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

Flauros

New member
Mar 2, 2010
475
0
0
LiquidGrape said:
I don't see what the problem is. Did most of you even read the article?

...Egalia doesn't deny the biological differences between boys and girls - the dolls the children play with are anatomically correct.

What matters is that children understand that their biological differences "don't mean boys and girls have different interests and abilities," Rajalin says. "This is about democracy. About human equality."
This literally happens EVERY SINGLE TIME something like this is brought up. I watched a video where theres this guy who looks kinda like a girl, so when he talks and says an opinion, people get ANGRY because that women is being a TOTAL *****, she shouldnt talk. But he was just talking like normal like all the other men. Anyway, he said that women should be allowed to talk.
The comments went insane "SO YOURE SAYING WOMEN CAN HURT MEN AND NOOONE CAN DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT! FEMINAZI! I WILL DESTROY YOU! AAHHHHHHHHHHH! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!" All Sam Kinison like.
 

ZombieGenesis

New member
Apr 15, 2009
1,909
0
0
Who cares if Cinderella is a stereotype?
Seterotypes aren't always BAD.

Seriously, 'all things in moderation'. Surely having ONLY stories about alternative lifestyles, utterly disregarding straight or otherwise 'normal' choices, is just as poisonous.
 

Flauros

New member
Mar 2, 2010
475
0
0
Cavouku said:
Seems we have something bordering on a divide on this topic amongst the community.

I agree with the core idea: Let them decide who they are. And I agree with those saying we should educate them about differences, both real and perceived, to prepare them for real life. But yeah, I can see how this is a bit much.

I don't know if they're actually banning the use of stick-swords just because it's masculine, and I hope not. See, even if it's just the boys doing it, they made the decision to be the person who uses the stick sword. More so, I'm hoping the focus is in making them accept when a girl wants to play stick swords too, or if a guy wants to play in the kitchen.

I mean, that's what they're doing right? Is it? It's a bit vague at the moment, and It'd be great if someone kept tabs on this, because an update in the future might help. For now, I'm going to hope that what they're doing is making an environment that allows exceptions, not eliminates them by eliminating the consistents.
They never said that, some guy was just GUESSING that theyll do that, lol. Kinda like how the creator of Dilbert says that if men arent allowed to RAPE and control women, all us men are going to be castrated slaves, unable to do ANYTHING MANLY EVER AGAIN.
 

Cavouku

New member
Mar 14, 2008
1,122
0
0
Flauros said:
Cavouku said:
Seems we have something bordering on a divide on this topic amongst the community.

I agree with the core idea: Let them decide who they are. And I agree with those saying we should educate them about differences, both real and perceived, to prepare them for real life. But yeah, I can see how this is a bit much.

I don't know if they're actually banning the use of stick-swords just because it's masculine, and I hope not. See, even if it's just the boys doing it, they made the decision to be the person who uses the stick sword. More so, I'm hoping the focus is in making them accept when a girl wants to play stick swords too, or if a guy wants to play in the kitchen.

I mean, that's what they're doing right? Is it? It's a bit vague at the moment, and It'd be great if someone kept tabs on this, because an update in the future might help. For now, I'm going to hope that what they're doing is making an environment that allows exceptions, not eliminates them by eliminating the consistents.
They never said that, some guy was just GUESSING that theyll do that, lol. Kinda like how the creator of Dilbert says that if men arent allowed to RAPE and control women, all us men are going to be castrated slaves, unable to do ANYTHING MANLY EVER AGAIN.
I had a feeling it wasn't something the school was actually doing. And I certainly hope they don't take that as an idea.

CAPTCHA: fyinithe 1953:

It was a cold morning, and it would be a cold day, as we marched through the wastelands of Fyinithe, barren of all life... and food... How much longer we could last, I don't know, but I pray to God we make it to that outpost on time. The Russians are planning something, this whole thing is a kettle boiling over, and I'll be damned if I don't do my part to stop it.

Diary entry of Sgt. Mark Samson, October 22nd, 1953
 

Flauros

New member
Mar 2, 2010
475
0
0
Generic Gamer said:
Flauros said:
Bilingual means substituting words with other words. They simply wont say it when its not necessary, just like when my son speaks english when its english time.
No it doesn't, it means speaking two languages fluently.

Flauros said:
You realize were not talking about a training facility or the the Truman Show. Its daycare. Where kids play for a couple of hours before theyre picked up again. Saying the place is bad because it has a new WORD is.....wow.

I bet all the kids who say PONG or SNAGGLEPUSS or JESUS are just totally screwed. Its a word. People use gender-neutral words all the time, believe it or not. THEY is a common one.
Actually primary schools are careful to use real words around children, as are parents. Parenting organisations also recommend it. I don't know why you're having trouble with this concept but it seems simple to me; if you make a word up no one else will understand it. Bear in mind this word isn't like 'they' since it's specifically stated that this word isn't actually a real word, no one outside of this program will understand this word.
Did you know that Sweden actually introduces new words every year? Every time someone makes a new word, they find it and put it in the dictionary? They say more words enriches their language.

Im about an hour away from Sweden right now, not that that has anything to do with anything, lol
 

Iron Mal

New member
Jun 4, 2008
2,749
0
0
You know why some fairy tales have such gender roles and stereotypes attached?

Because at the time they were written that's bloody well how things worked, women's right were not up for debate, your role was in the kitchen and raising kids back then.

Gender roles exist now, they always have and they always shall, and it's important that they do. Our gender and the roles, expectations and the differences in the way that our minds and socialisation works are all very important parts of us establishing who we are as people (even if it's very subtle, it's safe to say that most of us would be different as people if we were born the opposite gender).

I understand the interest in preventing future problems with sexism and misogyny but I feel that this is going the wrong way about achieving that goal. If you want to eradicate issues of discrimination and sexism then what you want to do is not try and convince kids that these problems simply don't exist but to try and teach them how to cope with people who are mean and cruel to them, in other words, teach them how to be better people rather than to be in denial.

This is going to leave with no experience or point of reference for when they eventually meet someone who doesn't give a shit what them or their idealistic 'no him or her' philosophy thinks and has the intent to ruin their day or life.
 

Liudeius

New member
Oct 5, 2010
442
0
0
I'm all for no gender stereotypes, but that's a bit much.
Also, how is reinforcing only homosexual relationships good? I can see how only heterosexual couples could be ill-advised, but only homosexual couples is even worse.
 

Beliyal

Big Stupid Jellyfish
Jun 7, 2010
503
0
0
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!"
What? Seriously, what? Quote the part of the article where it says "We are going to make children be something they might not want to be". It is exactly what they're fighting against. Allowing children to choose for themselves and giving them the opportunity to grow up without societal gender norm imposed on them is something I'd hardly paraphrase as "YOU MUST BE ANYTHING OTHER THAN A STEREOTYPICAL BOY/GIRL!". Fact is, there is nothing wrong with being a "stereotypical" boy/girl; as long that was chosen by the said boy/girl himself/herself. They are giving children a choice; you don't have to be a genius to be able to comprehend which toys you like more. If a girl chooses a car, fine. If a girl chooses a Barbie doll, fine. She chose that HERSELF. Which makes it perfectly fine. What is not fine are conventional preschools where they separate boys and girls and give boys only cars and give girls only kitchen utensils and encourage the social gender norms which removes the free will and choice of the child to be what he or she wants to be. There is a middle ground, people, and this might be the path to it. Stop demonizing the project by making it look like they're trying to go from one extreme into the other, Jesus. The article is perfectly clear to me and I honestly don't understand how can you think that they want to impose something on those kids. They are giving them a choice, something which current educational system is not doing.

Amizrael said:
This makes me want to go back and read those books I found detailing the differences between the male and female human brain. Then I could provide some useful insight into this conversation other than to say that males and females have very different neurochemistry an therefore very thought processes.

In any case, it is an interesting human experiment. I hope the children never suffer for it, and I hope the parents never forgive themselves if they do.
Differences in the brain do exist, but they are not responsible for someone's personality and interests. It's mostly things like "men have better orientation" and "women are better with colours", but that has never been and it never will be the deciding point in your personality and interests. And besides, there are exceptions, which are not even that rare. Humanity rose above all of our inefficiencies. If I'm poor at orientation, I'll buy a GPS. Problem fucking solved. Did that influence my hobbies and choice in toys? No. As a matter of fact, when I was a little girl, I didn't care about differences in the brain between a man and a woman; all I wondered about was why the hell are people looking at me weirdly if I play with swords instead of Barbies.

As for experiment thing, isn't everything we do an "experiment"? Because, something that we take for granted was an experiment once. How do you expect humanity to evolve and adapt to new situations if we do not experiment? The children won't suffer any more than they could "suffer" anyway if they went to ordinary preschool. I know I suffered for being pushed into something that wasn't my interest, and it was not the fault of some new experiment; it was the fault of a degraded and old system that does not apply to new generations.

Canid117 said:
So they decide to increase equality by including books and stories about gay couples single parents and orphans? Sounds fine to me. Wait they are also removing the stories about straight couples raising and nuclear families? Yay equality! [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SarcasmMode]
History of family and social norms will be taught in schools when the kid reaches high school and is able to make a difference between knowledge of the past and rules imposed on them. That's why we have Sociology classes in high school. We learned about multiple different cultures and norms throughout history and the cultural norms of today. About straight couples; most kids are in a straight couple family, they have that knowledge by experience. And no one said that they will not teach that too, they only mentioned that they included less "common" possible families.
 

Neverhoodian

New member
Apr 2, 2008
3,832
0
0
I don't know about the rest of you, but when I was in preschool I was too busy playing in the dirt, riding tricycles, and picking my nose to be worried about gender roles.
 

RN7

New member
Oct 27, 2009
824
0
0
buy teh haloz said:
So this is how Nazi Germany started!
Nah I'm pretty sure Nazi Germany started because an ambition Austrian guy manipulated a bunch of poor people who were a little peeved at having to pay 800 dollars for a loaf of bread.

OT: This whole things seems kind...highly ridiculous. I'm all for gender-equality, but this is just over the top. I mean, taking out classic fairy tales like Cinderella? Adding in books dealing with homosexuality and single parents doesn't sound like a bad idea, but at least give the children some options. Also, include the REAL fairy tales, Grimm style. Children need to learn that mean-spirited people will get ripped to death by ravens or receive spectral vengeance.

The worst part is adding the gender neutral pronoun. I highly doubt that telling a boy that this is his toy will cause him to generate a 1950's style view on women, and telling a girl that this is her's will cause her to join a group of militant feminists.
 

Twilight_guy

Sight, Sound, and Mind
Nov 24, 2008
7,131
0
0
The main problem with hat is that they are ignoring the fact that the vast majority of couples are heterosexual. I can understand trying to introduce them to other types of relationships but ignoring the relative proportions of these things is like saying that whites don't exist because they are the majority and we want to teach kids about blacks and Asians.
 

guntotingtomcat

New member
Jun 29, 2010
522
0
0
The issue is choice.

Children confuse the issue because they are perceived as too immature to make that choice.

That's beside the point. My opinion is that parents will matter way more in defining the attitudes of their children on subjects like gender roles and homosexuality.

Also, it doesn't matter how many books you write. As long as pay within the same grade differ by gender and as long as there are still jobs that women are forbidden by law to do, we live in a society with legally enforced gender roles.

By in large, they favor men. They should teach that to kids.
 

Flauros

New member
Mar 2, 2010
475
0
0
Generic Gamer said:
Flauros said:
Did you know that Sweden actually introduces new words every year? Every time someone makes a new word, they find it and put it in the dictionary? They say more words enriches their language.
England does that too, but they only pick words that are widely used in their environment. I suspect Sweden also does that. Basically to become a word it has to be popularly used whereas it sounds like the kids from this school are going to be the only ones that know this word.

Mixing the toys together, fine. Selectively losing certain traditional stories, I'm not 100% happy with but as long as the new material teaches kids to read well I don't mind. Not teaching the children the recognised 'correct' way to speak a language, that I have a problem with because it'll hurt their future communications.


Really? I didnt notice that, probably because thats not what they say happens.
 

guntotingtomcat

New member
Jun 29, 2010
522
0
0
Twilight_guy said:
The main problem with hat is that they are ignoring the fact that the vast majority of couples are heterosexual. I can understand trying to introduce them to other types of relationships but ignoring the relative proportions of these things is like saying that whites don't exist because they are the majority and we want to teach kids about blacks and Asians.
Most children do not need to be told about heterosexuality. As you say, the vast majority will see and learn about it from their own families and those of their friends.

Many children, however, may not see a homosexual couple because they aren't immediately apparent in many societies. Surely we should be combating ignorance. And many people actually pretend homosexuality doesn't exist, or tell them that it is wrong. This kind of thing is probably an effort to combat that.
 

Iron Mal

New member
Jun 4, 2008
2,749
0
0
Beliyal said:
About straight couples; most kids are in a straight couple family, they have that knowledge by experience. And no one said that they will not teach that too, they only mentioned that they included less "common" possible families.
By that logic doesn't a child coming from something besides a 'normal' nuclear family already have an understanding and awareness of that family structure because of their experience with it?

In that case they already know what they need to know and we don't need to focus too much on it.

I already mentioned my issues with the whole situation in general in my previous post but here I'm just saying that I have an issue with the statement quoted above, if we're going to be argueing that every choice is just as valid and acceptable as any other then surely all choices should be covered in just as much detail as every other (all things being equal there's no legitimate reason not to), especially if our interests lay in informing children of the choices they have and to help them understand (just assuing they know all about it just sounds lazy and careless to me, not to mention being something of a double standard).
 

Jonluw

New member
May 23, 2010
7,245
0
0
I see it as a good idea to not separate toys into boys' toys and girls' toys and for example keep the dolls with the action figures or whatever. However, I think it starts to get sort of silly when they refuse to refer to someone as a girl or a boy. In most situations where someone is referred to by their gender, that's an appropriate thing to do.

Oh wait. I read the article more closesly, and it turns out they use "hen" only when it's appropriate, such as when a plumber is coming to visit, and they don't know their sex.
You know, the way many use 'they' in English.
 

Sordak

New member
Oct 5, 2010
119
0
0
well good job making a whole bunch of girly men.

Women and Men ARE different, everyone SHOULD knowthis, its a fact. This way you just create new, even more fucked up gender stereotypes.
Also showing them mainly bisexual and homosexual couples will make them feel that homosexuallity actually is the norm, and from a evolutionary standpoint this is very very wrong...
 

TheLaofKazi

New member
Mar 20, 2010
840
0
0
LiquidGrape said:
I don't see what the problem is. Did most of you even read the article?

...Egalia doesn't deny the biological differences between boys and girls - the dolls the children play with are anatomically correct.

What matters is that children understand that their biological differences "don't mean boys and girls have different interests and abilities," Rajalin says. "This is about democracy. About human equality."
Honestly, some of you people act as if this was a stepping stone to a fascist society or something.
What is being challenged by this approach is the heteronormative gender, and I say rightly so. Nobody is somehow trying to usurp the biological sex of these children.
Thank you!

Holy shit people, go read about the differences between one's sex and their gender. Our society has a tendency to think people who are biologically male should act 'masculine' and female act 'feminine'. Sure, such behaviors do have some basis in biology, and that's completely fine, but you can't deny that a large amount of it is enforced by societal norms. Expecting a biological male to act 'masculine' is similar to expecting a person with biologically black skin to act like a 'black person' (except in that case there is no biological root for it). Hence the terms, sexist and racist.

I can understand one feeling an opposition to what the school is doing, because their approach certainly isn't perfect, but I think the idea of it is good, and at least they are trying. It's going to be difficult to find a good balance between raising children that understand everything, while still being able to understand, deal with and function in a society that doesn't get it yet.
 

Flauros

New member
Mar 2, 2010
475
0
0
Generic Gamer said:
Flauros said:
Did you know that Sweden actually introduces new words every year? Every time someone makes a new word, they find it and put it in the dictionary? They say more words enriches their language.
England does that too, but they only pick words that are widely used in their environment. I suspect Sweden also does that. Basically to become a word it has to be popularly used whereas it sounds like the kids from this school are going to be the only ones that know this word.

Mixing the toys together, fine. Selectively losing certain traditional stories, I'm not 100% happy with but as long as the new material teaches kids to read well I don't mind. Not teaching the children the recognised 'correct' way to speak a language, that I have a problem with because it'll hurt their future communications.
lol "I dont like how these facts are going, lets pretend this is happening in ENGLAND instead, i like that better!"