Take off that nefarious bandana

Now we can say that a mall is private property, can be used largely as the owner sees fit, and so there's no big issue here. "Private property" is, of course, sacrosanct and functions in America as an argument on its own.

A southwest Missouri mall defended its dress code after a security guard told a 10-year-old girl her bandanna decorated with peace signs, smiley faces and flowers violated the mall’s code of conduct...

Christine Moses, director of mall marketing, noted the mall is privately owned and behavior on its premises can be regulated.

We could also say that in the ideological drive to privatize nearly everything, the environment is shaped in subtle, controlling ways that our limited imaginations tend to think only authoritarian government does. This drive to privatize is combined with a general cultural drift towards the fetishization of security (in a politically manipulated climate of fear).

Lydia had violated No. 10 on the list of 17 offenses: "failing to be fully clothed or wearing apparel which is likely to provide a disturbance or embroil other groups or the general public in open conflict."

There's nothing like a bandana to create widespread social unrest.... In the end, they might be worried about hippies or other such threats to security. Who knows? But it really doesn't matter - "private property." Whatever. It's just a bandana. I'd also never recommend going to a mall for anything.

Total privatization plus security fetishization, however, shapes the environment in which we all live.

Similar policies are in place at 285 Simon properties in 39 states and Puerto Rico.

(Via Maxspeaks).