Apparently, I should consider moving to Sweden
Thursday, April 12th, 2012 11:24 amThe reason being that Sweden's got some potential to be moving towards gender equality, which is a cause I think is worthy.
Of course, the article itself can't abstain from the doubt that comes of most people thinking about a world in which, gasp, gender is forcibly NOT permitted to be used as a discriminating factor. The comments, even worse, are like poison; nobody gives a shit if women are granted equality, or people who do not identify with any traditional gender roles are given the opportunity to develop from youth.
The article goes to great lengths to say "What about the children?"-- yes, what about the toddlers, who are too young to say they would prefer to be treated as men or women?
Well, what about them in the current set up, assholes? Parents are indoctrinated from THEIR birth to treat girls one way and boys another. Studies have shown that if you tell a parent that the baby they're holding is female, they'll be more overprotective of it and keep it closer. If it's male, they'll be more likely to encourage it to explore. It doesn't matter what gender the child actually is-- both are just as likely to want to stay close or go ranging-- but the parent, who is already socially conditioned, has notions that are transmitted to the child.
The article cites, as if this is proof of some great crime against these lucky toddlers, that some schools in Sweden have removed certain types of interaction or toys because they found that the children would revert to existing societal roles that they're working hard to abolish, otherwise. I don't see this as proof that the kids just love being jammed into the existing social stereotypes-- on the contrary, the parents of these children will have grown up in a society that still gave them the same bias that every other society already has. In the home, the teacher has no control, no ability to help give all children an equal opportunity to speak.
Having grown up in a world where I was always shunned a little bit for being willing to speak in a public forum (a shameful thing for a girl, who is societally expected to shut up and listen when the men are talking), for being eager and quick to learn (how dare I make men feel threatened by being intelligent), for preferring to do sports as a kid to playing with the other girls, whose two-faced nature repelled me, I can honestly say I would have loved a school environment that was as free and open as my home environment. My parents put no expectations on me. Two-year old Dev wore coveralls and had short, curly hair; five-year-old Dev had long hair because it was Cool, swam constantly, and played with dinosaurs and sandcastles in the backyard; nine-year old Dev was pals with the boys, played basketball every day during lunch, was ostracized by her female peers with the exception of one or two girls, and struggled confusedly with the concept that she should already have a boyfriend, which didn't seem desirable or to make any sense. At school, I had to deal with things that didn't make sense to me; when my grandparents visited, I had to deal with old-fashioned and inaccurate expectations of what it meant for me to be a little girl. But at home, with just my parents and my brother, I was who I was. I liked things from both sides and as it turns out, both genders appeal to me.
So to heck with all this fear of the unknown. Anyone who thinks making an actual, concerted effort to change the world so that women get true equality is a bad idea doomed to obvious failure because "gender identity" is "hardwired" by your sexual organs is just afraid of what might happen. They're repulsed by the idea of a world that, to them, is so different from their comfortable norm.
I think they can deal with being slightly uncomfortable and learn to accept it. Moreover, I think they should.
And I think I might have to consider the merits of someday moving to Sweden. You know, if I ever make it as a successful author, or something. That'd be kinda nice.
Edited to add unrelated notes: Man! So I bought these amazing chicken-stuffed-with-spinach-and-cheese things from the grocery store for my lunch. It's just grilled chicken + spinach, cheese and tomatoes, and it was totally delicious. They were on sale, so I'll be having those for lunch at work for a while. Also probably great to have at home for dinner with Danny, so I'm keeping that in mind.
The way they're made is a little clumsy, though. Having had flank steak with peppers and cheese actually cooked inside the meat, I think I could probably do something similar with chicken and whatnot and get to choose what goes in. Sounds like a good choice for experimentation-- stuff 'em with garlic, spinach and onions instead, maybe. I do like the cheese, but I think these'd go best with a small side salad, and cheese is filling, so it wouldn't be totally necessary, per se.
Tonight we're going to be making tacos for dinner, which both Danny and I are looking forward to.
Of course, the article itself can't abstain from the doubt that comes of most people thinking about a world in which, gasp, gender is forcibly NOT permitted to be used as a discriminating factor. The comments, even worse, are like poison; nobody gives a shit if women are granted equality, or people who do not identify with any traditional gender roles are given the opportunity to develop from youth.
The article goes to great lengths to say "What about the children?"-- yes, what about the toddlers, who are too young to say they would prefer to be treated as men or women?
Well, what about them in the current set up, assholes? Parents are indoctrinated from THEIR birth to treat girls one way and boys another. Studies have shown that if you tell a parent that the baby they're holding is female, they'll be more overprotective of it and keep it closer. If it's male, they'll be more likely to encourage it to explore. It doesn't matter what gender the child actually is-- both are just as likely to want to stay close or go ranging-- but the parent, who is already socially conditioned, has notions that are transmitted to the child.
The article cites, as if this is proof of some great crime against these lucky toddlers, that some schools in Sweden have removed certain types of interaction or toys because they found that the children would revert to existing societal roles that they're working hard to abolish, otherwise. I don't see this as proof that the kids just love being jammed into the existing social stereotypes-- on the contrary, the parents of these children will have grown up in a society that still gave them the same bias that every other society already has. In the home, the teacher has no control, no ability to help give all children an equal opportunity to speak.
Having grown up in a world where I was always shunned a little bit for being willing to speak in a public forum (a shameful thing for a girl, who is societally expected to shut up and listen when the men are talking), for being eager and quick to learn (how dare I make men feel threatened by being intelligent), for preferring to do sports as a kid to playing with the other girls, whose two-faced nature repelled me, I can honestly say I would have loved a school environment that was as free and open as my home environment. My parents put no expectations on me. Two-year old Dev wore coveralls and had short, curly hair; five-year-old Dev had long hair because it was Cool, swam constantly, and played with dinosaurs and sandcastles in the backyard; nine-year old Dev was pals with the boys, played basketball every day during lunch, was ostracized by her female peers with the exception of one or two girls, and struggled confusedly with the concept that she should already have a boyfriend, which didn't seem desirable or to make any sense. At school, I had to deal with things that didn't make sense to me; when my grandparents visited, I had to deal with old-fashioned and inaccurate expectations of what it meant for me to be a little girl. But at home, with just my parents and my brother, I was who I was. I liked things from both sides and as it turns out, both genders appeal to me.
So to heck with all this fear of the unknown. Anyone who thinks making an actual, concerted effort to change the world so that women get true equality is a bad idea doomed to obvious failure because "gender identity" is "hardwired" by your sexual organs is just afraid of what might happen. They're repulsed by the idea of a world that, to them, is so different from their comfortable norm.
I think they can deal with being slightly uncomfortable and learn to accept it. Moreover, I think they should.
And I think I might have to consider the merits of someday moving to Sweden. You know, if I ever make it as a successful author, or something. That'd be kinda nice.
Edited to add unrelated notes: Man! So I bought these amazing chicken-stuffed-with-spinach-and-cheese things from the grocery store for my lunch. It's just grilled chicken + spinach, cheese and tomatoes, and it was totally delicious. They were on sale, so I'll be having those for lunch at work for a while. Also probably great to have at home for dinner with Danny, so I'm keeping that in mind.
The way they're made is a little clumsy, though. Having had flank steak with peppers and cheese actually cooked inside the meat, I think I could probably do something similar with chicken and whatnot and get to choose what goes in. Sounds like a good choice for experimentation-- stuff 'em with garlic, spinach and onions instead, maybe. I do like the cheese, but I think these'd go best with a small side salad, and cheese is filling, so it wouldn't be totally necessary, per se.
Tonight we're going to be making tacos for dinner, which both Danny and I are looking forward to.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}