Boys and Girls are same in Swedish School

19 posts

Flag Post

some school in sweden is gonna treat boys and girls exactly the same. people may not call each other he or she. girls arent gonna be in the kitchen playpart of the room anymore and the boys are gonna get as much talking as the girlz.

some people think that this way of treating boys and girls will lead to more gaysexuality and bisexuality. this will be bad for human population. discuss what u think about this.

here is the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/14/world/europe/swedish-school-de-emphasizes-gender-lines.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=global-home&

 
Flag Post

so…uhm…i’ve read your link, but i still don’t quite understand the difference. what sets this school apart from any other?

are pronouns really that powerful?

 
Flag Post

I think in some ways this can be good, and some ways it can be bad.
It just depends on how it goes.

They shouldn’t treat them the same, but actually caring for boys actually getting hurt would be nice.
Although I never found that such a thing like they seem to be fighting against happen in the schools I was at, it may be different there.

I don’t think you would become gay or bi simply by such a thing happening.
I just don’t see how it could all too much.

And what’s this about population?
The worlds population isn’t in trouble at all, even if tons of kids became gay/bi over this it wouldn’t matter in population terms.
Our population isn’t too big where we would need to reduce it, but it’s not like we need more people on earth.


“Everyone gets to play with dolls…and some are also black. "
That there multiculturalism, first the tv and now with forced dolls.
I just find it odd that they just had to mention this.

 
Flag Post

Personally I think it is taking gender equality too far.

If a girl wants to climb a tree I see no reason to stop her, if a boy wants to play with dolls then fine, if playing with “other gender” toys or activities makes them happy then fine. However I don’t see what advantage will come from trying to hide the fact that there are two genders from these children will do. Not reinforcing gender sterotypes is a good thing, but deliberately avoiding gender pronouns almost implies (to me atleast) that having different genders in the first place is what is wrong.

 
Flag Post
deliberately avoiding gender pronouns almost implies (to me atleast) that having different genders in the first place is what is wrong

actually, i’m sure that’s the opinion of whoever initiated that.

 
Flag Post
some people think that this way of treating boys and girls will lead to more gaysexuality and bisexuality. this will be bad for human population.

How would not treating by their gender lead to homo- or bisexuality? How is this “bad for human population”? I’d just like a clarification here.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by JaumeBG:

How would not treating by their gender lead to homo- or bisexuality?

It doesn’t. However, it is something of a popular myth that it does, somehow.

 
Flag Post

well, actually — and this leads to the most dramatic part of the whole thing — “they” believe that people are and aught to be programmed to be straight, by societies gender-seperatist standarts. or else we would devolve into lewd animals or something (even though homosexuality is also unnatural, err…)

that’s not a misrepresentation i’m pretty sure. they really believe that way. now, in my view, that means that the validity of the argument of the people behind what this school is doing, and their justification, is that it is perhaps inherently wrong to “program” children in such a way, rather than letting them develop naturally as they would without such programming.

what is really unfortunate is that the link actually mentions

“That’s why we chose it,” she said. “It’s so important to start at an early age.”

because…“start” what? what does she want to “start” doing? sounds like they are trying to program children to be tolerant and openminded. which would destroy the primary argument they have in favour of themselves.

shouldn’t we just not care and let them about their business as they would naturally? just set the right example, don’t seperate them by genders all the time, and avoid pronounces if you must. but it’s all kinda sounding like they’re trying to force something onto these children, which would be bad and hypocritical.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by dd790:

Personally I think it is taking gender equality too far.

If a girl wants to climb a tree I see no reason to stop her, if a boy wants to play with dolls then fine, if playing with “other gender” toys or activities makes them happy then fine. However I don’t see what advantage will come from trying to hide the fact that there are two genders from these children will do. Not reinforcing gender sterotypes is a good thing, but deliberately avoiding gender pronouns almost implies (to me atleast) that having different genders in the first place is what is wrong.

This right here. I don’t think you should force gender neutrality on the kids, it’s a lot like pretending gender doesn’t exist at all.

 
Flag Post

^does it? isn’t it just the opposite? isn’t it much rather not pretending it does exist?

 
Flag Post

Hm. Now you have me thinking on gender pronouns. Is this something “we” are in favour of? The more I consider them the more I can’t find a case for their use at all. It is placing gender differences at a very primary level of separation. If one is to talk about men, or women, sure – but when referring to an individual is it of value to establish gender inherently? Although at this far along in the game it would be difficult to remove certainly.

As for programming children… well, ultimately, I am okay with that. In so far as I find the programming justifiable. It comes down to means and goal for me. I can’t say I am against teaching children anything, or even certain things.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Ungeziefer:

Hm. Now you have me thinking on gender pronouns. Is this something “we” are in favour of? The more I consider them the more I can’t find a case for their use at all. It is placing gender differences at a very primary level of separation. If one is to talk about men, or women, sure – but when referring to an individual is it of value to establish gender inherently? Although at this far along in the game it would be difficult to remove certainly.

Well you kind of have to in order to English properly and accurately.

 
Flag Post

English can change, it must really. But, is this a change we desire?

Well there is a pejorative association with our neuter pronouns. Most people wouldn’t like being called an “it”, and given contrary knowledge it seems a deliberate omission.

But why the push for gender accuracy? Why is it so vital as you suggest? We’ve already started gliding over it in older forms. A female doctor, or professor, is called as such. Though more accurately should be a doctress, professress, and so on. ‘-or’ is a specifically masculine suffix, we just don’t use it in such a form routinely anymore.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Ungeziefer:


But why the push for gender accuracy? Why is it so vital as you suggest?

Because, like it or not, gender is actually a pretty defining characteristic, so it helps to say he or she when describing someone.

We’ve already started gliding over it in older forms. A female doctor, or professor, is called as such. Though more accurately should be a doctress, professress, and so on. ‘-or’ is a specifically masculine suffix, we just don’t use it in such a form routinely anymore.

Not exactly the words I was thinking of, but whatever.

 
Flag Post

that doesn’t explain why. why do we use the bilateral pronoun “he” and “she”? just saying that it’s defining or characteristic doesn’t explain why we by pronoun define genders, and not for instance the species, or the age.

and certainly saying anything around using correct grammar doesn’t explain why that is considered the right gender, nor does quoting dictionaries. i’m just adding that because so many people have trouble distincting a reason for things to be the way they are with recognising that’s how they happen to be.

 
Flag Post

that doesn’t explain why. why do we use the bilateral pronoun “he” and “she”? just saying that it’s defining or characteristic doesn’t explain why we by pronoun define genders, and not for instance the species, or the age.

It’s a remnant of older languages from which modern ones are derived. For example, my language doesn’t even have any neuter gender. Everything is masculine or feminine.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Suicidal_waffles:

that doesn’t explain why. why do we use the bilateral pronoun “he” and “she”? just saying that it’s defining or characteristic doesn’t explain why we by pronoun define genders, and not for instance the species, or the age.

It’s a remnant of older languages from which modern ones are derived. For example, my language doesn’t even have any neuter gender. Everything is masculine or feminine.

wtf… what language is that? turk or japanese?

 
Flag Post

according to hir profile it’s Lithuanian. but actually French also has no neutral gender, every object is either masculine or feminine, adn even their article refers to it. (le and la)

 
Flag Post

French has no neutral object, but it does have neutral subject pronouns…the word ‘on’ which is used for impersonal ‘one supposes that x’, or ‘il’, which is usually male pronoun but can also be universal ‘he’

Originally posted by OmegaDoom:
deliberately avoiding gender pronouns almost implies (to me atleast) that having different genders in the first place is what is wrong

actually, i’m sure that’s the opinion of whoever initiated that.

Actually it’s more likely that they believe that there are more than two genders (transgender) therefore they need to teach gender neutrality instead of locking children into one or the other traditional gender roles.