wearing of the green (jerseys), part 2. also, bikinis

so I said I'd post a little more about green St. Patrick's hockey jerseys, and it got delayed past March 17. but hey, Chicago kept St. Pat's going past then, because the annual "Shamrock Shuffle" was today. (since this is an event that's 1) outside and 2) requires physical exertion, I know next to nothing about it.) anyhow, I'd hoped to get a few photos of green jersey fouls at games I went to this week, but saw nothing too bad.

but first: bikinis! Friday afternoon, this Puck Daddy piece debated the new $40 NHL bikinis (available in certain teams only so far), with three female bloggers. two of my favorites, I Mean, We Got Guys & Wrap Around Curl,  plus Hitthepost!, which I don't know too well (by the way, I'd like to point out that I'm available for roundtable discussions. and guest posts. and columns. and...).  nice discussion about hockey apparel and what the NHL does/doesn't do for its female fans. of course, it being Puck Daddy, almost immediately there was a "these bloggers must be ugly anyway" comment, and by the third page, a troll asking "why let some silly economic idea like 'demand' (or lack thereof) get in the way of Marxist knee-jerk gender obsessions?" *speechless*

anyway, this is the sort of thing I left out of the first post (which was more Irish-themed hockey jerseys, not St. Patrick's-themed team jerseys):

last week on NHL.com I found this (what's especially St. Pat's about the Bruins item? just being Boston-related doesn't qualify it, does it?):

I liked seeing how much was available for each team based on size of their fanbase and/or Irish-American population in their city, presumably (I'd think the NYC-area teams would have more available):

what was my point? not that I'm bothered by having St. Patrick's-related apparel per se, but that the all-green items that don't just incorporate the team's name but its logo too? well, how are they different from:

the dreaded pink jerseys! now, I don't care for all-pink jerseys (the above is a girl's one, which bothers me less than adult women wearing them--the NHL store didn't even have women's pink Hawks jerseys when I just checked), but are they objectively worse than all-green jerseys? either way, you're not properly wearing the team colors (green Flames? green Red Wings? to use examples from above). the gender-based marketing behind them bothers me, but I don't see the object itself as any more objectionable. in fact...well, sometimes it seems like too easy a way to pick on female fans. I think many critics of pink jerseys use it as a shorthand for new or bandwagon fans, without any sexist intent. but there is also, um, let's say, a longstanding cultural tendency to insult things that are identified with women. (see: well, the vast majority of the trash-talking done in any men's sport.)

that's the monochromatic jersey. there's also these:

that's from a fun piece on the Chicago Wolves' site about their St. Patrick's jerseys over the years. now, as with so much minor league apparel, these can be a bit goofy, but because they have the proper logo in the proper colors, it's different. and I've seen jerseys and shirts that use a pink background and regular logo (pale pink for breast cancer awareness, or in the case of a Cincinnati Cyclones girl's shirt, their red and yellow logo on a bright pink background. I kind of wanted to buy it). in fact, there was a Puck Daddy defense of that type of pink jersey (now I'm wondering if I can find any fight videos with a player in one of those fundraiser pink jerseys!).

okay, enough. all this is reminding me that's it's nearly the end of the season and I don't have any hockey jerseys of my own yet. and I now have a strange search history on NHL.com thanks to this piece: