents of Washington state had approved the use of recreational cannabis in 2012 and the first recreational cannabis stores in Washington opened to the public on July 8, 2014. That, however, didn’t obligate hotels like the Hilton to permit the use of cannabis at their locations. Unfortunately, some attendees chose to ignore this prohibition by the hotel and used cannabis anyway, along with a variety of other prohibited drugs and inhalants.

The question is, did all of the attendees truly understand that drugs couldn’t be used at the hotel? When we read the RainFurrest 2015 Code of Conduct, there is actually no mention of drugs in the Code of Conduct at all. While there is a reference to following the hotel’s rules and policies,

“As a convention attendee, you are a guest of the hotel and must abide by the hotel’s rules and policies whenever you are on the premises.”

there was no link to what those hotel rules and policies were as of 2015. This, in our opinion, was something that the RainFurrest board failed to publicize.

While tampering with a smoke detector was probably a major issue for the hotel (due to liability), we strongly believe that the lack of adequate security provided by the RainFurrest board was the other major contributing factor to the demise of the convention.

Thus, drug use and lack of security (plus all of the vandalism that occurred at the hotel) greatly damaged the reputation of the RainFurrest convention, its attendees and its board. While the problems were likely only due to a small number of attendees, it was enough to harm the entire convention.

As we posted in April of this year, the public perception of costumers, cosplayers & furries is the responsibility of all costumers, cosplayers & furries. Once reputation has been damaged, it’s usually very difficult to rebuild.

References

Advertisements

Public Perceptions of Costumers, Cosplayers & Furries: Who’s Responsible?

All #costumers, #cosplayers & #furries share one common responsibility: public perception. That public perception applies to the fandom(s) being represented by costumers, cosplayers & furries; the perceived reason(s) why costumers, cosplayers & furries dress up in #costumes; and (most importantly) the types of activities that costumers, cosplayers & furries engage in while in costume.

Any time that costumers, cosplayers or furries are in costume in a public space, members of the general public who are not costumers, cosplayers or furries themselves will also be present and they will be able to observe what the costumers, cosplayers or furries are doing while they are in costume. A public space could be a public park, a city street, a convention center, a hotel lobby, etc.

Who are the members of the general public? They are, in all likelihood, a combination of adults and underaged children. Also, members of the general public are going to be a cross-section of society itself, which includes a myriad of beliefs, as well as a myriad of ethical, moral and political points of view.

While there will always be a wide variances in the points of view that different people have, there are also going to be some points of view that are probably going to be commonly held by most people when they pertain to intimate behaviors between people who are in a public space and how acceptable those intimate behaviors are.

  • Some types of intimate behaviors that are likely going to be regarded by most people as being acceptable while in a public space include a couple holding hands; family members or friends hugging each other; someone kissing another on the cheek; a brief kiss on the lips between adults; etc.
  • Some types of intimate behaviors that are more likely going to be regarded by most people as being unacceptable while in a public space include very long passionate kisses on the lips; physical contact that is more than a simply embracing or hugging; touching parts of the body that are never shown while in a public space; etc. At this level, these types of intimate behaviors can cross over to being regarded as sexual; and anything construed to being a sexual activity or imitating a sexual activity while in a public space is probably not going to be an acceptable behavior.

Let’s ask a question: what may happen if people (the ‘participants) are observed by others (the ‘observers’) while they are actively participating in unacceptable intimate or sexual behaviors while in a public space?

Obviously, many (if not most) of the observers are going to quickly develop a very poor opinion of the participants. But it doesn’t end there: if the participants are identified as being part of a specific group, there’s a good chance that many of the observers are also going to associate other members of that same group with that behavior, then apply the same poor opinion to other group members even though they weren’t involved. It also won’t necessarily matter if the group as a whole doesn’t condone that type of unacceptable public behavior: they’ll still bear the burden of that low opinion caused by the actions of a few.

Now, let’s take this up a notch. We live in a very interconnected society thanks to the Internet and smart phones that include cameras capable of taking both pictures and videos. If an observer takes out his or her smart phone and takes pictures or or video of the participants as they are actively engaged in an unacceptable public behavior, then that observer shares those pictures or video on the Internet, what’s going to happen? Within a matter of seconds the total number of observers will increase from a handful of people to potentially millions of people.

As we have discussed in past posts, some costumers & cosplayers are members of costume clubs; and many costume clubs have written charters that include codes of conduct that define specific types of behaviors that are not acceptable for costume club members to engage in while in costume or otherwise representing the club. Why? To maintain a positive public perception of the costume club and its members. Members who engage in an activity that violates the costume club’s code of conduct face potential punishment that could include suspension from the club or even banishment.

Similarly, many businesses and corporations require their employees to take annual training in order to prevent the employees from engaging in behavior that could potentially cause a negative public perception of the company,  which could undermine the company’s bottom line: it’s ability to conduct business and make money. If an employee violates a company’s policies, he or she may be suspended, be put on probation or possibly be terminated.

So, who then bears the responsibility of public perception in the costuming, cosplay & furry communities? We all do!!!

Are there any examples of what could go wrong when one or more costumers, cosplayers or furries engages in unacceptable behaviors while in a public space? Unfortunately, yes; and the most recent occurrence that we are aware occurred at “Furry Weekend Atlanta” (FWA) two weeks ago. Ironically, our previous post was about the dance contest that occurred at FWA.

2 weeks ago, 2 individuals (presumably men) dressed as human pups (by wearing what is typically viewed as being fetish attire) started to play with each other as puppies in the hotel lobby where FWA was occurring. The 2 individuals wrestled with each other and then one got on top of the other and remained there for roughly 30 seconds, which gave the appearance that some sexual stimulation was occurring in that position. As these 2 individuals were engaged in this actively, other furries were walking by, as well as members of the general public. Then, one of the FWA attendees who was on a balcony overlooking the lobby took video of the 2 individuals and did what? Posted an edited video emphasizing the 30-second period when one of them was on top of the other onto their personal Twitter feed. The backlash was immediate and includes an unflattering article in a well-known British publication.

We learned about this incident from the World of Rooview YouTube channel:

One very important distinction that Roo points out is the difference between fursuiting and the adult activity known as “pup play”:

  • Fursuiting is the creation of anthropomorphic characters through costuming. Anthropomorphism is the attribution of human traits, emotions, or intentions to non-human entities, including animals and animal characters.
  • “Pup play” is an adult activity in which one or more humans behave like a puppy. It is a type of zoomorphism, which is the attribution of animal behaviors and characteristics to humans (or other things). Thus, it is the opposite of anthropomorphism.

While the 2 “pup play” participants that were publicly wrestling with each other in the hotel lobby were not wearing fursuits at the time they were filmed, there is a presumption that they were also FWA attendees because they were wearing fetish pup play attire. Whether or not they were actually FWA attendees, they’re costumes associated them with FWA, other furries in attendance and the broader furry community at large. Had these 2 individuals only engaged in this activity in a more private location (such as their hotel room or some other site away from FWA) then this would not have become an issue. Also, had the person who filmed their questionable public activity taken their concerns to an FWA representative instead of posting it online for millions of people to see, then this would not now be associating FWA or the furry community as a whole due to the actions of only 2 participants.

Our request here is simple: if you are in costume in a public space, please do not engage in behavior that could be deemed as sexual, imitating sexual activity or be otherwise interpreted as being inappropriate or unacceptable in a public setting. Because if you do, it can reflect poorly on everyone in the hobby.

References:

What is Fursuiting?

Of the various forms of #costuming & #cosplay, one of the forms that has a very vibrant & creative community are the #furries. Furries (or #fursuiters) are people who dress up as anthropomorphic animal characters, usually ones that they have created themselves and that may be a combination of 2 or more types of animals put together. The characters may appear like very realistic animals, but they are often very colorful and cartoonish in appearance, which makes sense because many fursuiters take inspiration from anthropomorphic animal characters from cartoons and animes.

Furries typically congregate at furry-themed conventions, though some may attend more generalized comic or anime conventions. They also have their groups and clubs where they like to get together. Their main method of communication is the Internet, with sites like Fur Affinity and many others.

Unfortunately, some cosplayers & costumers who aren’t furries don’t have positive opinions of furries; but in our opinion, these views are not justified because furries are technically no different from any other cosplayers & costumers: they design, create and wear costumes for both having fun and for charity work.

The biggest differences between furries and other costumes & cosplayers is that furries tend to emphasize the design of their own characters (as well as what furries call a “fursona”, which is the furry equivalent to a persona), while most costumers and cosplayers typically wear a costume that represents an existing character from a specific sci-fi, fantasy, superhero/super-villain, etc., franchise (or is a custom costume based on existing characters). Also, the vast majority of costumes worn by non-furry costumers & cosplayers aren’t based on a furry character. Exceptions include (but are not limited to) Chewbacca (from Star Wars), wampas (also from Star Wars), Rocket Raccoon (from Guardians of the Galaxy), etc. All of these mentioned characters are anthropomorphic characters.

If costumers & cosplayers (who don’t consider themselves to be furries) can wear furry-based costumes, so can furries. Thus, furries are just as much a part of the overall costuming & cosplay community as any other costumers & cosplayers and should always be treated as such.

If you want to know more about furries, we highly recommend viewing this student-made documentary about furries that was created for a film class in 2016. Check out the reasons that many people become furries and you’ll hear reasons that are essentially identical to why people become non-furry cosplayers & costumers.

References:

The Odd Direction for Kylo Ren in “Star Wars: The Last Jedi” by Disney & LucasFilm

*** Spoilers *** For those who haven’t yet seen “#StarWars VIII: #TheLastJedi”, you may wish to not read this article yet.

The villainous character Kylo Ren was first introduced into the “Star Wars” franchise in the franchise’s seventh film, “The Force Awakens”. In this movie, he is usually seen wearing his now well-known black helmet as depicted below.

Masked Kylo Ren

Masked Kylo Ren

Now, here’s where the spoilers start. If you started to read this article, but haven’t yet seen “The Last Jedi”, you should stop here.

While Kylo Ren did show his face a few times in “The Force Awakens”, in “The Last Jedi”, Kylo is verbally punished & ridiculed by Supreme Leader Snoke in his throne room aboard Snoke’s massive ship. When Kylo leaves the throne room, he enters an elevator where he has a temper tantrum (he had several temper tantrums in “The Force Awakens”). During the temper tantrum, he smashes his beloved helmet (which Snoke had criticized) into tiny pieces by slamming it against the elevator’s walls several times.

(While one of the trailers showed Kylo Ren destroying his helmet, the reasons weren’t shown. This was the spoiler that we wanted to warn people about.)

Kylo Ren Holding His Helmet

Kylo Ren holding his helmet in the elevator in the movie “Star Wars VIII: The Last Jedi” before he destroys it.

Since this scene occurs early in the movie, Kylo Ren is never seen with the helmet on again; he’s only seen with his face.

This appears to be an odd decision by Disney & LucasFilm, which had poured tons of money into marketing Kylo Ren-based products, including costumes and helmet replicas. Most #cosplayers & #costumers who donned a Kylo Ren #costume included what had become his iconic helmet. By destroying the iconic helmet, it’s not clear whether Kylo Ren costumes will remain as popular, especially since the film has had a mixed reaction from fans. Only time will tell.

It will be interesting to see where Disney & LucasFilm go next with Kylo Ren in Episode IX.

Trailer from “Star Wars VIII: The Last Jedi”:

Cosplayers & Crowdfunding: Not a Good Idea

For most, #costuming & #cosplay is a hobby. As such, should #crowdfunding be used to support the activity? Over the past few years, a number of #costumers & #cosplayers have resorted to the practice of #crowdfunding to support their hobby, often citing that the intent is to attend fundraising events in #costume to raise money for charity. In other words, they want charity from others to raise money for charity.

Now, if you reside in the United States and periodically donate money to charities that are registers non-profit organizations, those donations are tax-deductible. However, money given to individuals in pursuit of a hobby is not. That is simply a cash gift being made to an individual who may or may not use it for the purpose cited in the crowdfunding advert they wrote to obtain the monetary gifts.

Crowdfunding is a wonderful tool. When someone is trying to start a business or is in financial trouble and is desperately seeking money to make ends meet because of an unexpected costly life event (such as a medical problem, uninsured property damage, etc.), then crowdfunding is an excellent way for such individuals to start the business or to potentially stay financially afloat until they get back on their feet.

However, is the pursuit of a personal hobby (such as costuming & cosplay) similarly worthy of asking others to fund it through the use of crowdfunding? In our personal opinion, no it is not.

Cosplayer Ani-Mia posted on this subject on her personal Facebook page on May 11, 2015. Below is an excerpt from her post that she wrote. (Warning: some may find it upsetting.)

“Cosplayers, it is not the responsibilities of your fans to pay for your next costume, to send you on a trip or to a con. That is called personal financial responsibility. And before the arguments begin let me tell you that this is all coming from someone who sees so much behind the scenes garbage that fans and contributors don’t see. What you don’t see is that many cosplayers that do this spend their money frivolously on unnecessary wants, meals out and events with friends; say they are broke but then conveniently are able to attend a convention for fun and a slew of other lies that make me so ashamed at what this community is becoming.”


We agree completely with the substance of Ani-Mia’s Facebook page post and want to focus on one item in particular: personal financial responsibility. What is personal financial responsibility? According to Investopedia,

“What does it mean to be financially responsible? It’s a complex question with a complex answer, but at its core is a simple truth: to be financially responsible, you need to live within your means. And to live within your means, you must spend less than you make!”

When a costumer or cosplayer sets up a personal crowdfunding campaign to support their hobby, here’s what that is actually saying: that the costumer or cosplayer is NOT living within their means.

Let’s compare crowdfunding for an individual with donating money to a registered non-profit.

In the United States, registered non-profit organizations are governed by federal law called 501(c)(3). At the core of any organization that is registered under 501(c)(3), there are strict regulations that must be met at all times:

“501(c)(3) organizations are highly regulated entities. Strict rules apply to both the activities and the governance of these organizations. No part of the activities or the net earnings can unfairly benefit any director, officer, or any private individual, and no officer or private individual can share in the distribution of any of the corporate assets in the event the organization shuts down.”

And from the IRS’s own website is the following:

“The organization must not be organized or operated for the benefit of private interests, and no part of a section 501(c)(3) organization’s net earnings may inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual.”

(In the above quote, the word “inure” in a legal sense means “benefit, advantage to an individual”.)

Thus, when a costumer or cosplayer sets up a crowdfunding site to get monetary gifts from people to support their costuming & cosplaying activities, it is diametrically opposed to how a 501(c)(3) must operate, especially when the excuse that the costumer or cosplayer makes in the crowdfunding request is to enable them to spend time in costume as a way to help an actual 501(c)(3) to raise money for its charitable cause.

Let’s make one more comparison between giving money to a costumer or cosplayer to support their hobby with giving money to a registered 501(c)(3) charity. How can a 501(c)(3) spend the money it collects from donations? This is answered by the law that governs how a 501(c)(3) can operate:

“To be tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, an organization must be organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3)…”

And what are those exempt purposes? The law clearly defines them:

“The exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3) are charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and preventing cruelty to children or animals.”

By comparison, when a costumer or cosplayer starts a crowdfunding campaign to raise money to support their hobby, what obligates the costumer or cosplayer to spend any money raised solely on the hobby? Nothing. Let’s repeat that: with the exception of securitiesthere are no laws that require someone who initiates a crowdfunding campaign to use the money raised for the purpose specified in the crowdfunding campaign.

But how about any rules that crowdfunding websites might have? Let’s examine what is written on the popular GoFundMe website regarding whether it’s safe to donate to someone:

“With hundreds of thousands of campaigns, it’s not feasible for GoFundMe to investigate the claims stated by each Campaign Organizer. Rather, we provide visitors with the tools to make an informed decision as to who they choose to support. While GoFundMe and its payment partners do provide a number of safeguards to deter fraud, we must insist that visitors follow the advice stated on each and every campaign. ‘Only donate to people you personally know & trust.'”

In other words, any money you give on a crowdfunding website is at your own risk.

While you can be reasonably sure that at least part of the money you donate to a legitimate charity will be spent on helping who the charity claims to help, there is absolutely no guarantee whatsoever that money given to a cosplayer or costumer via a personal crowdfunding campaign will be used for the intended purpose.

In our humble opinion, if you really want to help others, donating money to an actual charity is a much better idea than giving monetary gifts to a costumer or cosplayer. If you give money to a costumer or cosplayer who has started a personal crowdfunding campaign to benefit themselves, you may be making yourself to be an enabler. What’s an enabler?

An enabler is “one who enables another to persist in self-destructive behavior…by providing excuses or by making it possible to avoid the consequences of such behavior.”

In other words, by sending money to a costumer or cosplayer who has started a personal crowdfunding campaign, you may be enabling them to continue self-destructive behavior that encourages them to live in a financially irresponsible manner.

Finally, if you are a costumer or cosplayer considering a personal crowdfunding campaign to support your hobby, in our humble opinion, don’t. Instead, find ways to lower your own personal spending & expenses (especially frivolous ones) before asking others for financial support. If you start a personal crowdfunding campaign to pay for your costuming & cosplay hobby, you may be telling others that you are living in a financially irresponsible manner. Is that the message that you want to send? Just food for thought.

References:

More on the Cancellation of the 2017 Rocky Mountain Fur Con

After posting on April 16, 2017 about the cancellation of the 2017 #RockyMountainFurCon (#RMFC), we viewed several YouTube videos on the subject from varying points of view. After going through each of them, we found that one posted by a furry named Roo on his YouTube channel called Rooview provided the most complete & unbiased description of not only the cancellation of RMFC, but also the complex chain of events from multiple directions that lead to its demise.

While the video is over 35 minutes in length, we highly recommend viewing it in its entirety for anyone who wants a much more complete understanding of what lead to the cancellation of RMFC. The thing to remember here is that what lead to the demise of this particular convention could occur at any convention; the type of drama and conflict that destroyed RMFC is not limited to the furry community as we’ve seen similar levels of conflict & drama destroy #costuming & #cosplay groups well outside the furry community. Some of which lead to the destruction of entire #CostumeClub chapters and even one costume club altogether.

Unresolved drama and conflict that is allowed to exponentially spiral out of control is a recipe for disaster in any situation; but when conflicting parties are willing to calmly discuss their differences and be open to accepting compromises, disaster can usually be averted. Sadly, RMFC is an example of the former, not the latter; combined with (in our opinion) poor convention management that:

  1. Failed to adequately address concerns with the furry group named “Furry Raiders” and its founder Foxler Nightfire, who wears a Nazi-like armband as part of his furry costume.
  2. Failed to extricate itself completely from the convicted felon (Kendal Emery, a.k.a. Kahuki,) who had originally founded the convention 10 years earlier and who had been removed from leading it in 2008.
  3. Lost its non-profit status several years earlier,
  4. Allowed Kahuki to send a “cease and desist” letter that cited non-existent laws as a way to intimidate and threaten an individual in another state (Deo) with loss of property, among other things, including being consistent with the anti-government “Sovereign Citizens” movement.

In response, Deo shared the threatening “cease and desist” letter publicly on April 10, 2017, which is what prompted the RMFC management to cancel the convention. The “cease and desist” letter (in our opinion) served only to damage the credibility of the RMFC management because:

  1. If they didn’t know the letter was sent, then there was a complete breakdown in internal communication.
  2. Or, if they did know about the letter, then they should have prevented it from being sent in the first place given that it cited non-existent laws and was highly threatening.

As we said in our original post on April 16, 2017:

Please leave your personal beliefs and politics out of costuming & cosplay. When it comes to symbolism used in custom costumes, using highly controversial and potentially upsetting political or religious symbolism or something that closely resembles it in a costume is really not a good idea. This is why costume clubs don’t permit politics & religion in their groups. It only leads to problems.

Referenced Articles & Videos:

 

“Star Wars” Stormtrooper Costumes Banned by Princeton Reunion Committee: Seriously?

Graduates from #Princeton’s 2012 class will not be allowed to attend a #StarWars-themed party in #Stormtrooper #costumes due to unfounded fears that it will convey a racist message. In other words, one of the most iconic and most recognized science fiction costumes from the “Star Wars” franchise won’t be permitted because the name “stormtrooper” was derived from soldiers so-named from Nazi Germany.

The organizers of the 2012 Princeton graduating class reunion should consider learning that there is a vast difference between “Star Wars” and Nazi Germany. While Nazi Germany committed many heinous crimes against humanity, “Star Wars” is purely science fiction that never happened. Also, while events from World War II were part of the inspiration for “Star Wars” and its characters (as created by George Lucas), there is absolutely no connection between “Star Wars” and any form of past or current racism that occurred any where on the planet Earth.

We are genuinely shocked that a plastic costume worn by characters from science fiction that don’t actually exist and (therefore) never actually harmed anyone, would be banned due to unproven claims of racism caused by these non-existent characters.

Let’s consider other places where individuals wearing “Star Wars” stormtrooper costumes may be seen:

  • Since Disney theme parks are now filled with actors wearing stormtrooper costumes of various types, is Disney promoting racism or harming anyone? Absolutely not.
  • Are the 10,000+ members of the #501stLegion #CostumeClub (many of which wear stormtrooper costumes) promoting racism or harming anyone while raising millions of dollars for various charities while they’re wearing stormtrooper costumes? Again, absolutely not.
  • Are the hundreds of millions of people who have watched one or more “Star Wars” movies or animated TV shows been inspired to be racist because of “Star Wars”? That seems very unlikely.

If the organizers of the 2012 Princeton graduates reunion can prove that wearing a “Star Wars” stormtrooper costume promotes racism, then by all means ban stormtrooper costumes. Just make sure that all Imperial costumes are also banned. In fact, if “Star Wars” is so racist, why have a “Star Wars” themed party to begin with? Take our advice: don’t have a “Star Wars” themed class reunion. In fact, don’t have a theme at all because who knows what other heinous forms of racism weren’t actually ever inspired by other fantasy & science fiction genres.

stormtroopers

Original article (also linked above) can be found here: http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/mar/1/stormtrooper-costumes-banned-from-star-wars-themed/