Disclaimer: I communicated with the staff about this discussion and was given the ok to create this thread. I am not trying to start unawarranted drama, just trying to have a mature and reasonable discussion about making Subeta a place where everyone can relax and have fun, regardless of who they are, especially in light of recent events.

There are some items on Subeta that are pretty racist.

Some examples I've found are and , along with the others that let you dress your avatar up as Ganesha. This is really disrespectful. Hinduism is an actual religion that many people believe in. In Hinduism, there are some contexts where dressing up as a deity would be acceptable as part of religious celebrations, but that's not really up for anyone else to decide. Images of deities are important in Hinduism, you're meant to show respect to the icons that are part of a prayer space.

I'm not Hindu but I am South Asian and I can tell you that many people do use our many cultures and traditions in a way that's really offensive. If nothing else, it points to this idea that anything South Asian is more "exotic" and is up for grabs for fun, regardless of what their actual significance is and what stereotypes it's perpetrating. In this case, it's a reminder that our cultures aren't taken as seriously and can be used just because they look cool or exotic. There are a lot of hurtful stereotypes that go along with this idea of people as exotic.

There are also items that sound like they're disrespectful to people of other backgrounds, like dreamcatcher accessories. I don't want to speak for anyone else so it would be great if other users could chime in with what they think about these kinds of items. I also don't know all the items on this site, so if you see any others, you can talk about them.

What could be done about these items? I think the answer depends on what people feel would be a good idea and what the staff would be willing/able to do. I think that the Ganesha items, for example, could use with retirement (in cases where there's no way to dissociate them from what they were going for) or revamping to make them less Ganesha-like. Subeta is, after all, a fantasy site so there could be cultures in the lore who do believe in elephant deities that are otherwise completely different from real-world ones.

To white users: I'm not saying that staff is racist. These items are. It's possible to be accidentally racist due to just not knowing better. It's about the bigger picture, too. A lot of people already deal with issues related to race and ethnicity in real life. At the end of the day, those issues shouldn't be mirrored on Subeta. Consider what you're asking if your opinion is that we should "deal with it" -- you're asking us to not enjoy the site on the same footing as everyone else. I won't make this post even longer but if you have (genuine) questions, you can try to ask, though you should also try to do your research first because there's a lot of information about this kind of thing.

I agree; I'm Anglo-Indian and not Hindu either, but these particular items have kind of rubbed me the wrong way, since I know about various religious events where people do dress up as gods to celebrate. They're also cash shop items, so it's a little disconcerting that a religious icon's likeness is being sold tbh 😬😬 Throw in the cultural legacy of cultural artifacts being stolen from the Indian subcontinent, and there's a lot of historic baggage there.

Honestly these items would be cooler if they were Zentu-inspired. Like keep the elephantine head, but make it look like a Zentu instead of Ganesha.

it's good to know I'm not the only one! You're spot on about the context. I somehow missed the fact that these are cash shop items, which I agree, it makes it sketchier.

A Zentu take on these items would be really cool. Zentu is really underrated as it is and it could also create a good opportunity for some Subeta lore/worldbuilding.

The whole set as is it references, for good or ill, a real-world religious icon. If someone didn’t know who was depicted, they could ask and maybe gain a little cultural knowledge they otherwise wouldn’t. Your mileage may vary on whether that’s a net positive, but that’s an approach I take on items that I draw (full disclosure: didn’t draw these.) For me, it comes from a place of “here is an interesting thing I have learned, this would be a good item to expand the site’s horizons culturally.”

I don’t understand how it would it be less offensive to keep the elephant deity and otherwise all the aspects of Ganesha, holding the weapons and the lotus and wearing the headdress, but then override it with a fictional cartoon elephant from fictional cartoon vague-Asia. Is that not a cross between cultural appropriation and erasure?

[edit] To be clear, if there are racist items that need to be changed, they absolutely should be. I just think replacing existing cultural items with subeta equivalents is a very tricky thing.

For clarification, I did not mean simply changing it into a Zentu while keeping the real-world, culturally-relevant weapons and etc. for the rest of the wearables. The lotus and weapons and etc. could be changed into jewelry that users need to give to Zentu to adopt them, or adjusted so they aren't multiple arms (so it doesn't become a Subetafied Ganesha). Making it the exact same but a Zentu definitely isn't the solution.

I don't see a problem with people learning about Ganesha and other religions/cultures, but I think that the context here--dressing up your HA as a deity--is what matters. Is someone's HA on a pet site a good context for learning about Ganesha? Why couldn't it be items that reference Ganesha (or other elements of Hinduism, such as certain items used in ceremonies), instead of turning your HA into Ganesha?

These are more rhetorical than anything and not directed specifically at you; just something for the staff to think about when incorporating real-world cultures into site items. I also would love to see more items from other cultures, as long as they're done with respect and not just plucked out of their original contexts without sincere consideration.

I didn't suggest keeping the weapons and the lotus. If you read my initial post carefully, you'll see that I said this:

Expanding someone's horizons is absolutely no excuse for this kind of thing. If people want to expand their horizons, there are many ways to do it that aren't going to be offensive or disrespectful. There's no reason why anyone would need to expand their horizons by specifically dressing up their HA as Ganesha and what that's supposed to be teaching them is unclear. Also, people of colour don't need their cultures to be used just for white people to learn an interesting thing or two.

If there's some sort of need to have items based on real-world cultures, why not choose things that wouldn't be disrespectful? is right, I think the context that objects come from are important to take into account, especially if it's truly supposed to be a way for people to learn about cultures not their own.

Thank you, I'm glad! :) It's really important that you say that you're not only aiming to not be racist but to actively oppose racism.

I'd be curious if anyone that is actually Hindu is offended by them? I honestly don't know. I know that Muslims are offended by someone creating/displaying an image of Muhammad. But I also know that people make images of the Christian God/Jesus, and unless they are being overtly offensive in another way, that many, if not most Christians probably aren't terribly offended by it.

If it's the situation similar to Muhammad where participants of the religion are actively offended by something like this, then I would say change/remove it. If people would be actively offended by it, I don't think that just changing it to a Zhentu would fix that problem though.

[url]https://www.columbian.com/news/2017/jan/07/hindu-deity-images-are-still-misused[url/]

With very limited googling, I found this article, but even reading the article it isn't clear, the start of the article makes it seem like it would probably be frowned upon, but the later parts of the article swing it back into more of a gray zone it seems to me.

That would be cool! Zentu don't have very many items as is, so this would be very welcome.

I personally feel a bit sad that the items are going to be changed, but that's because I have a gallery called All the Cultures of the Earth. However, dressing as someone's deity for fun is rather offensive, and I'm glad it's going to be changed.

I would beg that the ancient Egypt items be left alone, however, as no one actually worships these dieties anymore (save modern neopagans.)

I have a Shiva statuette in bronze that was readily sold to me by someone who is a Shaivite Hindu. I was not asked the reason I was buying it was pukka devotional, or asked anything. Selling religious items is not offensive to at least some Hindu. I personally have sold items within a Jewish temple, even though Jesus did overturn that table of the Pharisees.

The syncretic nature of Hinduism does not distinguish between a statue of a god and a god sometimes, unless-and-and-and those other times it does. I find the objection here a Hindutva=political one, in that it is deliberately placing its own idiosyncratic interpretation of Hinduism as true, and privileged. Anyone can be someone's devi , because these things happen, and there is no one true approach to this. We do not know for an absolute fact that someone dressing up as Ganesha isn't doing it to draw luck or grace and is being sacrilegious instead of frivolously insulting

I just wanted to point out that this discussion isn't only about those items I mentioned, and it would be good if people could talk about others as well. :)

I'd love to get some input from Hindu users, if there are any who could chime in. In any case, in Hinduism it's not usually depicting a deity that's the issue per se, it's the context for the image and how it's treated.

Nobody's saying that selling religious items is offensive to Hindus and I'm not sure where you're getting that from. did bring up that it's sold in the cash shop and I agreed. The issue with it being sold in the cash shop is that it's still people profiting from something they have absolutely no connection to when it's pretty insensitive.

I don't think what you've done in a Jewish temple is really relevant to the discussion about Hindusim, since they're completely different religions. Also: mainstream Judaism largely does not place the same importance on Jesus as Christians do so, again, that seems like a weird thing to bring up.

Yes, in Hinduism sometimes there's a distinction between a depiction of a deity and the deity, and sometimes not. Hinduism is definitely a very mixed set of practices, what with it having a very long history and being practiced in such a large geographic region. That said: I think it's safe to say that most people using these items is dressing up as Ganesha for religious reasons -- or whether, for them, doing this would outweigh the possibility of these items being misused. If you could cite sources about dressing up as deities in everyday life being somehow a mainstream practice in Hinduism, please do. Because I only ever see it in the context of very, very specific situations and not really as an every day or even "fun" thing.

Also, are you seriously going to accuse two people who have literally said they're not Hindu but are South Asian of coming from an Hindutva perspective?! Is that a joke?! Either you're as educated as you're trying to sound, in which case you should 100% know better, or you're not -- in which case please think things through before you say them.

Both and I have discussed how these items aren't "just" about religion but fit into a larger pattern that does affect South Asian people and how white people treat us and our cultures (notice the plural).

in a pluralistic society it is absolutely relevant that different religions can get along despite different beliefs. I a christian was selling gay music on CD in a conservative temple. Subeta has an elephant deity that is not Ganesha because it Subeta is not connected to reality. In no way is Subeta saying we made this up and they're special because of it.

I am a Lutheran. Lutheran belief is that no gods come before God, and idols of any kind are sinful. If any one person's interpretation of religion is somehow reflective of THE TRUTH that Subeta must must must follow, then mine is that Subeta should dump any and all god images and mentions of any gods and any and all crosses that are decorative should also be gone.

Your position privileges your opinions that only some Hindu follow over others that are Hindu and it privileges those particular Hindu positions over Christian ones. Then you are identifying those particular people with all of southeast Asia despite Thai being Buddhist and China being atheist wut? Import-export shops regularly sell Hindu items to interior decorators all the time. The vendors who wholesale these items are devout believers, and know perfectly well that there will be a markup.

There are Indian films with Ganesha in them where there's a Bollywood dance break that an actor playing him joins in on, and there are others where Ganesha does things that are funny or for comedic effect. You are supposing that Subeta's interpretation is somehow wrong just because of who Subeta is, and this IS the Hindutva position, even if none of you are aware of it. IMO your position may not be racist and creedist, but it's racist and creedist adjacent.

Futhermore, because of the syncretic and time lorn nature of HInduishm there are many interpretations of what Ganesha actually looks like. Does he have blue skin like many other gods, or is it pink? Does his head stay grey, or does it retain the blue/pink color? Is that head cartoony or realistic? Not every Vajra looks the same.

I've certainly become more sensitive to issues like these and find myself uncomfortable when using "cultural" clothing items. Quite often I simply choose not to use them, in other cases I will use an item in such a way that it doesn't look like the original item.

As a Native American, I actually love the fact that there are Native American items onsite - that I can dress to my heritage if I want to. Does it bother me when non-Natives use those items, frankly, no. But I don't speak for anyone other than myself. Other Natives onsite might very well be bothered.

I do know that most of my friends and relative who make Aboriginal jewelry, clothing, shoes, artwork, etc sell the stuff to white people all the time. The only thing they don't sell are eagle feathers (real ones), though they will sell imitation eagle feathers.

The thing that bothers me, and people I personally know, are when people try to sell fake "authentic" Native stuff that wasn't made by Aboriginal people, or mocks native peoples. I don't feel that any of the Native items on Subeta does that in any way.

I've always been curious about these...

edit: The description of the second does acknowledge stuff though. I don't know

I don't know what your understanding of hindutva is, but I don't appreciate the implication that I'm pushing for something that's used as justification to brutalize Muslims living in India, something that may end up targeting my family, and something that's touted by Modi's far-right party.

I'm saying that, because of the historical context of Asian culture and religion being used as props by white westerners, the use of Ganesha's image to dress up a human avatar probably isn't well thought out. It isn't about priviliging one way of religious belief over others, it's about using cultural artifacts in a more considerate manner.

.....

I think the main idea is to specifically remove the wearables, rather than anything and everything referencing Ganesha. We definitely shouldn't be erasing what little representation there is. So figurines, books, that kind of stuff should be kept - or added, if there aren't any, I really don't know if there are any other Hindu items onsite - and only the things specifically used for dressing up need to be changed or removed.

Likewise with the dreamcatchers, I suppose - things like earrings should maybe be changed but ones that hang in the background of the HA or aren't wearable at all might be okay depending on what else is in the art and what the item description is?

I don't really have a horse in this race, my racial/religious/cultural background is bland as sawdust, but my view of all these discussions is 'well, why not change it when it's bothering a few people now and would harm literally nobody to alter'.

I honestly have no idea. I'd say that, probably? Even if the text acknowledges it, it sounds like something that has a special significance beyond being something to dress up your avatar in.

Ok. Your post is honestly really bizarre but I'll try to adress it point by point.

Again, what you have or haven't done in a place of worship has no relevance to this discussion. Nobody here has said religions can't get along. As to the elephant deity being connected to reality or not, it seems like it is. If Subeta made up the item, it's one hell of a coincidence that everything about it mirrors a well-known deity from a real-life religion. Based on the previous comments here, I don't think anyone is denying the "inspiration".

Nobody is saying that any religion is reflective of what Subeta must follow. What people are saying is that the beliefs of many PoC around the world are regularly trivialized and profited from out of context and that's an issue. I was raised a Christian but it's no skin off my nose to not have items disrespecting things that are meaningful to other cultures and religions. Like I said before, I am also not coming from a solely religious perspective here but from a history of how people from my own background and similar to mine are treated.

Aha, now I understand why you're so set on talking about "religious tolerance" -- it seems like you think it means you can do whatever the hell you want and everyone else needs to shut up about it. Got it. And if your issue are differences in how different Hindu people behave, then by the same token I could dismiss you entirely because you're Luteran and don't speak for all Christians.

Sweetie, nobody identified "those particular people with all of southeast Asia". Nobody even mentioned southeast Asia that I've seen, certainly not me. I've talked about South Asia, which is commonly understood to largely mean the Indian subcontinent. Which, if you don't know, is not only India. If you're taking issue with non-Hindu Indian people pointing out these items because it's somehow conflating Hinduism with the whole of South Asia, then you shouldn't talk about "Thai being Buddhist" and "China being atheist" since people of other religions do exist in those countries.

And again, this is completely besides the point. You're claiming things that simply aren't in our posts and trying to get away with accusing us of an Hindutva agenda, no matter how much we've repeated that we're not Hindu and no matter how offensive and serious that accusation is. If you really do care about non-Hindu Indian people, then you'd know better than that and own what you just called us, and you also wouldn't try so hard to erase our opinions by conflating them with Hindutva.

Nobody is taking issue with Hindu items per se, we're talking about specific items that aren't even Hindu, just Hindu-themed because they don't represent something Hindu people tend to do. A lot has been written about why people from other cultures might sell (even meaningful) things to white people, so I recommend you'd read up on the continuing impact of capitalism and the burden placed on PoC to appeal to white markets before you talk about this. Also, these wholesale vendors you're talking about are presumably Hindu or at least South Asian themselves.

I asked about dressing up as Ganesha as a regular, every day practice, not movies. Can you really not see a difference between people doing something playful with their own culture and misguided items on a pet site that benefit white people? Seriously?

I don't think Subeta put much thought into any kind of interpretation, lol. But like I said before, my issue here isn't solely about religion but about a larger pattern that affects many of us even if we're not Hindu, in which case it is relevant who Subeta is.

If you're trying to imply this "racism" comes from pointing out that the Subeta staff is mostly/all white, you need to do more reading and research before you come in here saying these things.

Sorry you think I'm "creedist" and "racist". I'll take the opinions on this from actual PoC, and from actual religious minorities from South Asia who suffer as a result of Hindutva doctrine, rather than yours.

This is not at all relevant to this conversation. Subeta did pick one depiction of Ganesh that is recognisable as such.

I don't know what to say if you don't understand the difference between having items that celebrate who people are and let them express themselves, and items that are a white person's interpretation of what that's supposed to look like, don't benefit people from that background, etc.

I did ask white people who chimed in to please do their homework. I can't force people to do it because I'm not a mod, but gets tiring to have 101 discussions that are readily available elsewhere, or dealing with convoluted mental gymnastics to try to justify something that isn't even yours to be ok with or not.

It sounds like the best idea is to find a Hindu artist to revamp the items, and if that's not feasible (I would think there has to be someone among all the fan and pro artists on Subeta, but they might not have time/interest in this), then at least hire a non-Subeta Hindu artist to give you concept art / interpretations that would be the sort of thing that would be "items that celebrate who people are and let them express themselves" --

-- so that the Ganesh-inspired item set becomes something that a Hindu person playing on Subeta might like to use rather than find offensive.