Just a few things I noticed
- You have a muslim (?) girl wearing fishnets.
- A Jewish girl wearing a Kippah(?) (oh according to the article it is worn by women during service in egalitarian Conservative and Reform movements, but it's still traditionally a male dress)
- The Hindu (?) girl is wearing a T-shirt with an Elephant's head. I know an Aum isn't the easiest thing to draw, but it would be a bit more accurate if it was what you are trying to convey.
- You've also got the white christian guy with a shaved head, white shirt and army pants.
It's a really nice cartoon in terms of drawing, but I really don't think screaming pigeonholed stereotypes really work best.
And I do realise it's a contradiction to complain about stereotypes when the muslim girl is wearing fishnets (not a stereotype), but this inconsistency is also bugging me.
I think a better way would be to just stick to the skin tone rather than try and represent religion, sexual orientation, mobility etc.--ZayZayEM 07:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- You have a muslim (?) girl wearing fishnet (material)|fishnets. Why not? Muslims come in all shapes, sizes and persuasions.
- A Jewish girl wearing a Kippah(?) If you're referring to the person in the wheelchair, it's a Jewish male wearing a yarmulke.
- The Hindu (?) girl is wearing a T-shirt with an Elephant's head. I know an Aum isn't the easiest thing to draw... The girl is meant to represent African-Americans, children, females, and Republicans. The elephant head is meant to represent Thomas Nast's symbol of the Republicans, just as the Arab Jewish wheelchair-bound man is wearing a shirt with a donkey on it to represent Democrats.
- You've also got the white christian guy with a shaved head, white shirt and army pants. He does not have a shaved head. Every single one of the figures is hairless, in order to emphasize the wiki puzzle globe logo used as the characters' heads. He's wearing army pants for the same reason his "W" is written in Stencil font: it's meant to represent that he's been in the military.
- It's a really nice cartoon in terms of drawing, but I really don't think screaming pigeonholed stereotypes really work best. If it really were meant to represent stereotypes, the little African American girl wouldn't be a Republican, the Jew would not be Arab, and the Muslim woman wouldn't be wearing fishnets, as you yourself pointed out.
- I think a better way would be to just stick to the skin tone rather than try and represent religion, sexual orientation, mobility etc. Why? What's wrong with representing sexuality and mobility? The very idea I was trying to convey was to represent as many different groups as possible.
- Thank you for your thoughts. Seeing it from a different perspective was very interesting. :-) Nightscream 14:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- Wow. looks like there is more than meets the eye. I think main comment was that trying to represent as many diverse groups (looks like political orientation is in there too) seems a little contrived. The Death Camp of Tolerance. Artwork is great though.--ZayZayEM 15:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- To each his own. And thanks again. Nightscream 15:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- Wow. looks like there is more than meets the eye. I think main comment was that trying to represent as many diverse groups (looks like political orientation is in there too) seems a little contrived. The Death Camp of Tolerance. Artwork is great though.--ZayZayEM 15:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Technically, the guy is wearing Marine pants not army pants.⇒SWATJester Son of the Defender 20:40, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
So this badge assumes that everyone is either religious, Republican or Democrat or LBGT? As someone who is neither I feel unrepresented. SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 19:26, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
