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.