Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

Well,raising someone gender neutral shouldn't be a problem I think? Idea being not that you'll end up with children with no idea of what gender is, but that your kid would be more at ease without having to conform to society's perception of gender.

Peoples crave an identity, if you remove gender it will be something else. I believe that gender neutral isn't the right way to go, and that being more permissive with gender definition will be much more beneficial.

But you have a lot of leeway on how you define gender-roles, roles in society and values in general.
Look what "being a man" was before. Read Duma for instance. Aristocrats wore heels, pretty jewels-adorned coats, make-up, and held culture and refinement in high esteem. They spoke of how their pants hi-lighted the gable of their legs, and made sure they had delicates hands.
They were also ruthless killers that would stab you for looking at them the wrong way.

That's just it. People do need identity, I agree. But let's rephrase your sentence:

"If you remove gender, people will make their own identities." Their own, as opposed to whatever gender roles are shoved onto them.

As an example of this: At camp, while I was away canoeing with a small group, we went to a beach. We had the option of going swimming or hanging out and making bracelets. Without thinking much of it, I went to the shoreline - but then noticed something. All of of the boys were swimming. Almost all of the girls were making bracelets. This alerted me to a subconscious choice based on a gender division. But did I want to go swimming? When I thought about it, no. The river was slimy, and I like making things with my hands. So I went and made bracelets and talked with the girls and had a much better time than I would have if I had swam.

Nobody stopped me from going to swim. I had that option at every point, but I didn't go swim. Gender neutral parenting doesn't mean forcing your boy to do girlish things. It means letting your boy do... anything, whether boyish or girlish, and trying to help your boy see that it's okay to play with dolls - if they want to. If they like trucks, nobody's stopping them from playing with trucks.

It's a common misconception that gender neutrality, feminism, etc., takes away choice, when in reality it takes away nothing. It only gives a choice.

[tonnot98]

Nobody stopped me from going to swim. I had that option at every point, but I didn't go swim. Gender neutral parenting doesn't mean forcing your boy to do girlish things.

I think we should just call that gender neutering.

[TheBiggerFish]

Nobody stopped me from going to swim. I had that option at every point, but I didn't go swim. Gender neutral parenting doesn't mean forcing your boy to do girlish things.

I think we should just call that gender neutering.

Ahahaha yessss.  I agree.

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

That's... Both funny and descriptive to the point of conceivably being used as a term. Good one.

[Phmcw]

Their own, as opposed to whatever gender roles are shoved onto them.

As an example of this: At camp, while I was away canoeing with a small group, we went to a beach. We had the option of going swimming or hanging out and making bracelets. Without thinking much of it, I went to the shoreline - but then noticed something. All of of the boys were swimming. Almost all of the girls were making bracelets. This alerted me to a subconscious choice based on a gender division. But did I want to go swimming? When I thought about it, no. The river was slimy, and I like making things with my hands. So I went and made bracelets and talked with the girls and had a much better time than I would have if I had swam.

Nobody stopped me from going to swim. I had that option at every point, but I didn't go swim. Gender neutral parenting doesn't mean forcing your boy to do girlish things. It means letting your boy do... anything, whether boyish or girlish, and trying to help your boy see that it's okay to play with dolls - if they want to. If they like trucks, nobody's stopping them from playing with trucks.

It's a common misconception that gender neutrality, feminism, etc., takes away choice, when in reality it takes away nothing. It only gives a choice.

You're making the assumption that peoples want choice. So I'm asking you : why are all identities so conformist? Why are gender roles well defined across any culture yet different for each?

Most peoples don't want choice. They want to be given a clear identity, they want to be told what to do, and they want a group to belong to.
You have to take this into account, as identity issues tend to cause quite a lot of violence.

My proposal is to give a default, but to let as much leeway as we can and to praise tolerance within the scope of society's values.

[Rolepgeek]

People want a group. It's not in fact that they don't want choice. They just want to choose their group. An access of choice can be exhausting, mind, and I've got nothing wrong with feminine and masculine existing and serving as pseudo-gender roles, but I think there's a spectrum of individualistic people to communalistic/social people. People who do well with structure and like the stability, who are able to adapt to whatever their circumstance/position is and do alright in it, versus people who chafe at the restrictions and want to be free to do their own thing. When societies optimize for just the one, it often comes at the expense of the other. Assuming most people fall into either category legitimizes this trade-off, which I think is the wrong answer.

That said, there's also nothing wrong with a default, and providing a basic scaffold for someone to build their identity with if they feel like it is perfectly fine. Whether that's career, place, hobby, goal, or people.

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

I don't like choosing my ice cream flavour, so nobody else gets to choose either - they all have to get vanilla.

[hops]

I don't like choosing my ice cream flavour, so nobody else gets to choose either - they all have to get vanilla.

Chocolate is the only correct choice you vanillanormative scum.

[TheBiggerFish]

But...Chocolatey chocolate chocolate with chocolate chocolates is best ice cream though.
(This is my ice cream opinions, not anything else, if this turns out to be a metaphor.)

[scriver]

People who use "vanilla" as the "basic" ice cream taste are spoiled, historyless fools. Cream is the basic ice cream taste. That's why it's called ice cream.

( )

[hops]

What about just literally ice.

[Neonivek]

I was thinking of the whole "Androgynous couples are happiest together" and I am starting to think that has less to do with gender roles so much that "People with a lot in common and who are willing to work together tend to be the strongest couple"

[scriver]

What about just literally ice.

Ice is a temperature, not a flavour!

[Neonivek]

What about just literally ice.

Ice is a temperature, not a flavour!

Molecular Gastronomy would like to have a word with you.

[misko27]

What about just literally ice.

Ice is a temperature, not a flavour!

There are 17 different types of water-ice, some at wildly different temperatures and pressures.

Ice-1_h is the best flavor.