If the Swedish teacher refuses to refer to the children as "boys" and "girls" implying that she would be referring to their gender, yet there are the words, "boys" and "girls" on the bathroom door, which refers to their sexual differences, then it would seem that the Swedish society itself is confused about the distinction between "sex" and "gender". This is why I would like to know about the signs on the bathroom door in a gender-neutral school. If it just has a picture of a figure in a skirt as opposed to one in pants, is that referring to one's sex or gender?

Right, I see, so you thought this conversation was about teaching Karl Marx to toddlers. — Baden

I've not mentioned Marx, but usually Marx isn't far behind in these conversations about gender. It usually goes down as some argument that the existing power structure is wanting to maintain its control over its resources to subjugate the masses, all having been brought about by capitalist greed. Removing gender based pronouns is somehow the first step in pushing against the power structure. No longer will I be benefited by having a penis, and so I fight viciously to protect my power position.

Nobody is suggesting teaching socialism the subject as Hanover implied. — Baden

I did not suggest that. I suggested that gender neutrality issues were ideological issues, and like socialism (another such example), should not be taught from an advocacy perspective.

Read it again. That was just an example he gave as to how we should handle teaching gender-neutrality to children. — Harry Hindu

Nice cross post.

I've not mentioned Marx, but usually Marx isn't far behind in these conversations about gender. It usually goes down as some argument that the existing power structure is wanting to maintain its control over its resources to subjugate the masses, all having been brought about by capitalist greed. Removing gender based pronouns is somehow the first step in pushing against the power structure. No longer will I be benefited by having a penis, and so I fight viciously to protect my power position. — Hanover

It depends who you're talking to, really. Marxist discourse can actually be pretty against what it sees as 'identity politics', though instead of complaining about liberals using it in a way that undermines civil liberties, they complain about liberals using it in a way that undermines the class identity of the proletariat.

Gender performativity and Marxism don't have to go hand in hand, there's no conceptual necessity between one and the other, it's just a statistical correlation of leftist ideals.

It doesn't help that 'postmodern Marxism' is a dead horse trope, I guess it's better to call it a zombie horse at this point.

Had a girl wished to take wood shop in highschool, she could have. We had one such pioneer in my woodshop class. — Hanover

Only one? I guess that must be because females are allergic to wood. Just another of those biological thingies we don't have to worry about. Anyway, we're done.

You missed the part where Hanover said that had a girl wished to take wood shop, she could have. You seem to want force girls to take wood shop.

If a girl decides not to take wood shop, is it a result of her own personal preference, or only because of some kind of societal pressure? How can you know? I havent heard of any stories where a girl that wanted to take wood shop couldn't.

If a girl decides not to take wood shop, is it a result of her own personal preference, or only because of some kind of societal pressure? How can you know? — Harry Hindu

[My italics]

Now you've stumbled on the type of question that I've been trying to ask you to consider for the entire discussion. Seeing as you're now asking me, maybe you'll attempt an answer. An effort which might actually lead somewhere. I'll leave you to it.

Most men I know have simply grown tired of the glaring incongruity in public gender discourse. This campaign (and I'd even say feminine campaign) to redefine masculinity antagonistically conflates the excesses of masculine traits with masculinity itself. Meanwhile, a comparable critique of femininity is intolerable misogyny.

the answer was in the rest of my post. If a girl made the decision to go to wood shop and was prevented, we'd be hearing about it, so it seems to me that girls in general aren't fond of wood shop and that is just a general preference of girls, but some do prefer wood shop and no one is preventing them. So the answer to "How can you know" is you will hear someone claim that they aren't being treated equally and then due process takes effect in determining if there really was some form of unequal treatment - kind of like the system we already have now. It seems to me that you and un have no reason to be outraged (manufactured outrage). There is no crime here. Move along to Iran and state your case there where it might be more meaningful.

Most men I know have simply grown tired of the glaring incongruity in public gender discourse. This campaign (and I'd even say feminine campaign) to redefine masculinity antagonistically conflates the excesses of masculine traits with masculinity itself. Meanwhile, a comparable critique of femininity is intolerable misogyny — Roke

This is a philosophy forum, is it not? You're welcome to give us your take on "toxic femininity" that is so sorely lacking from public discourse.



Yeah, social pressure only takes the form of people physically stepping in front of you and telling you "you can't do that". Case closed.

Case closed. — Echarmion

I have, alas, concluded that this is not enough of a philosophy forum to cope with this topic, a fear which I expressed in the op. So I have indeed closed the case for my own part. But I am not going to be dogmatic about it, and if you or anyone wants to bring forward something of interest, I will still be following, and will try to respond.

I have, alas, concluded that this is not enough of a philosophy forum to cope with this topic, a fear which I expressed in the op. So I have indeed closed the case for my own part. But I am not going to be dogmatic about it, and if you or anyone wants to bring forward something of interest, I will still be following, and will try to respond. — unenlightened

I think it would be more apt to say that this forum is not insulated from the culture war mentality that has spread around the internet.

Interesting thread. It left me wondering about a couple of things, such as high school sports. Consider a high school senior who is a 300 lb linebacker. I don't think anyone wonders what this student's gender is. How does this conversation relate to him?

And, what if a high percentage of the visitors to this forum were from Saudi Arabia. How would that alter the conversation, if at all?

Consider a high school senior who is a 300 lb linebacker. I don't think anyone wonders what this student's gender is. — frank

Why not? There are 300 lb women, are there not? Why couldn't a 300 lb linebacker suffer from gender dysmorphia?

Why not? There are 300 lb women, are there not? — Arkady

Are you imagining gender-neutralized football?

Why couldn't a 300 lb linebacker suffer from gender dysmorphia? — Arkady

Probably could. I was just wondering how the issue of gender neutrality relates to him, if at all. Does it promise greater freedom? Or does it end up meaning nothing? A linebacker could have the ability to see the humanity of other people rather than just seeing gender. But there are environments in which people are thoroughly and emotionally cast into gender roles. Consider the recent addition to the Supreme Court and his experiences in school. Sports environments are sometimes worse than what was on display there. Recall Trump's comment about "locker-room" talk. What is the inertia behind all of that? Nature or nurture?

BTW, I'm not going to engage in the virtue-signalling that has been rampant in this thread.

Are you imagining gender-neutralized football? — frank

No. I assumed that the linebacker in question was a biological male, as virtually all high school football programs are exclusively male.

I'm not sure what you are asking. Gender neutrality does not change anyones sex, or mandate their sport. and we could have this conversation in Arabic or Chinese, though I would be in linguistic difficulties personally.

I assume your linebacker is supposed to exemplify in a non-gender-neutral society, a man who conforms to the stereotype of masculinity. If there were no such stereotype, there would still be such men, but we would not call them 'masculine' and some other, ( pick your own cliche) 'effeminate'.

I'd like to draw attention to something I wrote earlier trying to characterise the difference from the subjective viewpoint, between gender neutrality and gender stereotyping. It passed without comment.

I am a man. Therefore however I behave is manly behaviour.

Men behave thus and so. Therefore anyone who does not behave thus and so is not a proper man.
Therefore I am not a proper man, therefore I have the wrong body.

Gender neutrality allows that your linebacker, Stephen Hawking, unenlightened the gobshite weakling, and Bitter Crank the gay icon, are all equally men, and thus equally masculine, no matter how many women we are not stronger than, or how we choose to waste our time.

Would it affect his perspective on himself or society?

He's also black and raised by his grandmother. His father is in prison.

Don't worry, I'm just thinking about it.

Gender neutrality allows that your linebacker, Stephen Hawking, unenlightened the gobshite weakling, and Bitter Crank the gay icon, are all equally men, and thus equally masculine, no matter how many women we are not stronger than, or how we choose to waste our time. — unenlightened

No. Nature and the fact that you have a penis, which is different than a woman, who has a vagina, is what allows you all to be equally men.

The "argument from hypocrisy" is not an argument, but rather a thinly veiled ad-hominem. Would making the argument in Saudi Arabia or Iran somehow change the argument? — Echarmion

Mine wasn't an aruement from hypocrisy. I'm saying that the application of his arguement is inconsistent. He's essentially preaching to the choir. Think of it this way: you go to the emergency room with a splinter in your finger and a bullet in your chest. The doctor thinks that the splinter is the more serious threat and completely ignores the bullet wound. Unenlightened simply isn't being intellectually honest or consistent.

No. Nature and the fact that you have a penis, which is different than a woman, who has a vagina, is what allows you all to be equally men. — Harry Hindu

I will inform the Language Police all over the world to remove gendered constructions, people all over France need to know that whether a river has a vagina or not depends on whether they're talking about the bit flowing into the sea vs it being inland. Sailors all over the world no longer must furiously masturbate into socks when they can just fuck the boat beneath them. This will be incomprehensible to those who speak Tagalog, however, who must suffice with the usual biological bits - at least before their language was changed through their interactions with the Spanish. Eunuchs are no longer male, hallelujah!

There is an extra dimension of gender surplus to the biological ones, which are certainly still relevant. Their relevance is echoed by the relevance of the words 'trans', and the distinctions between 'girl' and 'XX genotype' (see XX male syndrome) and so on. The etymology of gendered words (and tropes) goes further back than contemporary understanding of biology, we should not be surprised to find mismatches between the two in correct use.

It isn't us who're misunderstanding gender, it's you who are misunderstanding language and normativity.

Just as a point of convenience, if you highlight a section from someone's post (from top to bottom of the desired section), you can click the 'quote' button that appears in the prompt and it will also notify them that you have responded, and any of your readers can click on the quote to see exactly what you're quoting from. Such tags make conversations much easier to follow.

Sorry, re-do:

I suggested that gender neutrality issues were ideological issues, and like socialism (another such example), should not be taught from an advocacy perspective

- @Hanover

But it is safe to assume that it is OK to teach capitalism and proper gender roles from an advocacy perspective, right? If not, then nearly all of my teachers would be in trouble. See the problem? You did not think your teachers were advocating for anything, but that is only because you were in favor of what was being advocated. I believe that unenlightened can go a little too far sometimes, but surely they have some valid points.

It isn't us who're misunderstanding gender, it's you who are misunderstanding language and normativity. — fdrake

I think I have firm grasp of language as I have been able accumulate 1.7k posts without much of a problem. The only problem I seem to be having is with the way in which you are using a certsin term - "gender". I have defined it as the equivalence of sex. You have yet to provide a consistent definition for your use of the term.

If someone calls thenselves a man and puts on pants while another calls themselves a man puts on a skirt, then they're confusing the wide variety of human behavior as gendered behavior. Humans of any gender can where whatever they like. It is different cultures that place limitations on behavior based on sex, or some other trait. That doesn't mean that you are a woman only when you wear a skirt. It just means that different ciltutes have different guidelines for how to behave. If a man can wear what he wants and a woman can wear what they want then that just makes those terms, "man" and "woman" meaningless. Wearing what you want isnt a man or woman thing. Its a human thing. The distinction is their sex organs that make a man a man or a woman, a woman.

What you don't realize is the trans people would be oppressed in a gender neutral environment. They want gender-specific pronouns applied to them - the opposite ones than their sex would lead one to use - and get hostile when you don't use the "right" one. Men who feel like women (whatever that means) want to wear a dress to express their womanhood, but in a gender neutral environment wearing a dress isn't a characteristic of womanhood and they wouldn't be a woman simply by wearing a dress. It would require more and you seem conrent just to accept theyre claim, yet I dont see you accepting other claims so easily based on somones feeling. Its nothing but illogical, emotional arguments being made from left's side.

Consider a high school senior who is a 300 lb linebacker. I don't think anyone wonders what this student's gender is. How does this conversation relate to him? — frank

I assume you mean 'sex' rather than 'gender' here.

The way that this conversation relates to him is that in a world in which gender stereotypes were not promoted, this male would be free to wear lipstick, dresses, play with dolls and other activities that gender stereotypes claim are 'feminine' without fear of being judged or otherwise looked-down on by others.

His ability to play American football well is one property that is part of a male gender stereotype (by the way, that stereotype no longer applies to English football (soccer) or Australian football, in which there are popular and prosperous female leagues), but implies nothing about other aspects of his behaviour.

The way that this conversation relates to him is that in a world in which gender stereotypes were not promoted, this male would be free to wear lipstick, dresses, play with dolls and other activities that gender stereotypes claim are 'feminine' without fear of being judged or otherwise looked-down on by others. — andrewk

But that's an alternate reality. I think that introducing gender neutrality into schools would be icing spread on a shit cake from his point of view. Or at least he'd be aware that those making the changes think of him as part of a shit cake.

He has to lift himself up.

I don't understand your comments about cake, or about the fellow lifting himself up.

If you're saying that programs in schools do not help a person that is currently suffering persecution because of the gender stereotypes held by others, I don't think anybody disagrees. But nobody is saying that school programs are the whole solution, only that they may be an important part of the solution. Solutions to social problems like this are complex and multi-faceted. Some parts - like the schools - will address the gradual removal of the stereotypes, and others will seek to protect people that currently suffer from those stereotypes. Inevitably, the experience of a nonconformist will be worse now or in five years than it will be in twenty years.

I assume you mean 'sex' rather than 'gender' here. — andrewk

Whats the difference? I've asked this several times. If was so easy and obvious then why can't anyone answer the question?

The way that this conversation relates to him is that in a world in which gender stereotypes were not promoted, this male would be free to wear lipstick, dresses, play with dolls and other activities that gender stereotypes claim are 'feminine' without fear of being judged or otherwise looked-down on by others. — andrewk

But a transgender woman (a man claiming to be a woman) does call those things feminine. It is the only way they know how to express their womanhood. Are you telling the trans person that those things are not characteristics of womanhood?

His ability to play American football well is one property that is part of a male gender stereotype (by the way, that stereotype no longer applies to English football (soccer) or Australian football, in which there are popular and prosperous female leagues), but implies nothing about other aspects of his behaviour. — andrewk

So in a gender neutral school the girls will play on the varsity tackle football team or wrestling team with the boys?

Whats the difference? I've asked this several times. If was so easy and obvious then why can't anyone answer the question? — Harry Hindu

I'm surprised that nobody has answered it, because I believe it is very simple. Perhaps you didn't ask it quite as directly before.
For me, 'sex' refers to the biological sex of the person, as determined by their chromosomes and genitalia. If the chromosomes are not in one of the two standard sexual configurations or the genitalia are not consistent with the chromosomes, the person is intersex. That occurs sometimes, but rarely.

'Gender' identifies with which of society's two standard sets of behavioural expectations the person most complies, or society expects them to comply.

Sex is biological. Gender is a societal expectation based on sex.

I agree with Simone de Beauvoir that gendered expectations are oppressive and that it is worth working to eradicate them. That will take a very long time, and will encounter resistance, but it is worth the effort.

Some people use 'gender' as a synonym for 'sex', and even prefer it because it sounds less rude. I think that is a mistake and, wherever possible refuse to fill in a field in a form marked 'gender' (or choose the 'prefer not to disclose' or 'indeterminate' option if there is one), while I am perfectly happy to indicate my sex.

Although I think it is a mistake, I confess that I made it for much of my life, before I became aware of the importance of the distinction.

So in a gender neutral school the girls will play on the varsity tackle football team or wrestling team with the boys? — Harry Hindu

Sure, if they want to.

a transgender woman (a man claiming to be a woman) does call those things feminine. It is the only way they know how to express their womanhood. Are you telling the trans person that those things are not characteristics of womanhood? — Harry Hindu

I would not presume to tell the person anything, as I am not in a position to understand their experience, much less give them advice. It has to be acknowledged that in some cases gender dysphoria of the sort you mention can come into conflict with de Beauvoir's vision of feminism, and this has caused some distress on both sides. So it behoves us to proceed carefully in areas that are vulnerable to that conflict. But I think it is possible to work to dismantle societal gender expectations without having to enter that conflict zone.