Designing the ideal and politically correct holiday - Christmas - Viewpoint - Column

DSN Retailing Today, Jan 5, 2004 by Mike Troy

The beginning of a new year is always a good time to make changes, and there is no better place to start than with the holiday that just ended.

Every year it seems more and more people find something offensive about Christmas. It is, after all, the most schizophrenic of holidays. In the 134 years since Christmas was declared a federal holiday, Americans have managed to combine Christianity and the date established for Jesus Christ's birth with a heavy dose of commercialism and dozens of artificially created icons.

It is this peculiar combination that leads to some issues. It could be a nativity scene on public property, angels hung on a Christmas tree at a school or the lack of Kwanzaa symbols in an office where a Menorah and Christmas decorations are displayed. Some people even take exception to displaying a coniferous tree adorned with ornaments and calling it a Christmas tree.

While some of these views stretch the limits of political correctness, the reality is they are here to stay and more than likely will only intensify as people find new ways to take exception to what they view as the nation's only federally mandated religious holiday.

What's the solution? Why not move Christmas, or at least that portion of the holiday involving Santa, illuminated trees, candy canes and the exchange of gifts? There is no reason a different date or dates couldn't be established that would allow the birth of Christ to continue to be observed on Dec. 25. The rest of Christmas--the gift giving and all the other traditions--could be slotted in elsewhere on the calendar. Of course, this would take an act of Congress. Something like the Christmas and Commerce Separation Act of 2004.

From a business standpoint, it might not be such a bad thing for retailers. The risks associated with bad winter weather could be removed by scheduling the new federal gift-giving holiday during warmer months when freak storms are less prone to disrupt shopping. And as long as consideration is being given to rescheduling, why not have several dates spread throughout the month in which gifts are exchanged. From an inventory management and supply chain efficiency standpoint, this would flatten out the demand curve and simplify store operations. If the holiday were moved to June, kids would be out of school and it would be easier to hire part-time labor. To offset the potential sales disruption that the rescheduling would cause, retailers would be given tiered tax credits that de-escalate over time.

To convert to a new date there would also be a transition period to allow for the creation and implementation of a new gift-giving icon that rewards children who behave well throughout the preceding 12-month period. Santa, snowmen and elves would not be appropriate in June. The jolly white man with the beard and ruddy complexion would be replaced by an inoffensive animated character that is gender and ethnically neutral and displays no sexual preference. A nonpartisan government task force would create this icon. The character would be assisted in its gift-giving efforts by a group of diverse characters representative of all walks of life with one for each day so kids could collect all 365.

In all seriousness, the concept of moving Christmas is so bizarre and beyond reason that no one would ever suggest it. Of would they? Think about some of the things people manage to find offensive these days and it is probably only a matter of time before someone subjects themselves to widespread ridicule and actually proposes the idea.