Forest Fairy Hat

A while back, I did a "potluck choice" thing from Simply Sock Yarn - where I got yarn for a good price but had no choice of colors. One of those that came was a bright orange (almost blaze orange) yarn. As orange isn't a normal part of my wardrobe, I opined maybe I needed to make an orange hat to wear in the field in the fall. (They close off some of our field areas during hunting season, but still, even when you're "sure" hunters aren't out there, it's probably still a good idea to wear something that clearly says "NOT A DEER!" to others)

Searching around, someone suggested the Forest Fairy Hat and I decided to do it.




I did make one modification: I did one less repeat so the hat was not so big and slouchy. Even with the smaller number of rows (less height), it's still pretty slouchy.

But yeah. I like the idea of "blaze orange" combined with "feminine lace pattern."

Incidentally, one of the news stories I heard when I was up visiting with my parents was that someone in Wisconsin (or maybe it was Minnesota) wanted to make pink, or pink camo (yes, such a thing exists) equal with blaze orange as "accepted safety hunting gear." The stated purpose was "more women would hunt if they could wear pink."

Uh.

Yeah, I think that's a really silly idea. I'd be more willing to go, "yeah, pink is okay" if there were CLEAR studies showing it was equally visible and equally identifiable as NOT A DEER as blaze orange is. (And I would think then, that fluorescent chartreuse, like what road workers wear, should be equally allowed, because I find that even MORE visible).

But here's the thing: I know women who hunt. Not a one of them cares that they have to put on blaze orange for safety. And I know a lot of women who DON'T hunt, myself included. And I can tell you, almost every one of us is not going to go, "Oh wow, pink is now legal to wear now hunting....better go get a deer rifle." Women who don't hunt don't hunt for reasons OTHER than blaze orange.

Of course, if as I said, there were clear studies (none were referenced in the news story) that pink was equally visible, then I'd be okay with it. But I think the real purpose was some legislator - likely one who's never been in the deer woods - said, "Hey. Maybe we can sell more hunting licenses if we can attract the ladies to hunting? How do we do that....hm, maybe they think blaze orange is ugly, and would be happier with pink." Which just seems silly to me, because as I said: the women hunters I know are just fine with blaze orange. (I often wear one of those fluorescent chartreuse vests myself when I'm out in the field in the fall, again, for the purpose of signalling NOT A DEER to anyone who might be out there.)

(Also, I'm now thinking: if deer ever developed a mutation that made their coats blaze orange.....well, it's the reverse of that "Bummer of a birthmark, Hal" Far Side cartoon)


Edited to add: Okay, this news story suggests two things:

1. It's not any old pink, it's "blaze pink," and apparently it is equally visible with blaze orange. But pink is less visible to deer, apparently. (I thought deer were totally color-blind, anyway, and it was more movement that spooked them)

2. Apparently the bill was sponsored by a sportswomen's group, which frankly surprises me, because most of the sportswomen I know don't give a flip about what color they're supposed to wear for safety.

(It is also noted in the article that fluorescent chartreuse is legal for hunting wear in Arkansas. That makes sense to me as I think it's at least as visible as blaze orange)