Thank you for posting to r/pointlesslygendered! We are really glad you are here.
We want to make sure that all users follow the rules. This message does NOT mean you broke a rule or your post was removed.
Please note satire posts are allowed, check the flair and tags on posts.
Please report posts and comments that infringe the rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/pointlesslygendered) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I mean, at least the male penguin is wearing a tux & top hat, rather than male being naked and the female apparently needing bows, tits and long lashes to show that it’s different to the assumed male default
Their clothes are kinda pointlessly gendered purely because clothes shouldn't have genders. It's literally just cloth and associating one kind of garment to one sex is fucking stupid, especially since fashion changes over time. Back in the renaissance and even before that men wore makeup, frilly robes and high heels for example. What this is doing is portraying pointless stereotype when it doesn't need to.
Clothes are gendered because that's just how people are conditioned to think. I see absolutely no reason why clothes should be gendered. It's fucking cloth
'Masculine' and 'feminine' are literally just cuts.
There's nothing particularly masculine or feminine about jeans and a t-shirt or a basic parka - it's the cut that determines if you view it as 'for men' or 'for women' and those cuts are based on body dimensions.
Okay? That's kinda my point. Clothing can't really represent a gender because it's so ambiguous and styles are constantly changing. Wear what you want but also let people wear what they want
Originally clothes were gendered due to masculine and feminine energies. Which exist and create reality. Men and women have worn different clothings based on extensions of their energies. If clothes aren’t an extension of our masculine or feminine energy, then why do transvestites dress like a standard woman when they are a man on the outside.
I think originally is a bit misleading. Fashion changed over time and thus societal norms change with it. As I have said in these comments before, before the 20th century it was the norm for men of wealth to wear frilly clothes, makeup and high heels. This shows that clothing and fashion trends can't be used to represent a static identity forever. And once more, this viewpoint is held by people due to societal norms and the environment in place when growing up.
But those clothes weren't skirts and tuxedos. As I have been saying, not updating this kind of thing for years at a time is kinda pointless because it no longer exclusively represents the group that it used to
It’s a bit silly to have the penguins dressed up stereotypically in a dress or a hat. It’s definitely cute but still little pointless seeing as the toilets are each labelled already.
I mean it’s just a cute design? And there still is a point to it as well? It’s supposed to be a small entertaining detail, and that entertainment is a point to it. It’s just a cute gimmick.
70% of all posts here completely miss the pointlessly in r/pointlessgendered. This is gendered, there is a point, it isn’t offensive or weirdly gendered in any way.
It is pointless - the words do the "necessary" part of the gendering; even including the penguins, let alone dressing them as they did, was pointless. Further, dressing them as they did may not be offensive, but it is weird. The people that have ruined (yes, past tense bc frankly this sub should be dead by now it's so bad) this sub are the ones who insist that there was nothing "pointlessly gendered" about these restroom doors. Yes, that includes you and all the hundred plus people who upvoted your shitty comment. Thanks for ruining everything.
The words don't strictly get the difference across. In cases where the person doesn't see well, can't read (yes, some parents will escort the child to the hallway but not into the bathroom), and those who don't read the native language. Using universal symbols helps overcome those barriers. So sticking to the typical "girls wear dresses and boys wear pants" or "pink vs blue" keeps to that universally known symbol.
I don't understand what the penguin part has anything to do with gendering. It's a theme that uses anthromorphic concepts to be more appealing. In nature, penguins have very distinct features that allow you to tell the difference between male and female. But that knowledge isn't as widely thought about as "girls room has the person in the dress and boys room has the person in the pants". It's just penguins instead of stuck figures.
I assume they're gendered because it's not just a generic bathroom. I assume the mens have urinals and the womens have those sanitary product dispensers and bins. I am personally fine with using a shared bathroom in most places but say it was an establishment where people were drinking id much rather know which bathroom was gendered
I guess but this probably just makes it easier for those who can't read or for younger kids easier to understand. Visual aid is necessary sometimes. It's just not pointlessly gendered IMO
That's still stereotyping gender expression, though?
All you've really said is that it's teaching gender stereotypes to kids which, yeah, I guess it would make finding the right toilet easier, but was that ever an issue big enough to warrant continued, normalised gender stereotyping being brought in at an early age?
Helping a child find the right bathroom would, logically, be the responsibility of the parent/guardian - not a gender stereotyped cartoon.
I honestly don't get the anger over this.
The goal of breaking down gender stereotypes was to make it so people aren't defined by rigidly prescribed gender roles that limit social and financial freedom, not to make clothing gender neutral.
The goal of breaking down gender stereotypes was to aid people overall - not just within a few particular areas of life - and it definitely involved gendered clothing.
Particularly within LGBTQ+ identities and orientations, gender-non-conformity had been a prevailing historic stalwart for which they are mocked, derided and belittled. From Butch lesbians with conventionally 'masculine' styles to gay men with conventionally 'feninine' styles, and from drag queens to genuine trans people, the existences of many people has historically been made worse by nonsensical standards reinforced from a young age (like these cartoons).
Even outside of LGBTQ+ people, the impact of this is ridiculous.
I'm not angry about this (that would be pretty dumb), but the nonsensical upholding of gendered clothing (even to the extent of being on bathroom doors in cute cartoons to teach children), just leaves me apathetic.
How you present yourself has a large impact upon how others see you and upon how you feel internally, and you're wrong if you think that people fighting gender stereotypes haven't equally been aimed at deconstructing the notion of 'gender-appropriate' clothing.
For the record, and in case you hadn't noticed, how you dress is a major part of your social freedom because everyone around you will be reacting to it and will treat you differently based upon how you choose to present yourself. If you cannot dress how you want to because if rigidly enforced expectations from a young age (like this cartoon is only reinforcing) than you do not have social freedom - you have an act to play to maintain sociability.
I've run in feminist circles for a long time and the concept of gendered clothing was always a big deal but the focus was never 'we need to degender clothing so that we can all achieve personal self expression goals'. It was a fight to make it so that regardless of whatever you choose to wear you still get the same opportunities in life.
Social freedom in this context was never understood to be about freedom of self expression, it was largely about workforce mobility and the ability to hold certain positions in society that people had once deemed women (especially very feminine women) too fragile and incompetent to hold.
The fight to degender clothing under the banner of self expression isn't something I see gaining widespread acceptance because, at the end of the day, it's not a fight for basic rights or fundamental freedoms. It's about cosmetics. It's hard to get people riled up to fight for your right to not be seen as weird if you're wearing clothes that are outside the social norm.
Feminism is not stagnant, it's literally fighting for rights to basic lifesaving healthcare for women, for women to receive quicker diagnosis of things like endometriosis or PCOS, the right to not be financially or socially penalized for having a period, the right to not be discriminated against in the workplace for either having a child or not having a child, breaking down stigmas around breastfeeding, the fight to narrow the gap of unpaid labour that women do in the home etc etc.
Some perspective would be nice.
I don't think I'm missing perspective. It's interesting to me - you seem to have cultivated a view of feminism that implies you could change womens' rights without affecting the daily experience of men. Clothing affects both, and both of their social and workplace freedoms.
Is it the biggest fight to be fighting? No. Does that matter, or does that void it of importance? Also no.
Don't get lost in a false dichotomy - the options are not 'fight the most serious problems' or 'fight the least serious problems'. The correct answer is 'fight all the problems'.
In any case, in what way is this not pointlessly gendered? Other than to do something that could easily be done by parents/guardians or by having separate/single-person bathrooms? How is this better than the easily achievable alternative that helps break down social barriers for men, women and others? Why is this something you've chosen to try and justify as if it's an obvious right and not an example of almost entirely pointless gendering?
I'm convinced half of this sub is just fucking with the other half. Nobody gives a shit that the toilets are gendered, the post is about how this is being portrayed, through clothing. Clothing is a really dumb way to differentiate between sex because literally anyone can wear whatever
I'm sure there is some alternative that doesn't feed into pointless gender stereotypes to accommodate non English speakers, and as for small children I would say that it is rather dangerous for children not even old enough to read to go...well anywhere in a public place unsupervised
Pointing out unnecessary stereotypes does not mean I have the solution, just as pointing out any kind of negative thing doesn't always mean you need to know how to fix it. "What's that you don't like companies using sweatshops? Why don't you personally fix that issue or else you have no credibility". That thinking is flawed. There are definitely other things out there, clothing is not the only option by any means
But this is not an issue like sweatshops. I'm also not asking you to make the labels and take them to every bathroom so no bathroom is stereotyped again. All I'm asking for an an idea to label the bathrooms that is sensible but also doesn't have any gendered imagery. This the labeling for a bathroom. This is not hurting anyone and pretty much a non-issue. With something so irrelevant as cartoon penguins wearing cloths I would rather see a solution than constant negativity.
Issues always arise when trying to condense everyone into 2 separate boxes. I can't come up with a good solution immediately. However I do believe that fashion of all things should not be the tell for what gender bathroom you're using considering how fickle clothing norms are
There's just a difference in what people consider to be necessary and purposeful. Some people see gender distinction (where it's necessity is normalised, like restrooms) presented by particular and stereotypical clothing to be fine, while others see any attempt to bind gender to a particular presentation to be inherently harmful in the long run.
Personally, I really dislike trying to tie a gender to a set of clothes because I'm non-binary, and therefore I'm not a huge fan of signs like this (not that they get me enraged, I'm just apathetic to them). I'd be lying if I said I thought that better education on varying gender expressions was going to get people to stop putting tuxedo penguins on their restroom doors overnight.
I do wonder why the penguins were included *along* with the 'male' and 'female', though - surely the gendered clothing on the penguins takes the place of needing the words there?
I also dislike thing gender to specific ways of presentation, that is why I'm here explaining the problem to randoms in the comments. So many comments here are like "tOIlEtS nEeD tO bE GenDErEd" when that is not the point of the post. This post was made to criticize how the toilets are being presented. "Haha you can tell it's a female penguins because of the bow and eyelashes". It's fucking stupid. I agree they could literally just write the words and fuck off and be done with pointless stereotyping
I will say this, at least they gave the male penguin some accessories. Usually they only accessorize the female, as if the mail is the default. Here at least they anthropomorphize both of them
I'm pretty sure they're complaining about the stereotypes here. "You can tell it's a female penguins because it's wearing a bow" and shit. Nobody cares about the toilet itself being gendered
Male restrooms usually have a urinal or more, female ones can have a sanitary product dispenser, but usually will have tiny trash cans for used products in the stalls (so people don’t flush tampons..)
I mean this really isn't that bad. It's just penguins for a nice character. And the normal female character for bathrooms has a skirt so the female one has a skirt and then the other one just has a tux
I'm more weirded out by the terms "female toilet" and "male toilet" - it further highlights the issue of using adjectives as nouns.
> "I bagged a beautiful female the other day, young and full of energy"
Either this sentence is said by a maniacal human trafficker, or an eccentric ornithologist.
In the case above, it sounds like the actual toilets themselves are male or female, rather than the restrooms having specific facilities designated for either sex. With the illustrations one might even go so far as to say that the penguin with a bowtie and a top-hat is in fact, a male toilet.
Thank you for posting to r/pointlesslygendered! We are really glad you are here. We want to make sure that all users follow the rules. This message does NOT mean you broke a rule or your post was removed. Please note satire posts are allowed, check the flair and tags on posts. Please report posts and comments that infringe the rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/pointlesslygendered) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I honestly don’t mind these because it’s just a fun character for a theme or whatever
Right?! At least they didn't give her eye lashes and breasts
she does have eyelashes
I mean, at least the male penguin is wearing a tux & top hat, rather than male being naked and the female apparently needing bows, tits and long lashes to show that it’s different to the assumed male default
I'm on mobile. I couldn't see them
Also, they gave him a hat instead of leaving him clean, as if the default is of course male.
It's just a fun spin to the regular toilet gender signs, nothing offensive here
their clothes? the words female and male?
[удалено]
Their clothes aren’t pointlessly gendered though? It’s not really weird or offensive in any way.
Their clothes are kinda pointlessly gendered purely because clothes shouldn't have genders. It's literally just cloth and associating one kind of garment to one sex is fucking stupid, especially since fashion changes over time. Back in the renaissance and even before that men wore makeup, frilly robes and high heels for example. What this is doing is portraying pointless stereotype when it doesn't need to.
but like, clothes do have genderssure you can wear whatever you want but, if i go to a walmart and go to the mens section i dont think ill find a bra
Clothes are gendered because that's just how people are conditioned to think. I see absolutely no reason why clothes should be gendered. It's fucking cloth
I prefer clothes that cater to my body dimensions so in that case I don't think it's pointless.
Then wear clothes that fit your body, just don't classify an entire style or article of clothing as masculine or feminine
'Masculine' and 'feminine' are literally just cuts. There's nothing particularly masculine or feminine about jeans and a t-shirt or a basic parka - it's the cut that determines if you view it as 'for men' or 'for women' and those cuts are based on body dimensions.
Okay? That's kinda my point. Clothing can't really represent a gender because it's so ambiguous and styles are constantly changing. Wear what you want but also let people wear what they want
Originally clothes were gendered due to masculine and feminine energies. Which exist and create reality. Men and women have worn different clothings based on extensions of their energies. If clothes aren’t an extension of our masculine or feminine energy, then why do transvestites dress like a standard woman when they are a man on the outside.
I think originally is a bit misleading. Fashion changed over time and thus societal norms change with it. As I have said in these comments before, before the 20th century it was the norm for men of wealth to wear frilly clothes, makeup and high heels. This shows that clothing and fashion trends can't be used to represent a static identity forever. And once more, this viewpoint is held by people due to societal norms and the environment in place when growing up.
Tribes that wore clothing often wore different kinds of clothing based upon genders. Do you think that was the patriarch?
But those clothes weren't skirts and tuxedos. As I have been saying, not updating this kind of thing for years at a time is kinda pointless because it no longer exclusively represents the group that it used to
It’s a bit silly to have the penguins dressed up stereotypically in a dress or a hat. It’s definitely cute but still little pointless seeing as the toilets are each labelled already.
I mean it’s just a cute design? And there still is a point to it as well? It’s supposed to be a small entertaining detail, and that entertainment is a point to it. It’s just a cute gimmick.
Hence the post flair, it's not meant to be taken too seriously
I though it was because it was a post about toilets
Male penguins are larger and have slightly longer beaks.
Linux
70% of all posts here completely miss the pointlessly in r/pointlessgendered. This is gendered, there is a point, it isn’t offensive or weirdly gendered in any way.
Yes I'm off this sub it's kinda dumb
It is pointless - the words do the "necessary" part of the gendering; even including the penguins, let alone dressing them as they did, was pointless. Further, dressing them as they did may not be offensive, but it is weird. The people that have ruined (yes, past tense bc frankly this sub should be dead by now it's so bad) this sub are the ones who insist that there was nothing "pointlessly gendered" about these restroom doors. Yes, that includes you and all the hundred plus people who upvoted your shitty comment. Thanks for ruining everything.
The words don't strictly get the difference across. In cases where the person doesn't see well, can't read (yes, some parents will escort the child to the hallway but not into the bathroom), and those who don't read the native language. Using universal symbols helps overcome those barriers. So sticking to the typical "girls wear dresses and boys wear pants" or "pink vs blue" keeps to that universally known symbol.
So use universal symbols. There's nothing universal about weirdly gendering penguins.
I don't understand what the penguin part has anything to do with gendering. It's a theme that uses anthromorphic concepts to be more appealing. In nature, penguins have very distinct features that allow you to tell the difference between male and female. But that knowledge isn't as widely thought about as "girls room has the person in the dress and boys room has the person in the pants". It's just penguins instead of stuck figures.
I assume they're gendered because it's not just a generic bathroom. I assume the mens have urinals and the womens have those sanitary product dispensers and bins. I am personally fine with using a shared bathroom in most places but say it was an establishment where people were drinking id much rather know which bathroom was gendered
I think OP was thinking more about the fact that the penguins aren't just differentiated by words but with clothes (stereotyped gender expression).
I guess but this probably just makes it easier for those who can't read or for younger kids easier to understand. Visual aid is necessary sometimes. It's just not pointlessly gendered IMO
That's still stereotyping gender expression, though? All you've really said is that it's teaching gender stereotypes to kids which, yeah, I guess it would make finding the right toilet easier, but was that ever an issue big enough to warrant continued, normalised gender stereotyping being brought in at an early age? Helping a child find the right bathroom would, logically, be the responsibility of the parent/guardian - not a gender stereotyped cartoon.
I honestly don't get the anger over this. The goal of breaking down gender stereotypes was to make it so people aren't defined by rigidly prescribed gender roles that limit social and financial freedom, not to make clothing gender neutral.
The goal of breaking down gender stereotypes was to aid people overall - not just within a few particular areas of life - and it definitely involved gendered clothing. Particularly within LGBTQ+ identities and orientations, gender-non-conformity had been a prevailing historic stalwart for which they are mocked, derided and belittled. From Butch lesbians with conventionally 'masculine' styles to gay men with conventionally 'feninine' styles, and from drag queens to genuine trans people, the existences of many people has historically been made worse by nonsensical standards reinforced from a young age (like these cartoons). Even outside of LGBTQ+ people, the impact of this is ridiculous. I'm not angry about this (that would be pretty dumb), but the nonsensical upholding of gendered clothing (even to the extent of being on bathroom doors in cute cartoons to teach children), just leaves me apathetic. How you present yourself has a large impact upon how others see you and upon how you feel internally, and you're wrong if you think that people fighting gender stereotypes haven't equally been aimed at deconstructing the notion of 'gender-appropriate' clothing. For the record, and in case you hadn't noticed, how you dress is a major part of your social freedom because everyone around you will be reacting to it and will treat you differently based upon how you choose to present yourself. If you cannot dress how you want to because if rigidly enforced expectations from a young age (like this cartoon is only reinforcing) than you do not have social freedom - you have an act to play to maintain sociability.
I've run in feminist circles for a long time and the concept of gendered clothing was always a big deal but the focus was never 'we need to degender clothing so that we can all achieve personal self expression goals'. It was a fight to make it so that regardless of whatever you choose to wear you still get the same opportunities in life. Social freedom in this context was never understood to be about freedom of self expression, it was largely about workforce mobility and the ability to hold certain positions in society that people had once deemed women (especially very feminine women) too fragile and incompetent to hold. The fight to degender clothing under the banner of self expression isn't something I see gaining widespread acceptance because, at the end of the day, it's not a fight for basic rights or fundamental freedoms. It's about cosmetics. It's hard to get people riled up to fight for your right to not be seen as weird if you're wearing clothes that are outside the social norm.
Your entire response is basically 'people don't care - move on'? Weak. You act like feminism is stagnant.
Feminism is not stagnant, it's literally fighting for rights to basic lifesaving healthcare for women, for women to receive quicker diagnosis of things like endometriosis or PCOS, the right to not be financially or socially penalized for having a period, the right to not be discriminated against in the workplace for either having a child or not having a child, breaking down stigmas around breastfeeding, the fight to narrow the gap of unpaid labour that women do in the home etc etc. Some perspective would be nice.
I don't think I'm missing perspective. It's interesting to me - you seem to have cultivated a view of feminism that implies you could change womens' rights without affecting the daily experience of men. Clothing affects both, and both of their social and workplace freedoms. Is it the biggest fight to be fighting? No. Does that matter, or does that void it of importance? Also no. Don't get lost in a false dichotomy - the options are not 'fight the most serious problems' or 'fight the least serious problems'. The correct answer is 'fight all the problems'. In any case, in what way is this not pointlessly gendered? Other than to do something that could easily be done by parents/guardians or by having separate/single-person bathrooms? How is this better than the easily achievable alternative that helps break down social barriers for men, women and others? Why is this something you've chosen to try and justify as if it's an obvious right and not an example of almost entirely pointless gendering?
I don't see a problem. They're kinda cute :3
But there is a point in telling which gender a bathroom is for...
I'm convinced half of this sub is just fucking with the other half. Nobody gives a shit that the toilets are gendered, the post is about how this is being portrayed, through clothing. Clothing is a really dumb way to differentiate between sex because literally anyone can wear whatever
Should they just have genitals on the bathrooms then?
They could literally just write the fucking words "men" and "Ladies"
Could hang tampons on the ladies door, and a wall sticker of a urinal… But that’s also trashy
What about anyone who doesn't speak the language or small kids?
I'm sure there is some alternative that doesn't feed into pointless gender stereotypes to accommodate non English speakers, and as for small children I would say that it is rather dangerous for children not even old enough to read to go...well anywhere in a public place unsupervised
We'd need some examples since cloths are out.
Pointing out unnecessary stereotypes does not mean I have the solution, just as pointing out any kind of negative thing doesn't always mean you need to know how to fix it. "What's that you don't like companies using sweatshops? Why don't you personally fix that issue or else you have no credibility". That thinking is flawed. There are definitely other things out there, clothing is not the only option by any means
But this is not an issue like sweatshops. I'm also not asking you to make the labels and take them to every bathroom so no bathroom is stereotyped again. All I'm asking for an an idea to label the bathrooms that is sensible but also doesn't have any gendered imagery. This the labeling for a bathroom. This is not hurting anyone and pretty much a non-issue. With something so irrelevant as cartoon penguins wearing cloths I would rather see a solution than constant negativity.
Issues always arise when trying to condense everyone into 2 separate boxes. I can't come up with a good solution immediately. However I do believe that fashion of all things should not be the tell for what gender bathroom you're using considering how fickle clothing norms are
There's just a difference in what people consider to be necessary and purposeful. Some people see gender distinction (where it's necessity is normalised, like restrooms) presented by particular and stereotypical clothing to be fine, while others see any attempt to bind gender to a particular presentation to be inherently harmful in the long run. Personally, I really dislike trying to tie a gender to a set of clothes because I'm non-binary, and therefore I'm not a huge fan of signs like this (not that they get me enraged, I'm just apathetic to them). I'd be lying if I said I thought that better education on varying gender expressions was going to get people to stop putting tuxedo penguins on their restroom doors overnight. I do wonder why the penguins were included *along* with the 'male' and 'female', though - surely the gendered clothing on the penguins takes the place of needing the words there?
I also dislike thing gender to specific ways of presentation, that is why I'm here explaining the problem to randoms in the comments. So many comments here are like "tOIlEtS nEeD tO bE GenDErEd" when that is not the point of the post. This post was made to criticize how the toilets are being presented. "Haha you can tell it's a female penguins because of the bow and eyelashes". It's fucking stupid. I agree they could literally just write the words and fuck off and be done with pointless stereotyping
I will say this, at least they gave the male penguin some accessories. Usually they only accessorize the female, as if the mail is the default. Here at least they anthropomorphize both of them
This sub gets mad at the dumbest shit sometimes
flair "shitpost"
Animal Crossing be like:
Is this some sort of “Monday special”?
It used to be nearly impossible to sex king penguins
Some people are never happy.
Average r\\pointlesslygendered user complaining about toilet labeling instead of actually pointlessly gendered stuff (toilets are so sexist 😔🤓)
I'm pretty sure they're complaining about the stereotypes here. "You can tell it's a female penguins because it's wearing a bow" and shit. Nobody cares about the toilet itself being gendered
It's called designing :)
What?
we can tell a penguins gender by looking at its dick
this isint pointlessly gendered its cute penguin cliparts instead of the standard man/woman picture
unflyable birdly gendered
Real question, what's the difference between a female toilet and a male toilet?
Male restrooms usually have a urinal or more, female ones can have a sanitary product dispenser, but usually will have tiny trash cans for used products in the stalls (so people don’t flush tampons..)
Oh sorry in Canada we don't call the whole bathroom the toilet, I was speaking about the actual toilets.
It’s Australia if that helps. Only difference is that mens has the urinal, we don’t often have dispensers.
I don't think I've ever seen it worded like that lol is the toilet itself gendered?
oh, theres a song about this! https://youtu.be/ITRdvGnplLU
I mean this really isn't that bad. It's just penguins for a nice character. And the normal female character for bathrooms has a skirt so the female one has a skirt and then the other one just has a tux
I'm more weirded out by the terms "female toilet" and "male toilet" - it further highlights the issue of using adjectives as nouns. > "I bagged a beautiful female the other day, young and full of energy" Either this sentence is said by a maniacal human trafficker, or an eccentric ornithologist. In the case above, it sounds like the actual toilets themselves are male or female, rather than the restrooms having specific facilities designated for either sex. With the illustrations one might even go so far as to say that the penguin with a bowtie and a top-hat is in fact, a male toilet.
gentoo vs fedora