

now, this is literally a piece of folk art, just as much as any artifact of a tribal society(all societies are tribal, no disrespec to kalaharibros) or lightup fleamarket last suppers--it is a piece of the ephemera of these particular humans in this particular place and time.
WHAT THIS SHIRT REFLECTS: marijuana culture is frequently masculinized-->"yr a bitch, bro, if you are incapable of taking in all of the large 'hit' of drug-smoke from this two foot long glass cylinder in one inhalation", the inescapable phallic nature of most/many 'pieces' of paraphenalia, this shirt, rappers discussing the magnitude, quality, and quantity of their manifold blunts, etc.
WHY THIS IS SO: a reasonable frame for 'traditional' gendering is through hunting/gathering[i needed the scarequotes because 'tradition' in my context is derived from the 19th-century iteration of reality--via AMERICA, is why]--womenz multitask so for as to maintain the social contract and order/'raise children', men prosecutorially unitask so for as to 'murder animals to sustain the humans who comprise that order'
incidentally this is why there was-and is--the Patriarchy[via women's studies]. this is the reason driven, career-minded women face subconscious accusations [from others and possibly sometimes themselves? i am not a woman] of gender transgression/ 'un/de-gendering'
(for an example of this see lady macbeth, who literally explicitly verbally degenders herself so as to be inhuman enough to give her man his prophecied crown)
BACK TO MY ARGUMENT: marijuana makes one wholly internal, that is why rappers ingest it, it allows for the full expression of the participatory subjective internal[lil wayne claims to smoke two blunts over the course of his DOA freestyle--"fiji water, granddaddy purp/og kush"]. this state naturally encourages tenacious unitasking whatever the task may be--though frequently that task is simply enjoying the presentation of some content, i do well admit.
if you cannot see the relationship between weedy unitasking and masculine unitasking and therefore the validity of my argument i literally cannot help you understand it better [via subjectivities]
