At a liberal arts college such as Hamilton, there is certain stigma associated with the representation of religion. It is socially acceptable to practice any religion one chooses, as long as it does not overpower one's identity as an enlightened, independent, liberal student whose life is not controlled by a higher power.
The above image is one that I have previously kept private for one reason. Although it is a dorky picture from my awkward phase in middle school, the more significant reason I don't show this photo to many is the red robe as I have untagged myself from all of them on Facebook. I sang in the choir at my church for ten years, but I have hidden these glaring traces (many more photos like the one above) of my life as a chorister from the public. I talk freely about my involvement at church but there is something different about these images of me and all my choir friends in our cult-like red robes. Hearing about someone who is religious once you already have an impression of them is unlike seeing the image of him or her in religious garb.
I know I am not the only one that feels this way because this sentiment is very present on Hamilton's campus; barely anyone chooses to represent their self as religious based on how they dress. This is not because of a lack of religion on campus, but a level of shame of being perceived as religious. In her essay, The Language of Clothes, Alison Lurie discusses a "language of dress" (205) as an unspoken social code indicating aspects of each person's identity. Wearing religious clothing is a depiction of this negatively perceived submission; if one dresses the way a religion dictates, that person is no longer a "free-thinker." My red robe is an annunciation of my faith without me being able to verbally explain that my life is not ruled by religious identity. Hamilton students don't like the power of their words being overtaken by Lurie's "language of dress."
In what ways is religious identity different from one's identity as a fan of a certain movie, musician, style of clothes, etc?
Why is it acceptable to wear a band T-shirt but not a red robe?
We commonly associate ourselves with our religion and we find it part of our identity or soul, so I'm curious to know if by losing our identity to technology (i.e; cell phones, laptops) that we as a society as a result are becoming less religious. In the times of our forefathers, many activities and forms of entertainment were religion-centric, with many of the stories and a great amount of literature being religious myths that were taken from the holy books such as the bible and then expanded upon by the present day culture. In today's society, religion doesn't have as big of an impact as it did in past years. Today, people are consumed with watching television, playing on their computers, or utilizing social media so it asks the question: are we losing our religious identities to technology?
This is a difficult question to answer, and to do so, one must define an identity. In the simplest terms, your identity is who you are as a person, your beliefs, your passions, your personality. So in theory, it would be expected that technology could enhance your sense of identity by being connected to people with similar beliefs that would have never been connected before. But in actuality, people become so intertwined with their celebrity gossip or hunger games fandom that that stop being present in the actual world, choosing instead to live in a virtual world. For that reason, I believe that people are actually losing their identities, making religion less of a factor in their life. With losing their identity, people slowly start to lose the components of their identity that make them who they are, including their religious beliefs. 