Amazon ad with Girl with mustache

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I HATE IT.

…, said many when women had the audacity to wear trousers in the 1920s.

“The main reason why parents refused to buy their daughters a pair of trousers or restricted their use was that trousers were perceived as indecent. One of the respondents described how she had asked her mother whether “we women” should not also wear trousers: “The answer was clear, they don’t belong to women, and why should we imitate men?” (SKS KRA Housut 88.2006, respondent born in 1929). Reactions to women’s trousers were mostly negative; they were seen as indecent, immoral, disgusting and too mannish for women.”

https://ee.openlibhums.org/article/id/1788/

Gretchen, stop trying to make fetch happen.

You're gonna sound so old some day when you say that. Maybe even today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I HATE IT.




…, said many when women had the audacity to wear trousers in the 1920s.

“The main reason why parents refused to buy their daughters a pair of trousers or restricted their use was that trousers were perceived as indecent. One of the respondents described how she had asked her mother whether “we women” should not also wear trousers: “The answer was clear, they don’t belong to women, and why should we imitate men?” (SKS KRA Housut 88.2006, respondent born in 1929). Reactions to women’s trousers were mostly negative; they were seen as indecent, immoral, disgusting and too mannish for women.”

https://ee.openlibhums.org/article/id/1788/

This is not a good analogy, because anyone can choose (or not) to wear trousers. Meanwhile, few women can grow a mustache without hormone treatment. So it will always seem "mannish" to grow a mustache, and facial hair will always be associated with men.

I wish. Whole ethnicities you probably aren't familiar with will see this add as nothing but acceptance of excess facial hair growth.

Tell me you are white without telling me you're white.

[Anonymous]

*ad

[Anonymous]

Omg, my people! I hate that stupid commercial. It’s a shame because there are elements of it that I do like. The girl in it is adorable and I like the song.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I HATE IT.




…, said many when women had the audacity to wear trousers in the 1920s.

“The main reason why parents refused to buy their daughters a pair of trousers or restricted their use was that trousers were perceived as indecent. One of the respondents described how she had asked her mother whether “we women” should not also wear trousers: “The answer was clear, they don’t belong to women, and why should we imitate men?” (SKS KRA Housut 88.2006, respondent born in 1929). Reactions to women’s trousers were mostly negative; they were seen as indecent, immoral, disgusting and too mannish for women.”

https://ee.openlibhums.org/article/id/1788/

This is not a good analogy, because anyone can choose (or not) to wear trousers. Meanwhile, few women can grow a mustache without hormone treatment. So it will always seem "mannish" to grow a mustache, and facial hair will always be associated with men.

I wish. Whole ethnicities you probably aren't familiar with will see this add as nothing but acceptance of excess facial hair growth.

Tell me you are white without telling me you're white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I HATE IT.




…, said many when women had the audacity to wear trousers in the 1920s.

“The main reason why parents refused to buy their daughters a pair of trousers or restricted their use was that trousers were perceived as indecent. One of the respondents described how she had asked her mother whether “we women” should not also wear trousers: “The answer was clear, they don’t belong to women, and why should we imitate men?” (SKS KRA Housut 88.2006, respondent born in 1929). Reactions to women’s trousers were mostly negative; they were seen as indecent, immoral, disgusting and too mannish for women.”

https://ee.openlibhums.org/article/id/1788/

This is not a good analogy, because anyone can choose (or not) to wear trousers. Meanwhile, few women can grow a mustache without hormone treatment. So it will always seem "mannish" to grow a mustache, and facial hair will always be associated with men.

I wish. Whole ethnicities you probably aren't familiar with will see this add as nothing but acceptance of excess facial hair growth.

Tell me you are white without telling me you're white.

Allow me to introduce you to the Greeks and the Italians

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I HATE IT.




…, said many when women had the audacity to wear trousers in the 1920s.

“The main reason why parents refused to buy their daughters a pair of trousers or restricted their use was that trousers were perceived as indecent. One of the respondents described how she had asked her mother whether “we women” should not also wear trousers: “The answer was clear, they don’t belong to women, and why should we imitate men?” (SKS KRA Housut 88.2006, respondent born in 1929). Reactions to women’s trousers were mostly negative; they were seen as indecent, immoral, disgusting and too mannish for women.”

https://ee.openlibhums.org/article/id/1788/

This is not a good analogy, because anyone can choose (or not) to wear trousers. Meanwhile, few women can grow a mustache without hormone treatment. So it will always seem "mannish" to grow a mustache, and facial hair will always be associated with men.

I wish. Whole ethnicities you probably aren't familiar with will see this add as nothing but acceptance of excess facial hair growth.

Tell me you are white without telling me you're white.

Oh I know. I've met many in the threading places. But I'm assuming PP must be some variation of white who don't have to deal with this.

Allow me to introduce you to the Greeks and the Italians

[Anonymous]

Both of whom are considered white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I HATE IT.




…, said many when women had the audacity to wear trousers in the 1920s.

“The main reason why parents refused to buy their daughters a pair of trousers or restricted their use was that trousers were perceived as indecent. One of the respondents described how she had asked her mother whether “we women” should not also wear trousers: “The answer was clear, they don’t belong to women, and why should we imitate men?” (SKS KRA Housut 88.2006, respondent born in 1929). Reactions to women’s trousers were mostly negative; they were seen as indecent, immoral, disgusting and too mannish for women.”

https://ee.openlibhums.org/article/id/1788/

This is not a good analogy, because anyone can choose (or not) to wear trousers. Meanwhile, few women can grow a mustache without hormone treatment. So it will always seem "mannish" to grow a mustache, and facial hair will always be associated with men.

I wish. Whole ethnicities you probably aren't familiar with will see this add as nothing but acceptance of excess facial hair growth.

Tell me you are white without telling me you're white.

Allow me to introduce you to the Greeks and the Italians

Oh I know. I've met many in the threading places. But I'm assuming PP must be some variation of white who don't have to deal with this. (Pale, scarce hair?)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I HATE IT.




…, said many when women had the audacity to wear trousers in the 1920s.

“The main reason why parents refused to buy their daughters a pair of trousers or restricted their use was that trousers were perceived as indecent. One of the respondents described how she had asked her mother whether “we women” should not also wear trousers: “The answer was clear, they don’t belong to women, and why should we imitate men?” (SKS KRA Housut 88.2006, respondent born in 1929). Reactions to women’s trousers were mostly negative; they were seen as indecent, immoral, disgusting and too mannish for women.”

https://ee.openlibhums.org/article/id/1788/

This is not a good analogy, because anyone can choose (or not) to wear trousers. Meanwhile, few women can grow a mustache without hormone treatment. So it will always seem "mannish" to grow a mustache, and facial hair will always be associated with men.

I wish. Whole ethnicities you probably aren't familiar with will see this add as nothing but acceptance of excess facial hair growth.

Tell me you are white without telling me you're white.

Allow me to introduce you to the Greeks and the Italians

I'm eastern European and have a mustache too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It freaked me out. What was that about? Was it something with trans?

I hadn't seen it until I saw this thread. I'm a trans woman and after watching it, it seems pretty obvious to me that the person in the video is a nonbinary AFAB person, most likely on testosterone. It's clearly queer coded and the person is clearly supposed to be gender nonconforming and almost certainly nonbinary. They could have made it more obvious with something like a trans flag but that's probably too on the nose for cis viewers. I'd wager the only reason that there wasn't a blahaj in the video is because it's an Ikea product. If you're not familiar, it's a large and inexpensive stuffed shark from Ikea that happens to have the same colors as the trans flag and has become a thing in trans culture.

If they were on testosterone because they’re trans, they wouldn’t be upset about the lip hair and trying to remove it…

Maybe you're right. I might be reading too much into the bedroom. I'm not nonbinary but I know many that are and they don't all want the same things in their transition but one cannot dictate what hormones will do to your body. For example, an AFAB NB might not want body hair but would want a mustache. Or they may not want a mustache either. Some AMAB NB's want body feminization without breast growth. You're probably right though and I'm reading too much into it.

Am I the only one who can't follow most of what the PP is writing? Maybe lay off all of the acronyms for a second.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It freaked me out. What was that about? Was it something with trans?

I hadn't seen it until I saw this thread. I'm a trans woman and after watching it, it seems pretty obvious to me that the person in the video is a nonbinary AFAB person, most likely on testosterone. It's clearly queer coded and the person is clearly supposed to be gender nonconforming and almost certainly nonbinary. They could have made it more obvious with something like a trans flag but that's probably too on the nose for cis viewers. I'd wager the only reason that there wasn't a blahaj in the video is because it's an Ikea product. If you're not familiar, it's a large and inexpensive stuffed shark from Ikea that happens to have the same colors as the trans flag and has become a thing in trans culture.

If they were on testosterone because they’re trans, they wouldn’t be upset about the lip hair and trying to remove it…

Maybe you're right. I might be reading too much into the bedroom. I'm not nonbinary but I know many that are and they don't all want the same things in their transition but one cannot dictate what hormones will do to your body. For example, an AFAB NB might not want body hair but would want a mustache. Or they may not want a mustache either. Some AMAB NB's want body feminization without breast growth. You're probably right though and I'm reading too much into it.

Am I the only one who can't follow most of what the PP is writing? Maybe lay off all of the acronyms for a second.

No, you're not. And I definitely don't think Amazon would make an add this targeted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It freaked me out. What was that about? Was it something with trans?

I hadn't seen it until I saw this thread. I'm a trans woman and after watching it, it seems pretty obvious to me that the person in the video is a nonbinary AFAB person, most likely on testosterone. It's clearly queer coded and the person is clearly supposed to be gender nonconforming and almost certainly nonbinary. They could have made it more obvious with something like a trans flag but that's probably too on the nose for cis viewers. I'd wager the only reason that there wasn't a blahaj in the video is because it's an Ikea product. If you're not familiar, it's a large and inexpensive stuffed shark from Ikea that happens to have the same colors as the trans flag and has become a thing in trans culture.

If they were on testosterone because they’re trans, they wouldn’t be upset about the lip hair and trying to remove it…

Maybe you're right. I might be reading too much into the bedroom. I'm not nonbinary but I know many that are and they don't all want the same things in their transition but one cannot dictate what hormones will do to your body. For example, an AFAB NB might not want body hair but would want a mustache. Or they may not want a mustache either. Some AMAB NB's want body feminization without breast growth. You're probably right though and I'm reading too much into it.

Am I the only one who can't follow most of what the PP is writing? Maybe lay off all of the acronyms for a second.

They’re saying Assigned Male at Birth, Assigned Female at Birth, and Non-Binary. It’s similar to man, woman, neither/both.

[Anonymous]

I hate the ad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It freaked me out. What was that about? Was it something with trans?

I hadn't seen it until I saw this thread. I'm a trans woman and after watching it, it seems pretty obvious to me that the person in the video is a nonbinary AFAB person, most likely on testosterone. It's clearly queer coded and the person is clearly supposed to be gender nonconforming and almost certainly nonbinary. They could have made it more obvious with something like a trans flag but that's probably too on the nose for cis viewers. I'd wager the only reason that there wasn't a blahaj in the video is because it's an Ikea product. If you're not familiar, it's a large and inexpensive stuffed shark from Ikea that happens to have the same colors as the trans flag and has become a thing in trans culture.

If they were on testosterone because they’re trans, they wouldn’t be upset about the lip hair and trying to remove it…

Maybe you're right. I might be reading too much into the bedroom. I'm not nonbinary but I know many that are and they don't all want the same things in their transition but one cannot dictate what hormones will do to your body. For example, an AFAB NB might not want body hair but would want a mustache. Or they may not want a mustache either. Some AMAB NB's want body feminization without breast growth. You're probably right though and I'm reading too much into it.

In their transition to what? I thought the whole point of being nonbinary is to be neither.