It is true that "vanity" in itself is not a "sin"; indeed, within a certain realm it is even necessary; but where it exceeds the necessary, it is expressive of a desire to represent something original, something that can make others admire one's appearance or behaviour, that is, something that can awaken the desire to represent a "higher" rank, a "higher" cultural step and to be more "distinguished" than others. In itself this desire is sound enough where it cannot be satisfied merely by the shape of a pair of shoes or a hat, the width or narrowness of a trouser leg or the length of a jacket and the colour of a tie or by carrying an umbrella or not. Where "culture" represents only these phenomena, it has nothing to do with a truly higher culture. These phenomena are but a whim of vanity. And it can rightly be discussed whose whim or taste is the "most beautiful" and whose "adornments" look the best – the feather adornments of primitive beings, the rings they wear on their ears, arms and legs, the paint and tattoos on their faces and bodies or the "civilised" being's use of the same phenomena. If the feathers are placed on the head of a minister or on the head of a Red Indian, if the rings are worn by a Negress or a dollar princess, if the make-up and paint are applied to the skin of the black races or the white does not change the principle. Any difference there can be is in their access to the material for this adornment and their skill in using it.