What the fuck? The ONLY thing they are doing is removing social expectations: that boys and girls can choose to play and hang out with anything and anyone regardless of gender biases constructed and enforced by us adults. If anything, it's emphasizing individuality. Raising kids in the spirit of mutual understanding and respect is the recipe to avoid mocking and discrimination.Iron Criterion said:This sounds worryingly like it should serve as an origin for countless fictional dystopian states. What next, give them a number instead of a name? Shave all their heads so those with long hair are not mocked by those without? Put them in identical non-gender uniforms so there is no discrimination based on fashion sense or perceived 'lack of'? Destroy their individuality?
i don't think 5 year olds think this critically.Sneaky Paladin said: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.
I agree with this. I think media for little children can be bad sometimes, for example it can make girls all obsessed about marying, and it can stay that way for their whole lives.conflictofinterests said:Cinderella: Girl performs housework and endures abuse all her life and is unable to do anything else. Something completely apart from her life, a Fairy Godmother, magically whisks her away to fall in love. Upon not marrying, she then resumes backbreaking housework and abuse endurance until a man, a prince, who happened to be the one she fell in love with, marries her, and she lives happily ever after.
Have I left out any significant plot points?
Cinderella is pretty much the epitome of the ancient female stereotype. All a woman is good for is cooking and cleaning, and the best thing she can aspire to do is to get married to the richest guy possible.
That's not the way language works. Words can be created and evolve over time (as i mentioned earlier 'man' used to be gender neutral) but they can't just be 'made up', taught to preschoolers, and expected to hold water. they need to evolve in the language on their own or at least be used by a majority of the population.DoctorPhil said:I agree with this. I think media for little children can be bad sometimes, for example it can make girls all obsessed about marying, and it can stay that way for their whole lives.conflictofinterests said:Cinderella: Girl performs housework and endures abuse all her life and is unable to do anything else. Something completely apart from her life, a Fairy Godmother, magically whisks her away to fall in love. Upon not marrying, she then resumes backbreaking housework and abuse endurance until a man, a prince, who happened to be the one she fell in love with, marries her, and she lives happily ever after.
Have I left out any significant plot points?
Cinderella is pretty much the epitome of the ancient female stereotype. All a woman is good for is cooking and cleaning, and the best thing she can aspire to do is to get married to the richest guy possible.
I definitely don't agree with everything they're doing, but I think the gender neutral personal pronoun (At least I think that's what it's called) is a good idea. I don't see why so much languages don't have one. What if I came up with the idea to introduce different personal pronouns for black people and white people? I'd be called insane. That would be discriminatory, and now that I think about it the words him and her are kinda too. I get a feeling those words are a remnant of our old society where men > women. I don't really see the purpose of refering to people with different personal pronouns depending on their gender.
I'm a guy, before anyone calls me a feminazi.
Most of that school's propositions are dumb and those that make sence might not change anything (or they might), but they won't do any harm either. So... go right ahead, school.
No I haven't seen that, and I disagree with it. At least the way Morgan Freeman is un-eloquently arguing his position.Terminate421 said:I am assuming you've seen this?Jangles said:Snip
It adds to the 'equality' topic here.
yep, also, there are some differences between genders that are so obvious a preschooler could figure it out. It's not like they're teaching that males and females have equal abilities. They're just ignoring that there's any difference between the two.Deschamps said:Equality and tolerance should be achieved through education, not ignorance.
There is breaking down gender stereotypes and then there is denying people their own gender distinctions.Oathy said:The title comes from this article which is also the basis of this topic: http://beta.news.yahoo.com/no-him-her-preschool-fights-gender-bias-122541829.html
(recommend reading it)
What do you guys think?
Gender tends to accompany the sex organ, while it might not always be the case it is a valid generalization as it is by a large margin the most probable scenario.Snowy Rainbow said:What does gender have to do with sex organ?The_root_of_all_evil said:Little boy notices little girl is different. Coz I'm assuming they either have different gendered toilets or they all go together.Snowy Rainbow said:What? I don't get it...The_root_of_all_evil said:"What happened to your pee-pee?"
That is all.
Got me there. I shouldn't post on this kind of thread at midnight, I say dumb things.Innegativeion said:Um, wouldn't brainwashing BE the logical extreme of "ignorance"?lacktheknack said:If anything, this looks uncomfortably like brainwashing.
Does this remind anyone else of "Ingsoc" from 1984? Getting rid of the words that people use to express themselves negatively, with the aim that they can no longer express dissatisfaction at the ruling state. The reason we use 'him' and 'her' are because they give us a good idea of who we are talking about, of who to expect coming through the door. It is descriptive, specific language designed to produce a mental picture. Making this description more vague is a step backwards.They even try to get rid of the words "him" & "her" (han/hon in swedish) and replace it with a made-up word. That is not breaking down gender stereotypes, that is just being unreasonable. What will happen to these children when they get older and realize that there is no subject term called "hen" in the real world.
Exactly, this is the main problem, we are taking a minor issue and making it the main drive of the school, Yes gender equality is an issue that should be tackled, and negative gender stereotypes do exist, but there are also positive gender stereotypes. They have gone too far, and it has led to ridiculous things like this happening: "Bergkvist noted on her blog that the state-funded Swedish Science Council had granted $80,000 for a postdoctoral fellowship aimed at analyzing "the trumpet as a symbol of gender." No Sweden, that is not a good use of $80,000. Seriously, get a grip.NinjaDeathSlap said:Isn't imposing on children the mantra of "YOU MUST BE ANYTHING OTHER THAN A STEREOTYPICAL BOY/GIRL!" just as bad as imposing on them "YOU MUST BE A STEREOTYPICAL BOY/GIRL!"