By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The UFC’s newly designed patriotic outfits for their “Octagon Girls” at an upcoming White House fight night have sparked online debate. Critics argue the sequined, flag-motif attire, featuring short skirts, potentially violates U.S. Flag Code guidelines that prohibit using the flag as apparel or costumes. While the designs are stylized interpretations, their prominent use of stars-and-stripes patterns has been deemed by some as disrespectful, though the Flag Code is advisory and not legally binding for private citizens. Public opinion is divided, with some finding the outfits tacky and overly patriotic, while others view them as fitting for a celebratory spectacle honoring American identity.
Read the original article here
The recent UFC fight attended by former President Donald Trump brought a predictable wave of attention, not just for the athletic performances, but also for the attire of the ring girls. Images circulating from the event reveal outfits that incorporated American flag motifs, sparking discussion and, for many, immediate criticism. The underlying sentiment from many observers seems to be a feeling of “I told you so” or “what else would you expect,” indicating a resigned acceptance of what some perceive as predictable gaudiness associated with this particular political leaning.
The outfits themselves have been widely described as “tacky,” “disgraceful,” and “trashy,” with some going so far as to suggest they were ripped from the set of a satirical film known for its depiction of a degraded future America. There’s a strong sense that these choices reflect poorly on the image being projected, not just domestically but to the rest of the world. The aesthetic has been labeled “kitsch trash,” and it’s been suggested that the choices are embarrassing for the nation’s international presentation.
A significant point of contention revolves around the alleged breach of the U.S. Flag Code. The code, which offers guidelines on the respectful use of the American flag, is central to this discussion. Many believe that the ring girls’ costumes, by design, violate these established protocols. The argument is that the code pertains to the symbolic representation of the flag and that such widespread, casual incorporation into attire, especially when deemed disrespectful or aesthetically questionable, is a clear transgression.
However, a nuanced point is raised that the flag code specifically addresses the desecration of actual flags into clothing, not necessarily designs that are inspired by or mimic the flag’s elements. This distinction suggests that while the outfits might be considered tawdry or in poor taste by many, they might not technically fall under a strict legal interpretation of the flag code’s prohibitions against repurposing an existing flag. This point, however, doesn’t diminish the overall sentiment of disrespect many feel.
For many, the perceived violation of flag code isn’t just about a rule, but about a deeper disrespect for national symbols. This sentiment is particularly strong among those who have served in the military, who see such usage as an affront to the sacrifices made. The comparison is drawn to other instances where patriotic symbols have been used inappropriately, such as a flag being used as a pocket square or, more significantly, the events of January 6th where flags were reportedly used to assault law enforcement officers.
Interestingly, there’s a recurring theme that the “flag code” itself is not legally binding but rather a set of etiquette guidelines. Many argue that these guidelines are frequently, and often casually, broken by individuals across the political spectrum, making the focus on this specific instance somewhat trivial when compared to other perceived transgressions. The point is made that most people wear flag-emblazoned clothing, hang flags improperly, or let them touch the ground, and these actions are generally accepted.
The argument is then made that focusing on the flag code in this context, especially when criticizing a political figure, can trivialize more substantive criticisms. The sheer number of ways to critique Donald Trump and his administration means that a debate over ring girl outfits and flag code adherence might be seen as a distraction from more pressing issues. This perspective suggests that there are far more significant matters to address than the design of costumes at a sporting event.
A common refrain is that this particular political movement demonstrably “doesn’t give a shit about flag code” or the constitution in general. The argument is that for those aligned with this movement, their actions and beliefs often supersede or disregard established norms and regulations. The “blue line” flags seen on trucks are cited as another example of flag code violations that are seemingly ignored.
The situation is also framed by some as a stark example of hypocrisy, where the same individuals or groups who may vehemently criticize others for perceived disrespect of the flag are themselves engaging in practices that many consider disrespectful. The contrast is drawn between the criticism of kneeling during the anthem and the use of flag-like designs on potentially provocative attire.
Some observers have pointed out the irony that while there are concerns about flag code violations, the more significant issue at play might be the use of government facilities and landmarks for a commercial venture in which the president is personally invested. This perspective suggests that the financial and ethical implications of the event itself far outweigh the debate over the ring girls’ clothing.
The “Idiocracy” comparison continues to surface, suggesting that the reality of the situation mirrors the satirical depiction of a society in decline. The idea that the movie was meant as satire but is now being outdone by real-life events is a recurring sentiment. This comparison underscores a feeling of cultural degradation and a sense of absurdity surrounding the entire spectacle.
In essence, the discussion surrounding the ring girls’ outfits at Trump’s UFC fight reveals a complex mix of reactions. While many are quick to condemn the attire as tacky and a violation of national respect, others argue for a more nuanced understanding of the flag code and suggest focusing criticisms on more substantial issues. Regardless of the differing viewpoints, the event has undoubtedly sparked another round of debate about patriotism, respect for symbols, and the perceived aesthetic and ethical standards of public figures and their associated events.