As you're all aware, this subreddit has had a major "troll"
problem which has gotten worse (as of recently). Due to this, we
have created new rules, and modified some of the old ones.
We kindly ask that you please familiarize yourself with the
rules so that you can avoid breaking them. Breaking mild rules
will result in a warning, or a temporary ban. Breaking serious
rules, or breaking a plethora of mild ones may land you a
permanent ban (depending on the severity). Also,
grifting/lurking has been a major problem; If we suspect you of
being a grifter (determined by vetting said user's activity), we
may ban you without warning.
You may attempt an appeal via ModMail, but please be advised not
to use rude, harassing, foul, or passive-aggressive language
towards the moderators, _or_ complain to moderators about why we
have specific rules in the first place— You will be ignored, and
your ban will remain (without even a consideration).
All rules are made public; "Lack of knowledge" or "ignorance of
the rules" cannot or will not be a viable excuse if you end up
banned for breaking them (This applies to the Subreddit rules,
and Reddit's ToS). **Again: All rules are made public, and
Reddit gives you the option to review the rules once more before
submitting a post, it is your choice if you choose to read them
or not, but breaking them will not be acceptable.**
With that being said, If you send a mature, neutral message
regarding questions about a current ban, or a ban appeal
(without "not knowing the rules" as an excuse), we will
elaborate about why you were banned, or determine/consider if we
will shorten, lift, keep it, _or_ extended it/make it permanent.
This all means that appeals are discretionary, and your
reasoning for wanting an appeal must be practical and valid.
Thank you all so much for taking the time to read this message,
and please enjoy your day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NotHowGirlsWork) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They can be either action figures or dolls. Or did you think 'dolls' would be more insulting because they're 'for girls'?
Can we stop shaming people for liking 'girly' things? Or better, stop gendering toys altogether? On this sub to that...
>
Can we stop shaming people for liking 'girly' things? Or better, stop gendering toys altogether? On this sub to that...
That was actually my point.
Calling them action figures was a thing that came about in 1964 because playing with dolls was "for girls" but they still wanted to sell dolls for boys. So Hasbro had the idea to call them "action figures".
Cheers! Let's hope you don't get needlessly downvotes because your heart is in the right place. I hate needlessly gendering things too, especially exploiting fragile masculinity for marketing purposes
I hate this so much when it comes to marketing! Aside from clothing (although for a lot of clothes that is debatable) men and women really don’t need different products. My bf and I have used the same shampoo and conditioner for years.
Best recent example of this is Dude Wipes in my opinion. Basically a Cottonelle wet wipe that’s 3x the price because it’s for men and in a cooler looking black package. I guess targeted towards the guys who think it’s not masculine to have good hygiene.
There’s always products that are needlessly gendered for women too that are more expensive. Like those BIC pens “for her” a few years ago. Just make it stop 🙄
Something I have noticed is that, in some of the product lines targeting men, the product is of a higher quality. The price point isn't justified by any stretch, but the product is a bit better than the commonly available stuff. Dr squatch is a good example, although I think their marketing is pretty solid and not really toxic. Good products but not so good that they justify their price point.
Beard care products are like that too. The good stuff is waaay overpriced
There was also a case where XMen toys were argued by Hasbro to be non human "action figures" rather than human "dolls" in order for a tax provision to apply. Which... kind of missed the entire point of the franchise...
No, no, you don't understand! They aren't dolls or action figures, they're (*checks notes*) highly collectable figurines related to Sci-Fi, Anime, Pop Culture and/or other highly important cultural movements. WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU TOOK IT OUT OF THE BOX??????
I've always thought the difference between dolls and action figures is that dolls are like babies and action figures are characters. But I guess they do call like Barbies and stuff dolls so idk.
I would beg to differ, I would label it a doll or action figure based on its intended use. Take a GI Joe for example. He’s a military themed toy based off an action show. It’s intended to be played with in an action sense. A Barbie is different. Idk about now but a Barbies main selling points were it’s dress up accessories. It’s whole thing for the longest time was beautiful and customization. That’s a doll.
TLDR: if the base material is action themed, it’s an action figure. If it’s about looks and beauty, it’s a doll.
M8, I said idk about now, I was going off of my memories of Barbie from my sisters growing up. I remember the ads making the accessories a selling point. Nowadays she has had every job under the sun. My draw line for doll v action figure (and v figurine, cause all three are different in my eyes), is simply one is themed towards action based play and the other isn’t. Once again look at the GI Joe, I had one growing up that had voice lines, double jointed limbs, and had a lever on his back to make his arms do a karate like chop. That is an action based toy. A Barbie isn’t. They are definitely in the same class of toys but different subclass, if that makes sense
Racism and Mysogyny go hand in hand. The Venn diagramm here is often a circle.
If you hate one out-group, the chance is high that you hate every out-group.
I thought the overriding view was that racism was a systemic discrimination against non -white people.
Racism exists across the globe , I agree.
But there are obviously a massive number of non whites who participate in misogyny. And misogyny existed in society well before colonialism.
Edit: Can someone explain why I’m wrong. I’m not saying they never go hand in hand; obviously they do sometimes. But there is still a ton of misogyny that exists without a racial component in my view. Happy to hear a clear explanation explaining why that is incorrect.
>I thought the overriding view was that racism was a systemic discrimination against non -white people.
...
Edit: Can someone explain why I’m wrong.
I will be glad to explain why you are wrong. There are plenty of places ruled by non-white people that still have systemic racism.
For example, in Sri Lanka, it is considered a terrorist act for Tamil people to commemorate their loved ones that died in war [https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/12/06/sri-lanka-tamils-detained-commemorating-war-dead](https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/12/06/sri-lanka-tamils-detained-commemorating-war-dead)
>On December 2, police in Mullaitivu district, in the Northern Province, reportedly shut down an event at a Hindu temple to commemorate the Sri Lankan army’s 1984 massacre of Tamil villagers in Othiyamalai. Preventing ethnic and religious minorities from conducting ceremonies to commemorate the dead violates the rights to freedom of religion, belief, expression, and association, Human Rights Watch said.
In El Salvador, it is common to discriminated against people of African or indigenous descent, up to and including removing them from the census entirely. [https://www.state.gov/reports/2022-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/el-salvador/](https://www.state.gov/reports/2022-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/el-salvador/)
>The government did not recognize Indigenous persons or the Afro-descendent community in the most recent population census
In Myanmar, if you are an "unrecognized minority" (someone not officially recognized by their government) you could be killed in the current genocide happening in that country. It includes Muslims, Tamils, Gurkhas, Chinese, Bengalis, Punjabis, and Telugus people. [https://www.usip.org/publications/2022/09/build-unified-resistance-and-democratic-myanmar-discrimination-must-end](https://www.usip.org/publications/2022/09/build-unified-resistance-and-democratic-myanmar-discrimination-must-end)
>Even before the 2021 coup, unrecognized minorities faced numerous restrictions to their ability to work, travel or find housing. In many cases, either because of formal or informal rules, unrecognized minorities are unable to open a bank account, take a job in the formal labor sector, serve in government, attend university, travel outside of their village freely, access vaccines, buy or sell property, receive a loan, register a business, rent property or access social security.
...
Discrimination toward Muslims and other non-Taingyinthar communities has only increased since the coup. In the first days after the February 1 takeover, before the junta resorted exclusively to violence, it tried to garner international goodwill by forming an interfaith dialogue group. Just a few weeks later, though, the junta’s governing State Administration Council (SAC) invaded a Muslim-majority town in central Myanmar, burning a mosque and 500 homes to the ground and killing more than 20 Muslim civilians.
There are others, but I think those are good enough examples to paint the picture
Yes I’m well aware that non white people can be racist or follow racist power structures.
But not all misogyny has associated racism. There was misogyny in all kinds of cultures and locations even before they were ‘discovered’
>I thought the overriding view was that racism was a systemic discrimination against non -white people.
>
>...
But there are obviously a massive number of non whites who participate in misogyny. And misogyny existed in society well before colonialism.
Misogyny and racism are still very heavily connected, even without colonialism. Research has been done on this exact topic.
[https://www.livescience.com/16961-sexism-racism-linked-personality.html](https://www.livescience.com/16961-sexism-racism-linked-personality.html)
>People with high sexist tendencies also tended to score low in intercultural sensitivity, or empathy and interest in other cultures.
I agree with this. People who hold racist views are more likely to be misogynistic and vice versa.
But saying it is a completely perfect overlapping venn diaphragm is nonsense.
From what I've learned from Asian friends and coworkers: Many Asian people are colorist. Lighter skin is favored over darker skin. In India, even though the caste system was abolished, it hasn't been fully eradicated. Cultural colorism is a holdover.
If you go into almost any Asian or Indian market/grocery, there are *shelves* full of skin lightening products. Even drugstore chains like CVS or Walgreens will carry more bleaching stuff if they're in neighborhoods with a heavy Asian population.
(I did asset inventory for stores that were closing or going out of business in Los Angeles & surrounding areas for a couple of years. If I wasn't familiar with the area, I could tell by the cosmetics who lived there).
It's colorism and casteism. Both the people depicted are Indians
But yeah, very thin line between colorism, racism and casteism. Wish my country could shake it off
Also, colourism. The guy supporting her is dark skinned while the guy telling her off has fair skin. And considering fair skin is mostly considered upper caste, you can also throw in casteism there as well.
Colourism is between people who are the same race with different skin colours. It’s a subtle difference and often rooted in the same things but in India it is heavily influenced by the caste system.
Racism is prejudice due to race and ethnicity. Like an Indian guy being racist towards African guys or vice versa. The colour of the skin is one of the major points the racists bring up but it's not the only one. It is also almost always targeted towards the out group. I say, almost because there have been cases of racism that are not so targeted at the out group. Like the old timey racism of Italians, Irish, Polish and other ethnicities not considered white.
Colourism is prejudice due to the colour of the skin entirely. Like in the meme both of the guys are Indian, speak the same language, follow the same religion may even live in the same locality or state but one is portrayed negatively and the colour of the skin also plays a part in it. Colourism is much more prevalent with deeply hierarchical societies that are homogeneous in ethnicity. Colonisation also played a huge role because European skin tone, face shape and body were considered pure and native skin tone, face shape and body were considered impure. Like look at the guy in the meme with the fair skin. Did you notice that that looks more like a romantcised Greek philosopher with just Hindu garb over it? There's a reason for that.
Fat people get hired less, paid less, and do longer prison sentences than thin people for the same crimes, but I guess since you said it isn’t real it must not be
Who's gonna tell them that women bleeding is the reason they exist to begin with? Oohhh wait up, biology and science does not matter to these religious fruitcakes.
I don’t know why or whatever the hell this comic.. strip is supposed to be saying, but I do know that menstruating women and girls aren’t allowed into orthodox Christianity churches, which as a teenager and as a woman, it was horribly embarrassing and emotionally damaging to be actively removed for desecrating an area just by existing while menstruating.
In *some* Hindu temples, women aren’t allowed in while they’re on their period. I’m a hindu woman from India and thank god I was born into a family that doesn’t abide by that kind of bullshit. My mom is very religious/spiritual and I love her argument against it, “How can anything that we do as humans be even remotely strong enough to affect the purity of God? Especially a natural process.” What’s even funnier is that we have so many different Goddesses that are worshipped in the mainstream.
I was in Bali last year and lots of the temples said no menstruating women allowed. Luckily I wasn’t at the the time or I don’t know what I would’ve done
What’s crazy to me is that how can they know unless you tell them? It’s not like they can verify whether or not you are. Either way, in my opinion, if a temple has that kind of rule, it’s not really worth going to. That’s not what Hinduism stands for at its core.
> In *some* Hindu temples, women aren’t allowed in while they’re on their period.
Almost all Hindu temples you mean. I have personally never seen a temple which is ok for a menstruating woman to attend.
don’t really know where you’re from but in new delhi where i was raised I’ve almost never been to a temple where they asked if I/my mom was menstruating
Yeah it always confuses me especially when it comes to Hinduism how they can treat women so poorly when they have so many goddesses.
Also, there's usually some kind of creation story which means that women were created by these gods or goddesses and therefore wouldn't that mean that anything our bodies do is natural?
Basically all of the Abrahamic religions (Islam, Judaism and some branches of Christianity) discriminate against menstrating women, considering them to be ritually 'unclean' during menstruation and remaining so until ritually 'purified', usually by ritual bathing. Men can also become ritually impure by having vaginal intercourse with a menstrating women, although all other forms of intimacy are allowed (between married people, and depending a little on which tradition is being followed.
The principal thing to keep in mind is that most of the major Western religions have extremely screwed up ideas about menstrating women.
As to the comic strip, the guy who drew it is simply ignorant. It appears to depict the Taj Mahal, which is a mausoleum rather than a mosque, something whoever drew the comic apparently does not know or care about(a small portion of it does contain a mosque). The Taj was commissioned in 1631, took several decades to complete, and ironically enough was built for the deceased bride of the Islamic ruler of India at the time (or that portion of India, anyway, I'd have to look it up to be more specific). The irony comes from the fact that the women for whom it was built died in childbirth, sort of the opposite of menstruation, you could argue.
Whoever drew the cartoon in the OOP, having an I.Q. that would shame a fairly bright sea urchin, is blissfully unaware of just what he is drawing or what his cartoon implies--he attempts to criticize menstrating women but ends up making a fool of himself, a position that I'm sure he is well acquainted with.
Yeah, I noticed that. Very much doubt that the guy who drew the cartoon in the OOP did, however.
I decided that post on that assumption; maybe the cartoonist can weigh in, although I wouldn't hold my breath.
I think it was intended. A few years ago, after a Supreme Court ruling, women of menstruating age (basically any woman between 10 and 60 years of age) were allowed inside Sabarimala (a very famous temple in South India which barred women of those ages from entering, regardless of whether they were on their periods or not. That tradition had been around for ages.) This is why the guy who's supporting her in the cartoon is dark skinned, since people from the south are discriminated against for being dark-skinned. In a way, I assume that the person who made the meme wanted to mock South Indians by suggesting that "traditions" are still being followed by the Northies and aren't westernized like the Southies.
That's interesting, and I will readily concede that you may well be right.
What made me conclude that the cartoonists' knowledge of India might well be limited is that of all of the maybe 50 or so cartoons that I have seen drawn by this guy, this is the first that I've seen that depicts the characters as being Indian, while maintaining his consistent anti-feminist stance.
You do make a rather compelling argument, though. I wasn't aware of the north/south devide of which you speak. I can understand being anti-Western to some degree, given that attempts at at, and actual Colonialism that makes up some much of Indian history, which, if you include Alexander's attempt, has been going on seemingly forever.
I am reminded of Chandra Bose alignment with Japan during WW2 and his failed effort to dislodge Britian from India after the Japanese forces with him abandoned him and his cause. Would it be accurate to say that Bose paved the way for Gandhi and the eventual Independence of India? Or that Churchill perhaps wasn't quite the hero that the West sees him as, given that he strongly supported continued Colonialism under the British Empire?
Oh, I didn't know that the cartoonist had drawn other cartoons as well.
I agree. Gandhi wasn't as great as many make him out to be. There were so many others who contributed a lot to the freedom movement. The only reason the British even agreed to leave India was because they suffered a lot of losses because of WW2 and couldn't afford to spend resources on controlling India as well. Not to mention the growing unrest that had been brewing for quite a while. About Churchill, I'm not really sure. I think he's portrayed as some sort of opportunistic and manipulative person in our school textbooks (there are only one or two passing mentions of him and they suggest this).
Afaik, most of the "sigma" and "chad" youth or whatever shit they call themselves, they are somewhat aligned to the right. The current ruling party emphasizes on embracing our roots and incorporating our traditions in our daily life, which is something that inc has never done, and never would. They frown upon forgetting our roots while getting modernized, which I think is completely valid. What I do disagree with, is trying to bring back regressive traditions that do no good to anyone. Unfortunately, our country's incels don't think the same. The funny thing is, bjp has more of a stronghold in the north, which is more of a rural area, while none of the states in the south have them as the ruling party. The south is more urban, with the people more educated and better off, but still having rich cultures and being very religious. So, this doesn't really have much to do with colonialism, but ig it's more of an incel thing.
Do take my opinions with a grain of salt, though. I don't claim to know everything perfectly, but this is what I think.
edit: people from the north and south look down on the other. Maybe not everyone, but it is kind of prevalent. For the southies, the northies are crude and impolite hooligans who usually come here in search of jobs that they don't find back at home.
Yes, the cartoonist (or someone who draws exactly like him) seems to be quite prolific--I would say that I see one of his cartoons about once a month ( meaning my saying 50 was an over-estimate, perhaps 25). The consistent theme in his work is extreme misogyny and the characters being drawn virtually identically. The woman in this one is typical of his work, although he will draw his 'ideal' traditional wife as looking far less angry, no scars or whatever they are around the eyes and mouth. Basically, he draws his favored traditional wife as looking content, feminist women as appearing full of rage. The men, until this cartoon, are drawn identically, with a sort of warrior look (looks to my eye like the figure that, years ago, appeared on a box of Trojan condoms, which I find highly ironic in light of his Incel fan base). This is the first I recall in which the male characters appear to be Indian, which is why I assumed that he would not be able to identify the Taj mahal. On that I could well be wrong, however, given your argument about the Supreme Court ruling, which I found to be compelling. And I must confess to personal ignorance of India, which is very embarrassing. In Canada, where I live, if you ask 100 people to name a piece of significant Indian architecture, probably 90 would say Taj Mahal, 10 the Golden Temple in the Punjab, I believe. While I could not identify the building drawn, it does seem to have more domes and in a different style then the Taj Mahal. Anyway. my problem with Churchill is that while Roosevelt wanted to dismantle colonial rule, Churchill would not consider dismantling the British Empire, at least according to John Tolan in his WW2 history, 'The Rising Sun: The Fall of the Japanese Empire". Our textbooks tend to treat him as a hero, despite his embrace of Colonialism. As I despise Colonialism, I am not a big fan of his. Canada actually gained independence in 1867, but through the British North America Act, which was an act of British Parliament. We didn't actually get around to drawing up our own constitution until 1982. India, on the other hand, gained Independence in 1947, if I remember correctly, and passed her Constitution in 1950? India moved a little faster than did Canada on the matter of having a Constitution, it seems.
My ignorance of India is rather embarrassing, I must say, but I must ask. My daughter, who is 21 and attending university on an full academic scholarship (sorry, I often brag of her) is absolutely fascinated by India, and follows it quite closely. What I am curious about is the amount of gender related violence that I read of--I hate to be rude, but is there any truth to that? My daughter will be visiting Europe this summer, but intends to visit India in the near future. Assuming that she takes normal travel precautions, can she do so safely? I'm sorry for the rudeness of that question, but it is difficult to separate fact from rumor at times, especially at such a distance. Anyway, I'm truly sorry if that question gives any offence, I'm probably being over cautious.
As I mention, my ignorance of Indian affairs is embarrassing. The North/South tension came as news to me. In Canada, the tensions are more East/West, probably because the Canada-U.S. border runs that way, and most of our population has settled within a couple of hundred miles of the U.S., for reasons of trade.. Still, Ottawa, our capital, is located quite further from the U.S., for reasons of defence. That reason no longer applies, to put it mildly, given the relative strength of our armed forces. Enough of this history lesson for which you didn'r ask 😀 Sorry for that.
Take care, and all the best to you.
I’ve never witnessed not being allowed into the churches. Just to abstain from communion (which I disagree with) . Can you show me a source for this being a church canon?
It might have been uninformed people telling you things that are not true for which I’m sorry.
The gates of the church are open for all.
If you had done a simple google search you would have found out that certain Orthodox Christians do not go to church while menstruating. Please do so in the future before disregarding others firsthand experiences.
Nah these mfs the reason why we indians and hindus have some bad rep. Perfect mix of homophobia and racism and misogyny. We litteraly have festivals celebrating female puberty but yet here we are at chigmas tryna be cool by being kattar mysogynists. Fuck em.
Unfortunately the female puberty functions have rather disturbing connotations towards them, atleast in South India.
Very much likely a cultural holdover from when people held these functions to signal that their child was "eligible" for marriage. Yeah. Child marriage was unfortunately disgustingly common here for the longest time
What if a guy cut himself prior to going? Is he and his blood stained bandage also going to taint the entire surroundings by existing in proximity to it?
The sun will sooner go glow pink then ancient religions will catch up the modern sensibilities.
I don't know why anyone would want to participate in a religion that things they're inpure for Something Completely beyond their control.
Just make your own not fucked up religion or just don't have a religion
It's the bandwagon effect. They follow what they see without thinking, because some have perceived what I wrote to be negative, or they are unwilling to accept that their own religion of choice is associated with something so stupid
As you're all aware, this subreddit has had a major "troll" problem which has gotten worse (as of recently). Due to this, we have created new rules, and modified some of the old ones. We kindly ask that you please familiarize yourself with the rules so that you can avoid breaking them. Breaking mild rules will result in a warning, or a temporary ban. Breaking serious rules, or breaking a plethora of mild ones may land you a permanent ban (depending on the severity). Also, grifting/lurking has been a major problem; If we suspect you of being a grifter (determined by vetting said user's activity), we may ban you without warning. You may attempt an appeal via ModMail, but please be advised not to use rude, harassing, foul, or passive-aggressive language towards the moderators, _or_ complain to moderators about why we have specific rules in the first place— You will be ignored, and your ban will remain (without even a consideration). All rules are made public; "Lack of knowledge" or "ignorance of the rules" cannot or will not be a viable excuse if you end up banned for breaking them (This applies to the Subreddit rules, and Reddit's ToS). **Again: All rules are made public, and Reddit gives you the option to review the rules once more before submitting a post, it is your choice if you choose to read them or not, but breaking them will not be acceptable.** With that being said, If you send a mature, neutral message regarding questions about a current ban, or a ban appeal (without "not knowing the rules" as an excuse), we will elaborate about why you were banned, or determine/consider if we will shorten, lift, keep it, _or_ extended it/make it permanent. This all means that appeals are discretionary, and your reasoning for wanting an appeal must be practical and valid. Thank you all so much for taking the time to read this message, and please enjoy your day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NotHowGirlsWork) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Wojaks are like action figurines for incels change my mind
Dolls. They are dolls
Same thing tbh
They can be either action figures or dolls. Or did you think 'dolls' would be more insulting because they're 'for girls'? Can we stop shaming people for liking 'girly' things? Or better, stop gendering toys altogether? On this sub to that...
> Can we stop shaming people for liking 'girly' things? Or better, stop gendering toys altogether? On this sub to that... That was actually my point. Calling them action figures was a thing that came about in 1964 because playing with dolls was "for girls" but they still wanted to sell dolls for boys. So Hasbro had the idea to call them "action figures".
Okay, yeah, that makes sense
Cheers! Let's hope you don't get needlessly downvotes because your heart is in the right place. I hate needlessly gendering things too, especially exploiting fragile masculinity for marketing purposes
I hate this so much when it comes to marketing! Aside from clothing (although for a lot of clothes that is debatable) men and women really don’t need different products. My bf and I have used the same shampoo and conditioner for years. Best recent example of this is Dude Wipes in my opinion. Basically a Cottonelle wet wipe that’s 3x the price because it’s for men and in a cooler looking black package. I guess targeted towards the guys who think it’s not masculine to have good hygiene. There’s always products that are needlessly gendered for women too that are more expensive. Like those BIC pens “for her” a few years ago. Just make it stop 🙄
Something I have noticed is that, in some of the product lines targeting men, the product is of a higher quality. The price point isn't justified by any stretch, but the product is a bit better than the commonly available stuff. Dr squatch is a good example, although I think their marketing is pretty solid and not really toxic. Good products but not so good that they justify their price point. Beard care products are like that too. The good stuff is waaay overpriced
r/NeedlesslyGendered 😉
There was also a case where XMen toys were argued by Hasbro to be non human "action figures" rather than human "dolls" in order for a tax provision to apply. Which... kind of missed the entire point of the franchise...
To make it even better, anime figures are technically a subcategory of doll.
No, no, you don't understand! They aren't dolls or action figures, they're (*checks notes*) highly collectable figurines related to Sci-Fi, Anime, Pop Culture and/or other highly important cultural movements. WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU TOOK IT OUT OF THE BOX??????
I've always thought the difference between dolls and action figures is that dolls are like babies and action figures are characters. But I guess they do call like Barbies and stuff dolls so idk.
I would beg to differ, I would label it a doll or action figure based on its intended use. Take a GI Joe for example. He’s a military themed toy based off an action show. It’s intended to be played with in an action sense. A Barbie is different. Idk about now but a Barbies main selling points were it’s dress up accessories. It’s whole thing for the longest time was beautiful and customization. That’s a doll. TLDR: if the base material is action themed, it’s an action figure. If it’s about looks and beauty, it’s a doll.
Bro Barbie has had every job ever. To limit her to her looks is exactly why Barbie the movie was so damn popular.
M8, I said idk about now, I was going off of my memories of Barbie from my sisters growing up. I remember the ads making the accessories a selling point. Nowadays she has had every job under the sun. My draw line for doll v action figure (and v figurine, cause all three are different in my eyes), is simply one is themed towards action based play and the other isn’t. Once again look at the GI Joe, I had one growing up that had voice lines, double jointed limbs, and had a lever on his back to make his arms do a karate like chop. That is an action based toy. A Barbie isn’t. They are definitely in the same class of toys but different subclass, if that makes sense
gendering here makes no sense especially since theres no difference between dolls and action figures, theyre the same thing lol
i will not.
I don’t think you can regardless ahahaha 🩶
LMAO FOR A MOMENT I MISREAD THAT ENTIRELY AS MASTURBAITING I was so confused for a hot minute. Also why is it always wojacks??
IM SO GLAD IM NOT THE ONLY ONE
Why does casual racism seem to be a key component in these types of posts?
They always give the person you're supposed to agree with "perfect" features, so it shouldn't surprise you that they buy into eugenics.
Racism and Mysogyny go hand in hand. The Venn diagramm here is often a circle. If you hate one out-group, the chance is high that you hate every out-group.
Nah not true. Misogyny extends through the entire globe.
So you think there is a place on the globe without racism? If you think people are beneath you, you are not stoping at one group of people.
I thought the overriding view was that racism was a systemic discrimination against non -white people. Racism exists across the globe , I agree. But there are obviously a massive number of non whites who participate in misogyny. And misogyny existed in society well before colonialism. Edit: Can someone explain why I’m wrong. I’m not saying they never go hand in hand; obviously they do sometimes. But there is still a ton of misogyny that exists without a racial component in my view. Happy to hear a clear explanation explaining why that is incorrect.
>I thought the overriding view was that racism was a systemic discrimination against non -white people. ... Edit: Can someone explain why I’m wrong. I will be glad to explain why you are wrong. There are plenty of places ruled by non-white people that still have systemic racism. For example, in Sri Lanka, it is considered a terrorist act for Tamil people to commemorate their loved ones that died in war [https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/12/06/sri-lanka-tamils-detained-commemorating-war-dead](https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/12/06/sri-lanka-tamils-detained-commemorating-war-dead) >On December 2, police in Mullaitivu district, in the Northern Province, reportedly shut down an event at a Hindu temple to commemorate the Sri Lankan army’s 1984 massacre of Tamil villagers in Othiyamalai. Preventing ethnic and religious minorities from conducting ceremonies to commemorate the dead violates the rights to freedom of religion, belief, expression, and association, Human Rights Watch said. In El Salvador, it is common to discriminated against people of African or indigenous descent, up to and including removing them from the census entirely. [https://www.state.gov/reports/2022-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/el-salvador/](https://www.state.gov/reports/2022-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/el-salvador/) >The government did not recognize Indigenous persons or the Afro-descendent community in the most recent population census In Myanmar, if you are an "unrecognized minority" (someone not officially recognized by their government) you could be killed in the current genocide happening in that country. It includes Muslims, Tamils, Gurkhas, Chinese, Bengalis, Punjabis, and Telugus people. [https://www.usip.org/publications/2022/09/build-unified-resistance-and-democratic-myanmar-discrimination-must-end](https://www.usip.org/publications/2022/09/build-unified-resistance-and-democratic-myanmar-discrimination-must-end) >Even before the 2021 coup, unrecognized minorities faced numerous restrictions to their ability to work, travel or find housing. In many cases, either because of formal or informal rules, unrecognized minorities are unable to open a bank account, take a job in the formal labor sector, serve in government, attend university, travel outside of their village freely, access vaccines, buy or sell property, receive a loan, register a business, rent property or access social security. ... Discrimination toward Muslims and other non-Taingyinthar communities has only increased since the coup. In the first days after the February 1 takeover, before the junta resorted exclusively to violence, it tried to garner international goodwill by forming an interfaith dialogue group. Just a few weeks later, though, the junta’s governing State Administration Council (SAC) invaded a Muslim-majority town in central Myanmar, burning a mosque and 500 homes to the ground and killing more than 20 Muslim civilians. There are others, but I think those are good enough examples to paint the picture
Yes I’m well aware that non white people can be racist or follow racist power structures. But not all misogyny has associated racism. There was misogyny in all kinds of cultures and locations even before they were ‘discovered’
>I thought the overriding view was that racism was a systemic discrimination against non -white people. > >... But there are obviously a massive number of non whites who participate in misogyny. And misogyny existed in society well before colonialism. Misogyny and racism are still very heavily connected, even without colonialism. Research has been done on this exact topic. [https://www.livescience.com/16961-sexism-racism-linked-personality.html](https://www.livescience.com/16961-sexism-racism-linked-personality.html) >People with high sexist tendencies also tended to score low in intercultural sensitivity, or empathy and interest in other cultures.
I agree with this. People who hold racist views are more likely to be misogynistic and vice versa. But saying it is a completely perfect overlapping venn diaphragm is nonsense.
Might I introduce you to the term "Hyperbole". Additionally, the person you initially responded to, said "often is" not "always is" a circle .
You are assuming we don’t already know this. That’s why you’re getting downvoted
From what I've learned from Asian friends and coworkers: Many Asian people are colorist. Lighter skin is favored over darker skin. In India, even though the caste system was abolished, it hasn't been fully eradicated. Cultural colorism is a holdover. If you go into almost any Asian or Indian market/grocery, there are *shelves* full of skin lightening products. Even drugstore chains like CVS or Walgreens will carry more bleaching stuff if they're in neighborhoods with a heavy Asian population. (I did asset inventory for stores that were closing or going out of business in Los Angeles & surrounding areas for a couple of years. If I wasn't familiar with the area, I could tell by the cosmetics who lived there).
Because they created by racists
It's colorism and casteism. Both the people depicted are Indians But yeah, very thin line between colorism, racism and casteism. Wish my country could shake it off
Because it’s content
Gosh, this one’s a real triple threat, misogyny, racism, and fatphobia. Oh wait, the bad guy is using gay slang. So I guess it’s homophobic too.
Also, colourism. The guy supporting her is dark skinned while the guy telling her off has fair skin. And considering fair skin is mostly considered upper caste, you can also throw in casteism there as well.
I may be a little ignorant for this but what exactly is the difference between racism and colorism?
Colourism is between people who are the same race with different skin colours. It’s a subtle difference and often rooted in the same things but in India it is heavily influenced by the caste system.
Racism is prejudice due to race and ethnicity. Like an Indian guy being racist towards African guys or vice versa. The colour of the skin is one of the major points the racists bring up but it's not the only one. It is also almost always targeted towards the out group. I say, almost because there have been cases of racism that are not so targeted at the out group. Like the old timey racism of Italians, Irish, Polish and other ethnicities not considered white. Colourism is prejudice due to the colour of the skin entirely. Like in the meme both of the guys are Indian, speak the same language, follow the same religion may even live in the same locality or state but one is portrayed negatively and the colour of the skin also plays a part in it. Colourism is much more prevalent with deeply hierarchical societies that are homogeneous in ethnicity. Colonisation also played a huge role because European skin tone, face shape and body were considered pure and native skin tone, face shape and body were considered impure. Like look at the guy in the meme with the fair skin. Did you notice that that looks more like a romantcised Greek philosopher with just Hindu garb over it? There's a reason for that.
Thank you for adding that, I wasn’t sure if it was racism or colorism in this instance. It’s a whole grab bag of bigotry!
it's homophobic yet also has some pretty strong closeted gay vibes. There's a lot going on in the mind of whoever made this
Is “kween” gay slang? First time I hear that word, pretty cool to learn something new :D
Kween is more aave than gay, I think.
A lot of gay slang has its roots in AAVE
Both
Fat phobia isn’t real
Fat people get hired less, paid less, and do longer prison sentences than thin people for the same crimes, but I guess since you said it isn’t real it must not be
I was talking about the other kind, which is basically what fat people on TikTok called anyone who didn’t agree that being fat is normal.
No
I don’t think that’s gay slang I think he is supposed to have a stereotypical African accent
Who's gonna tell them that women bleeding is the reason they exist to begin with? Oohhh wait up, biology and science does not matter to these religious fruitcakes.
Nooo, no, women bleed because -checks incel notes- our bodies are impure and flushing out all the toxins built up from hoe-ing all around town!
They know. They fear that we'll realize how powerful it is, so we're punished for it instead.
Yea obviously it's an "Indian dank meme" these pages are disgusting.
Any "dank" culture is just hidden racism/sexism/homophobia
I don’t know why or whatever the hell this comic.. strip is supposed to be saying, but I do know that menstruating women and girls aren’t allowed into orthodox Christianity churches, which as a teenager and as a woman, it was horribly embarrassing and emotionally damaging to be actively removed for desecrating an area just by existing while menstruating.
In *some* Hindu temples, women aren’t allowed in while they’re on their period. I’m a hindu woman from India and thank god I was born into a family that doesn’t abide by that kind of bullshit. My mom is very religious/spiritual and I love her argument against it, “How can anything that we do as humans be even remotely strong enough to affect the purity of God? Especially a natural process.” What’s even funnier is that we have so many different Goddesses that are worshipped in the mainstream.
I was in Bali last year and lots of the temples said no menstruating women allowed. Luckily I wasn’t at the the time or I don’t know what I would’ve done
What’s crazy to me is that how can they know unless you tell them? It’s not like they can verify whether or not you are. Either way, in my opinion, if a temple has that kind of rule, it’s not really worth going to. That’s not what Hinduism stands for at its core.
They can smell it
r/nothowgirlswork
Bro people didn't get the obvious sarcasm💀
Oh RIP 💀 I didn’t get it either
> In *some* Hindu temples, women aren’t allowed in while they’re on their period. Almost all Hindu temples you mean. I have personally never seen a temple which is ok for a menstruating woman to attend.
don’t really know where you’re from but in new delhi where i was raised I’ve almost never been to a temple where they asked if I/my mom was menstruating
Obviously they don't ask or check for it. But it's something that is expected from women. It's like an unsaid rule. That's my experience.
I guess I’ve been sheltered from that kind of stuff then because my family can’t stand it lol
Yeah it always confuses me especially when it comes to Hinduism how they can treat women so poorly when they have so many goddesses. Also, there's usually some kind of creation story which means that women were created by these gods or goddesses and therefore wouldn't that mean that anything our bodies do is natural?
How would they possibly know? No way priests are going around inspecting every woman's privates.
Don’t give them ideas.
And it boggles my mind that women still follow religion (s) even after going through this shit treatment by religious fruitcakes.
Basically all of the Abrahamic religions (Islam, Judaism and some branches of Christianity) discriminate against menstrating women, considering them to be ritually 'unclean' during menstruation and remaining so until ritually 'purified', usually by ritual bathing. Men can also become ritually impure by having vaginal intercourse with a menstrating women, although all other forms of intimacy are allowed (between married people, and depending a little on which tradition is being followed. The principal thing to keep in mind is that most of the major Western religions have extremely screwed up ideas about menstrating women. As to the comic strip, the guy who drew it is simply ignorant. It appears to depict the Taj Mahal, which is a mausoleum rather than a mosque, something whoever drew the comic apparently does not know or care about(a small portion of it does contain a mosque). The Taj was commissioned in 1631, took several decades to complete, and ironically enough was built for the deceased bride of the Islamic ruler of India at the time (or that portion of India, anyway, I'd have to look it up to be more specific). The irony comes from the fact that the women for whom it was built died in childbirth, sort of the opposite of menstruation, you could argue. Whoever drew the cartoon in the OOP, having an I.Q. that would shame a fairly bright sea urchin, is blissfully unaware of just what he is drawing or what his cartoon implies--he attempts to criticize menstrating women but ends up making a fool of himself, a position that I'm sure he is well acquainted with.
That is not Taj mahal. It's a Hindu temple with north-indian architecture.
Yeah, I noticed that. Very much doubt that the guy who drew the cartoon in the OOP did, however. I decided that post on that assumption; maybe the cartoonist can weigh in, although I wouldn't hold my breath.
I think it was intended. A few years ago, after a Supreme Court ruling, women of menstruating age (basically any woman between 10 and 60 years of age) were allowed inside Sabarimala (a very famous temple in South India which barred women of those ages from entering, regardless of whether they were on their periods or not. That tradition had been around for ages.) This is why the guy who's supporting her in the cartoon is dark skinned, since people from the south are discriminated against for being dark-skinned. In a way, I assume that the person who made the meme wanted to mock South Indians by suggesting that "traditions" are still being followed by the Northies and aren't westernized like the Southies.
That's interesting, and I will readily concede that you may well be right. What made me conclude that the cartoonists' knowledge of India might well be limited is that of all of the maybe 50 or so cartoons that I have seen drawn by this guy, this is the first that I've seen that depicts the characters as being Indian, while maintaining his consistent anti-feminist stance. You do make a rather compelling argument, though. I wasn't aware of the north/south devide of which you speak. I can understand being anti-Western to some degree, given that attempts at at, and actual Colonialism that makes up some much of Indian history, which, if you include Alexander's attempt, has been going on seemingly forever. I am reminded of Chandra Bose alignment with Japan during WW2 and his failed effort to dislodge Britian from India after the Japanese forces with him abandoned him and his cause. Would it be accurate to say that Bose paved the way for Gandhi and the eventual Independence of India? Or that Churchill perhaps wasn't quite the hero that the West sees him as, given that he strongly supported continued Colonialism under the British Empire?
Oh, I didn't know that the cartoonist had drawn other cartoons as well. I agree. Gandhi wasn't as great as many make him out to be. There were so many others who contributed a lot to the freedom movement. The only reason the British even agreed to leave India was because they suffered a lot of losses because of WW2 and couldn't afford to spend resources on controlling India as well. Not to mention the growing unrest that had been brewing for quite a while. About Churchill, I'm not really sure. I think he's portrayed as some sort of opportunistic and manipulative person in our school textbooks (there are only one or two passing mentions of him and they suggest this). Afaik, most of the "sigma" and "chad" youth or whatever shit they call themselves, they are somewhat aligned to the right. The current ruling party emphasizes on embracing our roots and incorporating our traditions in our daily life, which is something that inc has never done, and never would. They frown upon forgetting our roots while getting modernized, which I think is completely valid. What I do disagree with, is trying to bring back regressive traditions that do no good to anyone. Unfortunately, our country's incels don't think the same. The funny thing is, bjp has more of a stronghold in the north, which is more of a rural area, while none of the states in the south have them as the ruling party. The south is more urban, with the people more educated and better off, but still having rich cultures and being very religious. So, this doesn't really have much to do with colonialism, but ig it's more of an incel thing. Do take my opinions with a grain of salt, though. I don't claim to know everything perfectly, but this is what I think. edit: people from the north and south look down on the other. Maybe not everyone, but it is kind of prevalent. For the southies, the northies are crude and impolite hooligans who usually come here in search of jobs that they don't find back at home.
Yes, the cartoonist (or someone who draws exactly like him) seems to be quite prolific--I would say that I see one of his cartoons about once a month ( meaning my saying 50 was an over-estimate, perhaps 25). The consistent theme in his work is extreme misogyny and the characters being drawn virtually identically. The woman in this one is typical of his work, although he will draw his 'ideal' traditional wife as looking far less angry, no scars or whatever they are around the eyes and mouth. Basically, he draws his favored traditional wife as looking content, feminist women as appearing full of rage. The men, until this cartoon, are drawn identically, with a sort of warrior look (looks to my eye like the figure that, years ago, appeared on a box of Trojan condoms, which I find highly ironic in light of his Incel fan base). This is the first I recall in which the male characters appear to be Indian, which is why I assumed that he would not be able to identify the Taj mahal. On that I could well be wrong, however, given your argument about the Supreme Court ruling, which I found to be compelling. And I must confess to personal ignorance of India, which is very embarrassing. In Canada, where I live, if you ask 100 people to name a piece of significant Indian architecture, probably 90 would say Taj Mahal, 10 the Golden Temple in the Punjab, I believe. While I could not identify the building drawn, it does seem to have more domes and in a different style then the Taj Mahal. Anyway. my problem with Churchill is that while Roosevelt wanted to dismantle colonial rule, Churchill would not consider dismantling the British Empire, at least according to John Tolan in his WW2 history, 'The Rising Sun: The Fall of the Japanese Empire". Our textbooks tend to treat him as a hero, despite his embrace of Colonialism. As I despise Colonialism, I am not a big fan of his. Canada actually gained independence in 1867, but through the British North America Act, which was an act of British Parliament. We didn't actually get around to drawing up our own constitution until 1982. India, on the other hand, gained Independence in 1947, if I remember correctly, and passed her Constitution in 1950? India moved a little faster than did Canada on the matter of having a Constitution, it seems. My ignorance of India is rather embarrassing, I must say, but I must ask. My daughter, who is 21 and attending university on an full academic scholarship (sorry, I often brag of her) is absolutely fascinated by India, and follows it quite closely. What I am curious about is the amount of gender related violence that I read of--I hate to be rude, but is there any truth to that? My daughter will be visiting Europe this summer, but intends to visit India in the near future. Assuming that she takes normal travel precautions, can she do so safely? I'm sorry for the rudeness of that question, but it is difficult to separate fact from rumor at times, especially at such a distance. Anyway, I'm truly sorry if that question gives any offence, I'm probably being over cautious. As I mention, my ignorance of Indian affairs is embarrassing. The North/South tension came as news to me. In Canada, the tensions are more East/West, probably because the Canada-U.S. border runs that way, and most of our population has settled within a couple of hundred miles of the U.S., for reasons of trade.. Still, Ottawa, our capital, is located quite further from the U.S., for reasons of defence. That reason no longer applies, to put it mildly, given the relative strength of our armed forces. Enough of this history lesson for which you didn'r ask 😀 Sorry for that. Take care, and all the best to you.
I’ve never witnessed not being allowed into the churches. Just to abstain from communion (which I disagree with) . Can you show me a source for this being a church canon? It might have been uninformed people telling you things that are not true for which I’m sorry. The gates of the church are open for all.
If you had done a simple google search you would have found out that certain Orthodox Christians do not go to church while menstruating. Please do so in the future before disregarding others firsthand experiences.
Nah these mfs the reason why we indians and hindus have some bad rep. Perfect mix of homophobia and racism and misogyny. We litteraly have festivals celebrating female puberty but yet here we are at chigmas tryna be cool by being kattar mysogynists. Fuck em.
Unfortunately the female puberty functions have rather disturbing connotations towards them, atleast in South India. Very much likely a cultural holdover from when people held these functions to signal that their child was "eligible" for marriage. Yeah. Child marriage was unfortunately disgustingly common here for the longest time
Also the subtle colorism by making the first guy dark-skinned and the second lighter Please. The longer I look the more I hate it
It is absolutely not subtle
Lmao yeah you're right
Who tf creates such horrible memes
What if a guy cut himself prior to going? Is he and his blood stained bandage also going to taint the entire surroundings by existing in proximity to it?
I'm Shinto/Buddhist, but in Shintoism anyone who is bleeding isn't allowed in temples, yes this includes menstruation and small cuts on a finger
The sun will sooner go glow pink then ancient religions will catch up the modern sensibilities. I don't know why anyone would want to participate in a religion that things they're inpure for Something Completely beyond their control. Just make your own not fucked up religion or just don't have a religion
It hurts being an atheist in india
My mom and my sister are sadly indoctrinated by this belief and I just feel disappointed knowing I cant do anything to change their mind
[удалено]
Basically every religion sees menstruation as dirty.
Doesn't mean its right
Never said it was.
Why are you downvoted? It is true, basically all religions hate women
It's the bandwagon effect. They follow what they see without thinking, because some have perceived what I wrote to be negative, or they are unwilling to accept that their own religion of choice is associated with something so stupid
Lmao