Why do you think the right has been trying to make the tradwife movement a thing? They yearn for a time when we were considered property.
Definitely. It’s the gateway. And a complete fantasy apart from maybe a few well off influencers living the dream without abuse and other.
But I mean, you just need to delve into mainstream social media occasionally to see what the men on the manosphere side of this reactionary conservative movement really think and openly say when they’re attacking feminist pages daily.
Any gen Z women that get lured across the line from cottagecore to tradwife are in for a hell of a fucking time with these broccoli top little nazi gen Z boys.
I tell you society went downhill when ladies stopped playing the zither!
I don’t think you are doing half of that list while dressed like that
They should kiss.
it’s been a hundred years and still no Yuri of them??!!!??
LOL, since fucking when did a woman who could tend farm ever wear dresses like the one on the left (more than, like, once in her life on her wedding day or something)?
Help manage her husband’s antebellum plantation, maybe, but fieldwork? Hell, no.
The cartoonist probably looked at some old family photos, saw his grandmother dressed up for a formal portrait, and thought it was everyday clothing. Early photographers used to keep nice clothes on hand for customers to pose in, so the clothes may not even have been hers.
Don’t forget modern girls only know "McDonalds, charge they phone, twerk, be bisexual, eat hot chip & lie.”
I should listen to more of them. I only really knew “ready for the floor”
Check out this absolute banger then https://youtu.be/1CS3UvH09ew
Um yea, you should. Every album of theirs is a banger.
Ya know, I’m not so sure that the old comic is necessarily just criticizing flapper girls. The way I understand the bottom text is “These are the qualities that women of these generations need to have to make men want to marry them”, so I think it’s also saying that the young men nowadays have wacky tastes as well.
If you want to be even more charitable, which is probably undeserved I know, there’s nothing explicitly written in the comic to indicate that the artist thinks one side is necessarily better than the other, just that things are different now than they used to be. It’s possible that it was created by a young guy who thinks the stuff on the left is lame and old fashioned and the stuff listed on the right kicks ass.
Fuck the manosphere though.
I see no criticism in the comic at all. Young men of the previous generation wanted the girl on the left, now they want the flapper. It’s just a comment on how far and how quickly society was changing 100-years ago.
Also, if the artist were making fun of the flapper they wouldn’t have drawn her as so attractive. Maybe it’s just me, but she’s leaving me hot and bothered. :)
I think thats a part of the cultural shift. Back then, the way the “flapper”(ive never heard that term, what does it mean?) was dressing was provacative, and by drawing her that way they are attempting to shame her i believe. They are listing what these women are able to do, and from the authors perspective, women NEED to be able to do things on the left. Whereas its a mans job to do the things on the right. Theyre also trying to say that the new generation can’t effectively manage a household, which I personally find hilarious, because the author clearly missed the entire point. Women were fed up with being forced into traditional wife roles. They werent interested in “running the household” any more, which the author seems to not understand.
In a way its a good thing that our society has changed so much its difficult to even tell that the authors goal was sexism. That brand of sexism is so alien now that most people dont even realize its supposed to be sexist, and instead just comes off as cool.
Really telling how much you’re reading into this. I wonder what your opinion would have been if you had not seen the editorial bit at the top, only the cartoon. I feel both you and OP are looking for offense when I feel there is none to be had.
Again, if the artist wanted to portray flappers as unattractive, a poor option for a marriageable young man, he could have easily depicted her as sickly and gross. If anything, it’s almost like he’s making fun of the demure, old fashioned girl. But that’s my modern sensibilities and attractions speaking. :)
BTW, flappers were a sort of 1920s women’s subculture. Google it and hit “pictures” and you’ll instantly get the look. They were young rebels, breaking out of the female mold they had been forced into. For example, women simply did not smoke before the 20s, strictly a male thing. Not sure if this was an American culture or if the Europeans shared, or likely, started it. From what I gather, flappers were pretty common, nothing weird at the time. 🤷
Yeah, i shouldve better clarified that I was speaking from my personal suspicions, not from a place of fact. As for the inclusion of the top context, i dont think it wouldve changed anything for me. My assumption that the comic is intended to cause harm is based on my assumption of the comics age, and my knowledge of how women were genrally seen as property back then. If it were a modern comic, I would be campaigning for the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise. But given the history and the likelihood that the author will not be offended since theyre dead, im not particularly incentivised to find nuance from an era of blatant disgusting behavior.
I appreciate the info on flappers. I don’t know anything about them but a couple people were telling me more. With that context, that flappers wasnt a slur or demeaning, i could much more easily see the comic going either way.
Yes, women were treated a second-class citizens! American women couldn’t even vote until 1920. And I think that’s exactly where the artist is coming from, highlighting these changes without judgement. One more time, he could have made the flapper unattractive. (I’ll allow maybe my personal preferences are at play here. :) Long, thin, knee-high hose, cute headband, small breasts, independent, parties, sexy jewelry, yes please!) I feel you’re mixing Victorian, Gilded Age and Mauve Decade (much the same) women’s rights into the thing. The 1920s were a breakout point for women. The next advance would be women in the WWII workforce and the next being birth control in the 1960s.
Very radical times not only for women’s rights, but for all of us. Often commented that the first two decades of the 20th century was the Cambrian Explosion of mechanical items. Look at all the idiotic inventions of the time. Nuts. And we went from Kitty Hawk to dogfights in a mere 10-years!
We’d just come off our first taste of mechanized warfare, worst war in history yet lost more lives to the Spanish Flu and had just gone into Prohibition. Party hearty, but keep it on the down low.
I feel privileged as GenX. Much like 100-years ago, my generation straddled a radical divide in tech and social norms. Guess that’s the new normal though. 🤷🏻
Wow, did not know a lot of that, thanks. Yeah, i was intentionally avoiding discussing their attractiveness because thats purely objective. Not saying they did, but I could easily see the author drawing them this way because theyre saying the woman is promiscuous, which from my understanding was seen as about the worst thing a woman could be. For the record though, dayum, I want a lady who smokes a pipe. She looks crazy classy.
“Flapper” was a 1920s subculture of women that was, well, exactly what’s pictured. The original etymology is unclear, as far as I know.
Didn’t know the etymology, you made me look!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flapper
Sounds reasonable to me. Wonder if there’s any tie in with “chick” as slang for “girl”.
It’s over, I’ve already depicted you as dancing the Charleston
And I’ve depicted myself as the noble Zither player
And playing bridge??
*clutches pearls*
Charleston gets pretty does old pretty quick. Mix it up with some east or west coast swing and some Lindy hop.
I don’t get it, both are cool?
Yeah, that happens a lot with regressive nutjobs. They’ll describe utopia as if it’s the apocalypse and assume you’ll agree with them.
One of each, then!
I see it as a commentary on how quickly times were changing back then. What’s telling is what some are reading into it.
I would say that the point is this kind of sentiment from the manosphere, for example just these quotes by Andrew Tate:
Look familiar? Good for you if you get to live your middle upper class cottagecore dream with a hipster lumberjack that brings home everything you’ll ever need. That definitely sounds pretty awesome.
But mostly this is about control and power of men over women, especially for women that aren’t in the economic class to get to have shelves of unread books and the luxury of spending all of their time doing arts and crafts and making tiktok videos.
We shouldn’t publicize Andrew Tate, he’s like a malware virus
I understand the sentiment but also, I should think a community called “Witches vs Patriarchy” would actually involve the “vs Patriarchy” part and not just be another !witchymemes@lemmy.world. And Andrew Tate is like everything wrong with the patriarchy rolled into one and one of the poster boys for it these days. So it comes with the discussion.
Yeah. For a long time I had no idea who he is, cuz’ I wasn’t on Facebook and Twitter I suppose. I only found out when he got in trouble in Romania, and I regret finding out.
Not OP but I still don’t get how this is related to the post. (Not defending any of those statements of course)
Im not super clear myself on OPs comment, but I believe they are just making a connection between what the comic is trying to do and what andrew tate is trying to do. Both are trying to demonize women, but due to the comics age it simply falls flat in the modern age.
Honsetly the flapper is the kind of gal I’d be looking for anyway but there is nothing wrong with the gal on the left either. It’s almost as if individuals should be left to make their own choices.
No way. People like different things? Impossible.
I dunno, this doesn’t feel the same as more contemporary commentary.
There’s no overt judgement call on display in this cartoon. Like pointing out that the older generation looked for women who could sew/cook, but the younger generation looks for women who can dance and mix drinks, isn’t inherently saying that one is better or worse than the other. It feels more neutrally observational.
Comparisons that we see these days, have pretty overt messaging as to the negatives the author sees in some social trends. Like comparing a virginal trad wife to a slutty gender fluid rainbow, and saying the rainbow will be bored with you in bed cause she’s had so many miles of dick that she barely notices yours.
Yeah, the headline is wrong. There’s no discernible criticizing going on in the cartoon. It’s called a juxtaposition.
No “eat hot chip and lie?”??
“Earn my own living” sounds great in this economy!
Seems pretty evenhanded to me.
