NIKKI LEE WADE

Pearl Paint’s landmark building located on 308 Canal Street.

Established in 1933, Pearl Paint has been the home of artists for over 80 years. Its Canal Street location in Lower Manhattan has been an iconic New York City landmark for decades, but on April 17th the beloved red and white building closed its gates for good.

Pearl Paint’s real estate broker, Massey Kankal has not released any plans to demolish the building, and proposes that the space can be “delivered vacant.” The five-story building is listed for sale at $15 million, with a lease price of $825,000.

Pearl Paint’s newly unemployed workers are shocked. They were given only 10 days notice that their jobs would be terminated, an act deemed illegal by their union, Workers United Local 169. “We all just can’t believe it,” said an anonymous worker to DNAinfo. “I’ve worked here for 10 years and this is how they treat you? You know how I really feel? This is f—– up.”

Pearl Paint’s previous customers are shocked as well. Lilly Nathan has been coming to the art store for over 20 years. “I’m in disbelief,” she says. “I mean I really can’t believe it. I’ve been coming here since I moved to New York City. I was just starting out as an artist, and that was when I was in my mid-twenties! That was so long ago.”

People like Dawn LaSalle have grown to know Pearl Paint’s employees as a local family. “I remember coming here with my mother as a little girl. She used to paint all the time at home and I would love to play with her different paint bottles,” she says. “I would see this beautiful red and white building and be so happy. The people here were always so kind and friendly. It’s a shame they’re closing this place down.”

The attention has been increasing with artists online as well, and many are disappointed to see another local business shut its doors. “I remember going there with my mom when I was a freshman in art school,” writes Jonathan D on Pearl Paint’s Yelp page. “It’s a sad day for New York. The days of New York being an artist mecca are over.”

With such a classic business closed, many of Pearl Paint’s loyal customers now need to find a new art supply store. SoHo Art Materials is just a three minute walk away from Pearl Paint’s building, and they seem to be picking up quite a few of Pearl Paint’s old customers.

“Customers have been coming in that have been going to Pearl Paint for years, and we are able to provide them with the art materials they are looking for,” says the manager of SoHo Art Materials. “I wouldn’t say we are the secondary source for Pearl Paint’s customers, but the primary source.”

Surrounding art supply stores Blick Art Materials and Utrecht Art Supply were unable to provide a comment.

Even with other art supply stores in close proximity, some of Pearl Paint’s customers are uneasy making the switch. “I’ve tried the other stores and it’s just not the same,” says Jenna Soto. “I’m used to walking right into Pearl Paint knowing what I need and knowing right where to get it. With these new art stores, I don’t know where anything is and I always have to ask the workers.”

Pearl Paint was a home for individuality and creativity. The employees were welcoming and always encouraged self-expression through art. “The workers at other stores are nice, but they’re so young,” she says. “You can tell that this is just some job to make money. They’re kids, they don’t care what store they work in, as long as they earn money to spend. At Pearl Paint, you knew that the workers cared. You knew that they liked to help.”

No one has yet to express interest in buying the property. Although it is unclear what the building will become in the future, it is safe to say that Pearl Paint will definitely be missed.

Public school dress codes seem to exclusively target girls.

Already in the middle of summer, New Yorkers find the weather outside increasingly hotter and hotter. The dramatic change from an intense frozen winter to a sweltering summer calls for a new wardrobe of shorts, tank tops and flip-flops.

With the transition in clothes, public school students (mostly girls) find themselves called out for disobeying dress codes. School officials enforce dress codes now more than ever, in an attempt to cover up as much of the female body as possible. This includes shoulders, midriffs and legs, body parts you would expect to see in the blistering heat.

Most public school dress codes include the fingertip rule: a girl’s shorts pass her fingertips when her arms are down at her sides. Another common rule is the ban of spaghetti-strap tank tops; all straps must be wider than two fingers. Some public schools have gone as far as completely banning leggings, yoga pants and flip-flops.

Almost all dress codes are targeted towards girls; exposed legs, shoulders and midriffs are all unacceptable. The same cannot be said for restrictions for the boys, for “offensive” clothing on boys is considered baggy pants or shirts referencing drug use. They are not forced to go home and change or wear oversized school uniforms over their clothes. They are simply asked to pull up their pants or turn their shirts inside out. School officials don’t seem to care about what boys wear, but how they see their female peers.

On May 21st, Lindsay Stocker was accused of wearing too short shorts by authorities at her high school in Montreal. Two vice principals walked into her sophomore classroom and asked students to perform the “fingertip test.” Lindsay’s shorts did not pass her fingertips and she was asked to change.

“In front of all my peers and teachers they said I had to change,” said Lindsay, according to the Huffington Post. “They continued to tell me that I would be suspended if I didn’t start following the rules…they told me that it doesn’t matter – I don’t have to understand the rules, I just have to comply by them.”

As a response, Lindsay put up flyers around her school saying, “Don’t humiliate her because she is wearing shorts. It’s hot outside. Instead of shaming girls for their bodies, teach boys that girls are not sexual objects.” There have been similar acts of protests in other schools, of people putting up posters with the same message. One poster read: “Instead of publicly shaming girls for wearing shorts in warm weather, teach male students and teachers not to over sexualize normal female body parts.”

“Slutty Wednesday” was an act of defiance by the students of Stuyvesant High School. The school’s dress code included a ban on exposed shoulders, lower backs, midriffs and undergarments. According to the New York Times, students “…peeled off sweatshirts, revealing tank tops and spaghetti-strap blouses.” Students also passed out flyers with slogans like “Redress the Dress Code” and drew X’s through printed versions of the school’s clothing restrictions.

School officials continue to argue that girls who reveal bare shoulders, legs, midriffs or backs distract male students and teachers. The revealing of girls’ bodies apparently causes the boys to be unable to compose themselves in an appropriate manner. “We could, instead, try having some more faith in young men – they are, in fact, fully-formed humans with the capacity to exercise self control,” says the Guardian.

Public schools are now teaching girls that they must cover up their bodies in order for the comfort of their male peers. When a female student is sent home to change, she is essentially told that her education is not worth that of male students. She is taught to be ashamed of her body, and must cover up every inch of bare skin because she is on display. Instead of teaching girls that their physical appearance must adhere to the comfort of boys, we must teach boys not to over-sexualize female body parts.

With the new school year coming just around the corner, we can hope there are changes in schools targeting young girls for their bodies.