No 'Him' or 'Her' in Preschool. Wait, what?

[conflictofinterests]

In short? It's retarded.

This is not about "democracy and equality". This is just stupid.

There are some significant differences between men and women, boys and girls, and trying to pretend otherwise is nonsense. "Equality" is great, not treating people as inferior because of gender is great, but there are still TWO DIFFERENT DAMN GENDERS!

More than 2. Even talking in a purely chromosomal sense, there are people who have more than the regular number of sex chromosomes. Even talking in a purely physical sense, there are people who were born with both sets of genitalia. In a cultural sense, there are even more genders than that. There are differences with everyone, and most of the problem is in the idea that there are ONLY 2 different genders.

 

[Mr. Eff_v1legacy]

It's just another example of the "we're all the same" PC garbage. People aren't the same. But what's wrong with that?
People should be taught to accept and celebrate differences, rather than being taught they don't exist.

 

[Aurgelmir]

A bit over the top yes, and I see how SOME fairy tales could reinforce stereotypes like girls are princesses to be saved men are heroes but they may have taken it to far.

Also, if you promote gay marriage, single parents, adoption and so forth, shouldn't the "stereotypes" also be taught?

Also do they have a scientific prescience to say that removing stereotypes will work? Because as far as I know a lot of studies have shown that boys and girls are drawn to different toys even at a younger age...

It's a nice thought though, but it might not work, and it might have other unforeseen consequences...

 

[conflictofinterests]

Israelis tried it. Didn't work. Boys still like cars, girls still like make up. Those gender stereotypes have a basis in reality, you know.

They have a basis in the entirety of the child's learning environment. A child spends much more time at home than at school, and will pick up things from around the house. Kid sees dad working on the car and mom putting on makeup? Kid's a girl, going to emulate mom, kid's a boy going to emulate dad. There MAY be valid genetic differences in preference of one activity over another between genders, but it is nearly IMPOSSIBLE to extricate those from any environmental influence without a) committing atrocities in the name of science or b) ruining the experiment because humans are creatures of culture, and if raised sans culture are quite fundamentally different.

 

[mikespoff]

In short? It's retarded.

This is not about "democracy and equality". This is just stupid.

There are some significant differences between men and women, boys and girls, and trying to pretend otherwise is nonsense. "Equality" is great, not treating people as inferior because of gender is great, but there are still TWO DIFFERENT DAMN GENDERS!

More than 2. Even talking in a purely chromosomal sense, there are people who have more than the regular number of sex chromosomes. Even talking in a purely physical sense, there are people who were born with both sets of genitalia. In a cultural sense, there are even more genders than that. There are differences with everyone, and most of the problem is in the idea that there are ONLY 2 different genders.

No, really, that's not "most of the problem" with this story.

To a first approximation, there are two genders for humans. There is male, and female. A vanishingly small percentage of individuals are not easily classifiable into these categories, but for all practical purposes there are two genders.

On the other end of the discussion, every individual person is a unique and beautiful snowflake. Thus we can also categorise the human population in a classification system of billions of distinct categories. The usefulness of doing this is not immediately obvious, though.

Of course, there are many other sub-categorisations in between: political ideology, aptitude at various sports and languages spoken may have an exciting array of groupings, but when considering issues of gender we are right to consider "male and female" as a broadly useful framework.

 

[trollnystan]

I'm Swedish and I can honestly say I don't quite know where I stand on this. Part of me goes, "Intriguing!" Another part of me goes, "But biology!"

I suppose we'll just have to wait and see how this turns out.

PS. Even though I've always been against the use of "hen" - mostly because the people I've heard advocating it wanted to use it to the exclusion of "han/hon" - I do find the idea of a non-specific gender pronoun in singular form interesting. Hmmm...

 

[WayOutThere]

I thought it was commonly known PC is running rampant.

There's not much I can say to this so I'm just going to recommend you watch this if you haven't already. Not that I'm accusing you of doing what he's talking about I'm just defending political correctness.

Just more mind pollution for the young and helpless...

Yes, because the stereotypes that men are tough and emotionless and women are weak and subservient isn't mind pollution at all...

Which makes them all the more stupid and useless to society when they hit adulthood and reality slaps them in the face.

It's a preschool; they're not sticking around this place until they enter college you know. Besides, having not grown up with them only to then be horrified to know what the world can really be like would more likely make them more attune to those problems and more motivated to fix them.

The longer kids live in an imaginary world of equality and happiness, the worse off they'll be.

The best way to bring equality and happiness to the world is to raise the next generation right. And you realize there's no necessary reason why these children can't be raised in such an environment and be educated about the dangers of negative stereotypes right?

 

[Thundero13]

Ich, it's good to be caring towards homosexual giraffes and etc. but you can't have all the books about that or it just doesn't work, good for them for making an effort but, there are better ways to do this

 

[Caligulust]

Things don't bode well when you try to seriously incorporate a made-up word.

All words are made up. If the creation of a new word will be beneficial why not create a new word? Language is flexible and should be adapted to our needs. That said the change would have to occur on a much larger scale than one school to do much more than cause confusion.

I know all words are made up, but it takes more than wishful thinking to have them come into common use. I get the impression that the group who pushed this forward was excited about their ideas, but did not have too many. Such as a word that they have created would help stop gender stereotypes.

 

[conflictofinterests]

In short? It's retarded.

This is not about "democracy and equality". This is just stupid.

There are some significant differences between men and women, boys and girls, and trying to pretend otherwise is nonsense. "Equality" is great, not treating people as inferior because of gender is great, but there are still TWO DIFFERENT DAMN GENDERS!

More than 2. Even talking in a purely chromosomal sense, there are people who have more than the regular number of sex chromosomes. Even talking in a purely physical sense, there are people who were born with both sets of genitalia. In a cultural sense, there are even more genders than that. There are differences with everyone, and most of the problem is in the idea that there are ONLY 2 different genders.

No, really, that's not "most of the problem" with this story.

To a first approximation, there are two genders for humans. There is male, and female. A vanishingly small percentage of individuals are not easily classifiable into these categories, but for all practical purposes there are two genders.

On the other end of the discussion, every individual person is a unique and beautiful snowflake. Thus we can also categorise the human population in a classification system of billions of distinct categories. The usefulness of doing this is not immediately obvious, though.

Of course, there are many other sub-categorisations in between: political ideology, aptitude at various sports and languages spoken may have an exciting array of groupings, but when considering issues of gender we are right to consider "male and female" as a broadly useful framework.

There are cultures that have many genders, aside from "male" and "female."
They have MtF and FtM and homosexual male or female. I'm pretty sure there's somewhere where gender neutral people are quite acceptable and have their own stereotypes and what have you.

Gender is a very fluid thing between cultures and may encompass or exclude a number of people, and provide its own set of obstacles and privileges to each group.

Sure, there are pretty much two physical sexes outside the occasional intersex specimen, but gender is a very different phenomena.

 

[Wintermoot]

I thought it was commonly known PC is running rampant.

There's not much I can say to this so I'm just going to recommend you watch this if you haven't already. Not that I'm accusing you of doing what he's talking about I'm just defending political correctness.

I,m not saying we should separate boys and girls and everybody can say whatever they want I,m just saying you shouldn't childproof everything and sugarcoat everything.

 

[mikespoff]

In short? It's retarded.

This is not about "democracy and equality". This is just stupid.

There are some significant differences between men and women, boys and girls, and trying to pretend otherwise is nonsense. "Equality" is great, not treating people as inferior because of gender is great, but there are still TWO DIFFERENT DAMN GENDERS!

More than 2. Even talking in a purely chromosomal sense, there are people who have more than the regular number of sex chromosomes. Even talking in a purely physical sense, there are people who were born with both sets of genitalia. In a cultural sense, there are even more genders than that. There are differences with everyone, and most of the problem is in the idea that there are ONLY 2 different genders.

No, really, that's not "most of the problem" with this story.

To a first approximation, there are two genders for humans. There is male, and female. A vanishingly small percentage of individuals are not easily classifiable into these categories, but for all practical purposes there are two genders.

On the other end of the discussion, every individual person is a unique and beautiful snowflake. Thus we can also categorise the human population in a classification system of billions of distinct categories. The usefulness of doing this is not immediately obvious, though.

Of course, there are many other sub-categorisations in between: political ideology, aptitude at various sports and languages spoken may have an exciting array of groupings, but when considering issues of gender we are right to consider "male and female" as a broadly useful framework.

There are cultures that have many genders, aside from "male" and "female."
They have MtF and FtM and homosexual male or female. I'm pretty sure there's somewhere where gender neutral people are quite acceptable and have their own stereotypes and what have you.

Gender is a very fluid thing between cultures and may encompass or exclude a number of people, and provide its own set of obstacles and privileges to each group.

Sure, there are pretty much two physical sexes outside the occasional intersex specimen, but gender is a very different phenomena.

Well if you want to start classifying homosexuals as a different gender, then we really need to revisit just what on Earth the word "Gender" actually means.

For the purposes of this discussion, gender = sex. The whole point is about using gendered personal pronouns and referring to people as male or female, or whether considering two genders is already too cruel and restrictive for the children.

 

[conflictofinterests]

Well if you want to start classifying homosexuals as a different gender, then we really need to revisit just what on Earth the word "Gender" actually means.

For the purposes of this discussion, gender = sex. The whole point is about using gendered personal pronouns and referring to people as male or female, or whether considering two genders is already too cruel and restrictive for the children.

I'm going to have to say gender does NOT equal sex for the purposes of this discussion. The English language and most of Western culture/language doesn't have gender pronouns or much of a place for anything that isn't a stereotypical "male" or "female." A large part of the reason why people who aren't stereotypical "males" or "females" get so much shit is because of THAT. You want to refer to someone as their sex? Fine. You want to refer to someone as their gender? You're going to have to do a little better than "he" and "she."

EDIT: I, personally, wouldn't want to be effectively called "vagina-haver" every time someone referenced me.

 

[ZacktheWolf]

Alright, as someone who is transgender, I have to say... this is kindda rediculous. Unless it's for some down-the-road experiment on gender role influences or something...
They're in -preschool-. At that age, I don't remember -caring- what was "gender-appropriate". If a girl wants to go for the legos, and a boy for the kitchen set, they're going to anyway, no matter where what's placed, or what pronouns are being used.
I'd rather see age-appropriate education about acceptance of diversity, and assurance that you don't -need- to find any stereotype, you should be happy being you, not someone else's you.

 

[TheFinalFantasyWolf]

Not againest homosexuality in childrens books, but nearly all of them depict homosexual couples, single couples or adoption. I hope they realise that most people are heterosexual. Whats the point of pushing out one sexuality for another, can't they teach both?

Wait....Why then does the sex of the Giraffe's matter, if the child's own sex is irrelevent to them?

 

[ultrachicken]

And they wonder why kids are acting worse and worse. They are PRESCHOOLERS! They shouldn't be taught about homesexuality and adoption or anything like that until they start asking questions about it which probably won't be for years. Let kids be kids for heavens sake!

Lolwut? Why not teach kids about homosexuality and adoption? Are you afraid it's going to pollute their minds or something? We will never get true tolerance in our society until people are comfortable with homosexual couples from a young age. And maybe adopted children wouldn't have breakdowns when discovering that their birth parents are not the parents they know and love if adoption wasn't treated so differently from raising blood-related children.

I think the way to reach these goals is not to try and blind children so much that they don't know that "hen" is not a pronoun, however. That's just stupid.

 

[SeaCalMaster]

Addendum to all the people decrying the lack of stories depicting hetero couples: [URL = "http://www.asofterworld.com/index.php?id=573"]http://www.asofterworld.com/index.php?id=573[/URL]
Remember, these kids aren't at school all the time, and they're certainly not being raised in a vacuum.

 

[rednightmare]

No, just No. Men and Women are inherently different, not less equal, but different. What these people are doing is not addressing the problem (Men and Women are not equal) but avoiding it (Men and Women, what's that?). Men and Women are genetically different and that means a certain amount of predisposition, case in point David Reimer: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/05/12/1084289756600.html

I like that they don't want to call a doctor a him or a her if they really have no idea, but then admit it. Simply say to the kids "the doctor could be him or her, I really don't know".

Part of me feels like taking away the association of girl things and boy things gives them more room to explore what they really like, but then I read this "to give our children all the possibilities based on who they are and not on their gender."
Part of who they are is them being a boy or a girl and you are just denying that.

And nearly all books deal with homosexual couples, single parents and adopted children? Now your just doing what you want to prevent, just the other way around. You can read them Snow White and make it so neither sex comes out worse, you just need a bit of imagination while telling it.

But to be honest, I'm interested. I'm wondering if boys will be boys and girls will be girls, even after all this equaling, because thats what I, as a biologist, am expecting.

 

[Jonabob87]

Retarded.

Boys will still find ways to hit each other with toy pots and pans, girls will find ways to be girly (whatever being girly is).

People are not born tabula rasa, a lot of gender is nature rather than nurture. Making boys act less like boy and girls act less like girls would be like trying to make an ectomorph turn into an endomorph. Very unhealthy.