About Gender Neutrality - why it's actually a GOOD thing (and why you're probably wrong if you think otherwise)

[Mesonfielde]

People assume that "gender neutrality" is something evil.

That it is some sort of unnatural, artificial construct that was designed to either "make men become women, and women become men", or "to make everyone be exactly the same". That we would "reach true equality by removing (or just ignoring) every single difference between males and females".

To be honest, this is far from the truth.

People who are regular to this site know my take on "gender". I tend to say that gender should be eradicated for the sake of the removal of sexism, stereotypical thinking, inflicting traumas by forcing males not to ever show any shreds of emotion or teaching females to feel ashamed by their own expression of sexuality, or even the concept that females are meant to be dominated upon my males.

And most of the time, people disagree with me on this subject. They say, "but Meson, `gender` is natural - males and females ARE different! There are significant biological differences within the brain structure, and our cultural beliefs aren't exactly based on absolutely nothing. Why on earth would you even try to bother to disagree?"

Simply put, because while these claims are partly true, they are also partly false, of course! We shouldn't take EVERYTHING we know about "gender" and especially "gender-specific behavior" for granted. Let's get started, shall we?

Biological differences

It is a fact. There are differences between the male and female brain, and also between our hormonal systems. It is unreasonable to expect everyone to be exactly the same. But as such, it's just as unreasonable to assume that all females, or all males act exactly the same just because they have a particular set of genitals.

But it's also unreasonable to expect that these differences are valid foundation for stereotypical claims. Most claims for how "females have white matter in their brain, THEREFORE ___" are hypotheses, they are not proven. Many of this `research` is done by finding a difference, and arbitrarily linking cultural expectations as a "possible likely result" of this difference.

Neuroscientists have been doing this for centuries. There's a whole book about this for those who are more curious which can be found here - Delusions of Gender by Cordelia Fine.

Therefore, even though there are differences, we shouldn't assume people are incomprehensible because of it. By learning about each other's thoughts, emotions and behavior, we can make really good estimations - especially if we include how we ourselves would feel in given scenarios. This is called empathy.

Masculinity / Femininity

First, let's define masculinity and femininity.

WORDS COMMONLY USED TO DESCRIBE FEMININITY
dependent, emotional, passive, sensitive, quiet, graceful, innocent, weak, flirtatious, nurturing, self-critical, soft, sexually submissive, accepting

WORDS COMMONLY USED TO DESCRIBE MASCULINITY
independent, non-emotional, aggressive, tough-skinned, competitive, experienced, strong, active, self-confident, hard, sexually aggressive, rebellious

Now as you can clearly see, not all of these qualities are positive. Dependent, non-emotional, passive, aggressive, quiet, weak - and some of these qualities are essential and shouldn't be exclusive to one sex - independent, self-critical, self-confident...

With that in mind, it's unreasonable to expect every single male to be purely masculine, and every single female to be purely feminine. And even if we did - pure masculinity and pure femininity are not optimal! They also involve qualities that are not necessarily positive.

Yet, people still teach their kids to be masculine, primarily by suppressing their emotions, or by being taught to rather sit around and wait for others to get things done for you rather than take initiative. This type of teaching (by parents and peer groups alike) being based primarily on shaming, bullying and psychological abuse.

Considering the idea of "femininity" and "masculinity" encompass so many different qualities, and therefore barely apply in their purest form to anyone; and even if it does, its purest form isn't even positive - they just aren't necessary. Neither as ideals, neither as a means of description for someone's behavior.

Therefore, the concepts of masculinity and femininity are unnecessary. But is it a problem if someone is masculine or feminine? No. Should males and females feel bad for being either feminine or masculine? No. Why should you? They're just character traits. If that's what you are like, then go for it. Most traits are based on context and are situationary anyways. Do what you like. Just don't do it for the sake of adhering to a broken standard.

...it's unreasonable to expect every single male to be purely masculine, and every single female to be purely feminine... but if that's what you are like, then go for it.

Gender Roles and Expectations

People tend to claim that it's the female's job to cook and clean, and it's the male's job to work and earn money. They also claim that males are ought to make the first move because they're the ones with the pokey stick, and females should never even think about it as a possible option.

But what if the female has a better education, and the male is better at cooking? Should they adhere to the expectations, or should whoever is better at doing a certain task be the one to actually do it?

I think the choice is obvious.

It is also worth noting that there are numerous claims about how "dating" and "courting" is supposed to work. Males are taught numerous things what "the Girls like". It's worth noting that even though some do like those kinds of things (such as flowers and 50 Shades of Grey), many also don't. And just because you get stereotypical gifts for someone, they are not obligated to like you back, nor is there any guarantee that they actually like what you got them.

It's easier to establish a relationship if you are attracted to each other, you mutually admire each other for your personality behavior and values, and also being in a relationship is more beneficial for both of you than not.

It is NOT going to work just because you bought chocolate. Gender roles don't actually obligate anyone to do anything. People have their free will, and the right to make their own individual choices.

It's easier to establish a relationship if you are attracted to each other, you mutually admire each other for your personality behavior and values, and also being in a relationship is more beneficial for both of you than not.

Conclusion

The purpose of gender neutrality is not to erase every difference. It is also not for us to be exactly the same. Hell, maybe not even to treat everyone exactly the same, considering EVERYONE is DIFFERENT.

The purpose is to see each others as equal, let people be who they actually are, and most importantly, see each other for who we actually are, rather than who we assume each other to be based on nothing but arbitrary constructs, and traditional cultural beliefs.

[chidude]

I'd rather be treated as an individual than quarantined into machine-like euphemisms that bludgeon society more year after year. Gender neutrality is such an awful phrase. So lifeless and out of touch with reality. Stands right next to post traumatic stress disorder.

How about we do the opposite? Instead of equalizing everyone, which will never happen for obvious reasons. How about we take the easier and better solution? Encourage the individual to lead their own life. We need to not be ashamed of who we are. Gender neutrality is just a different title to the dogma we already have. Respect is given to any individual that has heart. You want people to respect one another? There's a simpler answer.

Haters gonna hate, dude. It is what it is. Live a passionate life and learn to not give a fuck what dumb people think. People tend to respect that.

[CupKate6]

I'm studying language and gender at the moment, and I'm learning all about the different stereotypes and sexism that affects both men and women. I agree with you - it's time we all stopped having to conform to what our gender says we should be - I've made the first move with plenty of guys before, and the few times I've seen a guy cry just makes me respect them for it (and not feel so bad about doing it myself!) but I also don't think we should just ignore that we're male or female. Gender neutrality wouldn't even need to be a thing if we just got rid of the stereotyping, so we should all just try and do that

[Mesonfielde]

Exactly! I don't think we should ignore biological sex either, it is essential for reproduction after all. It's the gender stereotypes and gender expectations regarding behavior and personality that are causing trouble.

[M_A_X]

This is a loaded subject. Your views are extremely biased, and you've pretty much said flat out in the title that your mind won't be changed because you DGAF.

People like you piss me off to no end. Grow up and stop trying to push your agenda like you're a fucking politician. You're just turning your wheels the whole time and not really saying anything

You don't even know what the fuck you're saying and you contradict yourself several times and use all kinds of mental gymnastics including and especially the fallacy of equivocation. You're trying to make the term "gender neutrality" mean so many damn things and once, and half of them are contradictory to each other. You do the exact same thing to the words "stereotype" and "gender roles". You're talking about "pure masculine and feminine ideals" as actual things. Everything about this argument is wrong, and nothing about it is right. This is just manipulative propaganda to push your own backwards agenda because you think it will get you laid

It's just a big hodgepodge of you psychologically projecting all of your anger for not finding a date. There is nothing more to it. I've analyzed it all.

You do these mental gymnastics because it's the only way that you can convince yourself that not finding a date is someone elses fault.

[M_A_X]

You've just found a way to present your case all nice and fluffy, and filled with false promises and hopes and half-truths like a fucking politician.

[Mesonfielde]

... I don't know if you ever checked my relationship status, but I *am* in a relationship. This has nothing to do with "getting laid", it only has everything to do with self-improvement and becoming better people. Especially in regards to how we think of, feel about and socialize with the opposite sex. And also how we think and feel about our own gender identity. It is for the benefit of everyone, really.

[Mesonfielde]

So other than that "you are wrong because I don't agree with you", did you plan on sharing anything of informative value?

[M_A_X]

I already have, and @Coffinspire has elaborated on it, so I feel like my point has been made better by her than I made it.

[Dakota_The_Rota]

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with him, but I will say Asker you are a hypocrite, you say in the title of your MyTake "... and why you're probably wrong if you think otherwise", then bitch about him using the same logic.

[Mesonfielde]

@dakota_the_rota oh? Elaborate. He certainly isn't using more logic than "you are s shitty politician spouting a blanket of lies".

[M_A_X]

@Dakota_The_Rota shouldn't have to elaborate. It's clear as freaking day.

You don't think "... and why you're probably wrong if you think otherwise" makes you sound like a shitty politician? You're asking me to provide facts, but you're already saying in the topic title that you have a BIAS one way, and you don't GAF what anyone says. That makes you a hypocrite. He said it the same way I'm saying it right now.

[Mesonfielde]

I think you need to look up what hypocrite means.

[M_A_X]

I think you need to look up what hypocrite means. You ignore facts on your side, but demand facts from the opponent. That's hypocrisy. Do I need to get the definition for you?

[Dakota_The_Rota]

I was talking about this, "So other than that "you are wrong because I don't agree with you", did you plan on sharing anything of informative value?". You say he is claiming you are wrong because I don't agree with you, but then your title says "... and why you're probably wrong if you think otherwise", do you not see the obvious hypocrisy?

[M_A_X]

It's like he's a troll, but he doesn't even know it. I can deal with a normal troll, but this guy is like, hell bent on being retarded and trying to switch people's words around. I hate people like this guy with a fiery passion and the only reason I'm not going to comment on this stupid fucking thread anymore is because I have to spend time with my son.

I seriously hope somebody breaks his fucking nose

[kholland65]

I disagree with this completely. I don't think it's a coincidence that just about every animal on this planet is separated into male's and females. Why would nature create two versions of everything, for no apparent reason. Why doesn't it every species reproduce through parthenogenesis? Seems much more efficient for a species survival to be able to reproduce itself without the need of someone else.

As you even stated your self, there are obvious biological difference between men and women. Men and women, were clearly created with different inherent strengths and weakness, both physical and mental. (that coincidentally seems to compliment each other). I believe it was natures intent to create two more specialized beings that together form a team better than anyone balanced being.

Because of this, I think gender roles were both organically formed, and to some degree make for an effective and efficient society. Just like you wouldn't start a career in a field you suck at. It's just not an efficient use of human resources. For this reason I feel that a society and family unit functions better when people at least relatively adhere to some sort of gender role, just like companies divide employees into specialized departments.

There are always going to be outliers in any data pool. Especially when that pool is 7 billion. In a case like this, I think it makes sense to generalize. You have to take an average, and on average, there very clear traits that are more or less present in a particular gender.

Now all that being said, I could truly care less what a person does with their life or how they choose to run there family. If it works for them and makes them happy, all the power to them. Again, I just generally feel that men and women are not intended to be the same.

I don't think a gender neutral society is healthy. People start to fear having an extreme association with a gender and therefor nobody does any role well. Jack of all trades master of none.

[Mesonfielde]

Technically, there is no reason for anyone to fear being aligned with a gender. In fact, the current issue now is that people assume people align with them more than they do, and also some people fear NOT aligning with them enough.

The question here is, can you truly tell whether someone is good at a particular field just based on their sex? People claim females aren't good engineers and males are not good nurses, so they shouldn't pursue it. But what if that is what interests them, what if they are actually good at it? Biological sex is not necessarily definitive in terms of your skills and behavior.

[kholland65]

I think if a women is interested in being an engineer she should pursue it. But that's just it, women are far less likely to even be interested in something like engineering in the first place, which lends itself to the fact that men and women have a general tendency to think and behave differently.

[Mesonfielde]

Of course they aren't. People are told all day every day that females are not good at engineering, and only fat and ugly girls go for that career (indicating that *obviously* their only value as a female is their exterior appearance, as it is quite prevalent in our culture).

This is relevant: https://xkcd.com/385/

[Izzy2102]

I do agree with the asker here. I'm in engineering now but it took a lot of time and one very good high school (male) physics teacher.

When I was in elementary school. The first grade I ever got in math wasn't that great. And my mom said "It's ok, I wasn't good at math either. Girls usually aren't." And everyone around me said the same thing "It's ok, because you're a girl" so, being 7 years old, I thought "I guess I'm just not good at math then and it's ok, because I'm a girl" so I just kinda accepted that, didn't study much and got bad grades. And it took me a long time to figure out that that was total BS. And I don't think everyone does that before college

I wouldn't like a completley gender neutral society either, but I think what asker is trying to say is that there is no firm evidence that the way genders behave differently is because of nature instead of nurture, so instead we should just all treat each other

[Izzy2102]

like human beings instead of putting each other in those gender boxes and whine and complain and withdraw affection when a person doesn't fit that box

[kholland65]

Well this fundamentally boils down to is nature vs nurture. The age old argument in psychology. I think it's based on both personally. Many areas of psychology would suggest that there is such thing as born aptitudes.

There is a practice called johnson o'connor. They've been around for about 100yrs. They do extensive aptitude testing. They define aptitides as things you are naturally wired for and good at, not skills you gained through practice. In other words, you tend to be interested in things you have an aptitude for, not have an aptitude for things you have been interested in.

This suggest nature is more important that nurture. Some people are not good at math, some have no spacial sense, some are good with people, some are creative, etc. We have all different sets of born attributes, which usually dictates what we do with our lives. While the world obviously rears of course, we still started with a central path. All I'm saying is generally speaking, there are commonalities

[kholland65]

in born attributes seen across people of the same gender. In other words, women tend to be better with words, people, empathy, psychology, marketing etc. That's why they are commonly found in medicine, education, psychology. Men are physically stronger, are more logical, better at tracking moving objects, have better spacial sense, etc. This is why men are commonly found in engineering, sports, computers, accounting, finance.

I'm also in school for engineering, audio engineering to be exact. 90% if not more of the people in my program are men. There is no rule that says women can't join. There is nobody out telling women they can't be engineers. The women just simply aren't interested in the field. Us men welcome them with open arms, they just aren't interested. Why? Because "Most" women, are born with aptitudes that do not lend themselves to engineering, meaning they will likely not find it interesting. It doesn't come naturally. This all biological. No human intervention needed.

[Mesonfielde]

I actually do agree with you. I used to say all differences are nurture and all males and females are fundamentally the same, but that claim is honestly stupid, especially if you watch actual documentary that shows research: https://vimeo.com/19889788 and https://vimeo.com/19707588

But even with that in mind, that people are primarily influenced by their innate genetic code that defines their behavior, I still disagree on one particular thing.

"""There is nobody out telling women they can't be engineers."""

This is simply not true. People often say "girls aren't good at math", that "girls aren't cut out to be engineers", that "engineering is a male field", and the like. Any female would eventually be disheartened from pursuing such a career, knowing that they shouldn't be interested because they are female. It's the exact same mechanism which tells *me* that I shouldn't even want to bother with wearing skirts, because it'll just cause me problems. Technically, skirts are just fabric. I should be indifferent, but culture affects me.

[Mesonfielde]

@ThisDudeHere this is relevant for you.

[Anonymous]

On one hand, I think people should see themselves as a person first, and as a member of their gender second, instead of trying to fit their personality into a prestructured gender-based model. It does so much harm when we teach a boy to be ashamed of his emotions which makes him lose touch with important and healthy expression of integral part of his psyche, or when we shame a girl for standing up for herself or for expressing her sexuality which makes her suppress healthy parts of her being. It makes no sense to force guys to pretend they don't have emotions or force girls to feel bad for having sexual needs.
On the other hand, while I agree with you completely, I feel like I'm a result of my upbringing and I can't really change. I don't shame people not living up to out-dated societal expectations, I would never do that and I'm as open minded as I can be, but, in my love life, I'm just really drawn to so-called feminine women and I can't help it. I don't mean housewives or something - I don't need a girl to cook for me or any of those things - but being things you mentioned: sensitive, graceful, innocent, nurturing, soft, just really attracts me. It turns me on. It makes me feel so good to be with a girl like that. And it's not a choice - it something I respond to whether I like it or not. It is confusing for me as I feel like I should encourage my girlfriend to be, for example, more assertive and confident, as she tends to be compliant and people-pleasing, yet I kinda enjoy when she's like that with me. Her own upbringing made her feel like she's not a good if she has so-called masculine qualities and I see how it limits her (especially in her career), and at the same time when it's just two of us I like her traditional female traits. And I feel bad for it, for those traits really ARE causing her some issues, for learning to stand up for herself, to express her opinions freely, to be more "masculine", when dealing with life's problems, would be so good for her.

[misupanda]

This is a good take, because to be honest, I didn't know much about this subject, and my fear when people brought up "gender neutrality" was that I would be looked down on for embracing my femininity. Granted, I can be a tomboy as well, and I think that's sort-of what you're getting at. I think probably everyone is a little bit masculine and a little bit feminine in some way or another, regardless of gender, and I do think it's sad when people are treated like they're "not normal" for being like that. I know that feeling all too well.

Already people have started to look down on me for certain aspirations (such as wanting to be a stay-at-home mom), because they believe I'm trying to fit into my gender role. However, I truly want to be that when I have kids, but I think a guy could stay home with the kids if he wants, too. It's really up to the person to decide. So, as long as I don't get a hard time for wanting these things, I don't really have a problem with gender neutrality. However, I think it would be very hard to accomplish. If it ever happens, we probably won't see it in our lifetime.

[Amburger]

I truly agree with you and I think I'd make me and my husband do trade offs too even if he'd be judged he needs to spend time with his kid for the first bit

[Mesonfielde]

I personally see only one issue with being a stay-at-home mom, and that is the comparative decrease in financial income. Of course, if the husband earns enough to maintain the household on his own, and all people involved in the relation agree to these terms, then technically there is nothing wrong with it, is there?

As for not seeing this in our lifetime, I still try to be part of the change I want to see. I figured it helps if other people understand it a bit better.

[misupanda]

Yeah. I decided I'd do something where I can work from home if I need to, that way there's no problem. That's what my mom did, and I feel it worked out well. I want to be close to my kids, so that if there's an issue, they can come to me with anything.

And yeah. It's good to stand up for what you believe in, so long as you don't totally disregard people who believe differently. :p I think everyone is sort-of right and wrong in some way with almost any issue, since nothing is really "black and white". I'm pretty sure that you and I have a lot of conflicting views and beliefs, but I've actually learned a lot I didn't know before from debating and arguing with you. ^^

[inamorata]

Acknowledgement of gender differences is meant to serve people. Ment to enable them conduct themselves in the most easy and functional way towards differences.

It's not there to oppose the fact that you're a unique little flower, it's there to organise humanity in the most functional societal unit based on communal traits of subgroups.

For the same reason you acknowledge that, even though every old person is different, there are certain traits old people generally have that cause us to base our general behavior towards them on. We check if they know how to drive regularly, give them a seat on the bus. Maybe they can drive and their legs don't hurt.

But we generalise for the sake of old people. It's how we show we respect towards their old age. And that's a GOOD thing.

In the same way a man and a woman recognise the gender of the other and conduct themselves accordingly respecting this person is likely to fit their generalisation. ONLY when shown to be the exception, they begin to treat an individual accordingly having learned that exception.

To expect a woman to be more sensitive and to expect a man to be stronger are not insults. They are FUNCTIONAL expectations. They organise human society and make connecting to one another faster.

If you're an effeminate wimp, when people learn that, they'll change their behavior. That's ok too, but don't expect everyone else to drop gender identity as an idea because you don't fit into it.

That would be like asexuals demanding that we abolish all gender orientation and don't refer to it as such because not everyone's sexuality fits into a popular stereotypical orientation.

[koko124]

Meh. You're still committing the is/ought fallacy.

Gender neutrality is an "ought". It is prescriptive. People want it to happen.

Gender inequality is an "is". It is descriptive. It is what is actually happening.

You also brush over the gender differences as if they don't matter, or as if there's a lack of scientific literature on the subject. For starters:

- Kids as young as 2 show androgen-dependent toy preferences. Girls and boys with higher levels of androgens both prefer more "spatial" toys.

- Men desire the opposite sex much more than women.

- Women place a great deal of importance on social desirability in sexual attraction, while men place very little.

I could go on, but those three are facts which have been proven in studies. Gender equality would be nice, but it just can't and won't happen, at least not without gargantuan leaps in genetic engineering and medical technology (which I doubt will come about in our lifetimes). Men and women are simply fundamentally different.

[Mesonfielde]

Gender neutrality is an idea. If more people believed that it is possible, it would eventually become true. It is all about what you think of others, and how you behave with them. Even if there are biological differences, is it truly reasonable to expect everyone to behave along prescribed characteristics?

[koko124]

"If more people believed that it is possible, it would eventually become true."

This is false. Believing in something doesn't make it true.

"Even if there are biological differences, is it truly reasonable to expect everyone to behave along prescribed characteristics?"

No, that would be beyond stupid. I don't think any halfway intelligent person thinks that all women adhere perfectly to the average value of every trait for their gender.

By this logic, you'd expect every American parent to have 1.86 children, or in other words, one normal child, and another child with its head missing.

[Mesonfielde]

Gender stereotypes exist only because people believe them to be true.

[koko124]

That is also false. Strike two, try again :P

[Longblackveil]

I also disagree, gender stereotypes are simply an observation of reality. They didn't just pop up out of thin air

[Mesonfielde]

@Longblackveil it's not false, unless you guys are also willing to make the exact same argument regarding thievery and having dark skin color.

[Longblackveil]

Well I would make a broader argument than that and say that crime rate is higher for blacks than any other race, so yes that stereotype is based on an observation as well

[kheserthorpe]

It's important to distinguish between descriptive and proscriptive. Many people blur the two and I fully support calling that out. The flip side of that though is just because descriptive shouldn't be proscriptive doesn't make it false, and just because descriptive in this case tends to refer to tendencies doesn't make it invalid.

People should be very free to live their own lives in the way they like. The problem is when they want something from others. This isn't just dating specific. I will use an example of neck tattoos. They're legal. If people want them they should get them. If someone wants to be an investment banker I would strongly suggest they not get them. I wouldn't be surprised if there exist investment bankers with them but your chances would be radically reduced. That's the reality even if it's not a sure thing.

There are a lot of elements in dating that are less absolutely true but still strong. And a better example might be to say 'neck tattoos' and 'job'. You can almost certainly have neck tattoos and get a job. For some jobs it will make no difference. For some jobs that are very high paying (professional athlete or musician) it won't matter. But a lot of mid to high level jobs, it will be harder. Your selection will be reduced.

And that's how it works with some gender roles and dating. If you're a 30 year old guy and don't make much, your options are reduced. If you have a lot of great qualities it may not matter because you have great options to begin with. This is a bit like our guy with neck tattoos who happens to be a 6'9" athlete with a jump shot. But for most people to will make their options reduced.

So to what extent should we teach kids how to be what most of the other gender wants? I'm not sure. We should at least give them real information. I personally did NOT get an accurate impression growing up of what girls tend to be looking for. And I think the 'be yourself' versus striving to grow was over emphasized.

[RationalMale]

"I tend to say that gender should be eradicated for the sake of the removal of sexism, stereotypical thinking..."

1. Sexism is quite often reality. For instance, men on average have just under double the upper body strength of women. Hence, your average man would be far better as a soldier, for instance, than your average woman. Or on a mental level--why do you think there are gender specific female chess tournaments that men cannot participate in, while women can choose to participate in men's tournaments? en.chessbase.com/.../women-and-men-in-che-smashing-the-stereotypes

"inflicting traumas by forcing males not to ever show any shreds of emotion..."

2. You're seriously going to say men become traumatized by being told not to be crybabies?

"teaching females to feel ashamed by their own expression of sexuality, or even the concept that females are meant to be dominated upon my males."

3. Women are ashamed of their own sexuality? Is that why 50 Shades of Grey, a BDSM novel about a young girl literally becoming a sex toy for an executive, is now one of the top 10 selling books in history, solely because women love the emotional high of being dominated?

Also, considering that removing all controls on female sexuality has led to 40% of all births in 2012 alone to be out of wedlock. You do realize there have been dozens of studies showing that children raised by a single mother are far less valuable, helpful members of society than those raised by two parents? Such as, kids raised by single moms are far, far more likely to get criminal records or be high school dropouts? That marriage drives economic growth like nothing else, due to how strongly it encourages men to earn and earn smarter?

[RationalMale]

*sidenote, there's never been a female world chess champion, and only one woman has ever reached top 10, and that was Judit Polgar in 2005.

[FartmanFart]

This is not true. I see a woman as a human like would I even think my little sister is less human or less of a person than me? no she's much more. But that doesn't mean there is no role and me or she either of us has to force ourselves to see each other gender neutral in everything because that's not possible I'm a man and she's a girl we have different bodies and genetically act differently and more important is that her femininity makes me treat her MUCH more than a human. You get me?
Not being feminine doesn't make me see women less human than men but being feminine and act different can add to their value in every man's eyes. And that's nature we like everything that we don't have. When a woman is more different and acts more differently than us in her sex and gender we just love to sit and watch it because everything she does from moving her hands to speaking and etc is what we can't do. Just look how men that have good feminine supportive wives treat their women. Of course it depends on the man too if the man is an asshole he will abuse a woman's femininity but are all men assholes and abusers? No abusers were always a group between us and there are abusive women too. So we shouldn't sacrifice femininity here we should teach people to not abuse each others natures so we have less abusers in the future when we act according to our nature without forcing an artificial view on ourselves.

Not gonna ever judge a woman by her femininity like some assholes but always will appreciate and love femininity in a woman. That's me.

[Coffinspire]

Man, I was getting a little scared but the ending made me feel better. I don't think gender roles really have a place in our society anymore. In fact I think we've reached the gender neutrality already. I think gender roles were guidelines for back in the day. It was their way of making a team effort in running the household I think, which made perfect sense. I mean I would rather do dishes and cook than mow the lawn and fix things I know nothing about lol.

I also agree that if we saw each other as people (outside of looking for relationships which will never go away) instead of genders we would really progress because our brains ARE different, but in a way that works. I think we've really progressed as a society actually.

[Mesonfielde]

Indeed. But some people still think in terms of what is "right" for a "woman" and what is "right" for "men" to do and not do. And to change that kind of thinking, gender neutrality is the way to go - to stop assuming things about others based on stereotypes. We should get to know each other instead: it provides better results. :D

[M_A_X]

Yeah... that doesn't actually get rid of stereotypes, and gender roles aren't stereotypes. You're really starting to annoy me, Mesonfielde. You've got a very particular agenda you're trying to push, and I do not like it, sir.

I'll state again as I've stated before. A "stereotype" is noticing a trend. This girl just said she doesn't know how to fix machines, and would rather do dishes and cook than mow the lawn. That means she PERFECTLY FITS HER GENDER ROLE... and MOST women do!

Most women feel the same way that she does. They were taught to not learn about machines and stuff. There is nothing wrong with defining our roles, so a man knows what to be good at.

@Coffinspire - Do you know how much harder it would be to find a partner if there were no gender roles? Nobody would know what was expected of them. Men wouldn't learn to fix machines, so you'd have two people in a relationship who can cook and clean, and nobody to fix the vacuum.

[M_A_X]

Mesonfielde, you need to grow up dude. You need to grow up and realize that you need to improve yourself. Destroying gender roles won't make women like you more. They won't make women find your man tits attractive all of a sudden. You need to stop making topics trying to push this stupid agenda and focus on improving yourself. NOBODY expects you to live up to every stereotype that is included in the overall gender roles. Again, a stereotype is simply noticing a trend. MOST women feel the way that Coffinspire does about dishes and mowing the lawn. The stereotype isn't a real thing that you can change, it only exists because MOST women feel that way about that subject. Stereotypes are ALSO IS NOT HARMFUL IN AND OF THEMSELVES

[Mesonfielde]

@M_A_X knowing how to fix a vacuum is convenient, but if you don't, you can get also get it fixed by people who are specialized in this sort of problem. You don't have to be male nor female to fix a vacuum, you just have to know how. If you don't, you can pay people who do, or just get another one. Or use a broom while you don't have a vacuum available. There are multiple ways to fix the problem.

And if she fits her "gender role", that's fine. Great! No one is forcing her NOT to be good at those things.

... and I don't have the " man fits" that you speak of. I am not sure how to respond to these kind of baseless assumptions at the moment... So I just won't.

[Coffinspire]

Geez guys calm down! That was pretty funny though thinking of two people that didn't know how to fix a vacuum cleaner. Though I could learn to fix it, I would rather not, that's just something my husband would rather do than I would. We fill our gender roles because that's what we're good at, not because we're expected to. In my opinion it just keeps the balance and we are both holding down the fort. So, I don't really think it's a bad thing to teach kids boys usually do this and girls usually do that. It's supposed to be a guideline, after all, guys and girls are wired differently, so we're good at different things so I think that's why the whole gender thing came about in the first place, it's a guideline not a done deal. It's not like anyone takes it seriously anymore anyways. If someone said to be bitch get in the kitchen I'd be like Fuck off! But if it's time for dinner (and I'm a better cook than my husband thank goodness) then I make dinner. I think it's more of the attitude

[Coffinspire]

Stereotypes are another guideline not to be taken seriously. After all, there is always some truth in stereotypes.

[M_A_X]

Thanks so much for explaining that better than I could, @Coffinspire. Things I say make factual sense, but not emotional sense to most people, so I appreciate you elaborating my point in a more emotionally able way.

[Coffinspire]

Well lets make things crystal clear, you both have amazing points. If there was a happy medium between gender neutrality and teaching your children to be sexist, that's where I'd be. I don't think there is a problem giving you kid a push in a certain direction that would compliment their skills genetically (because our brains are good at certain things than others) but forcing them to conform into something they'll never be, is wrong. Things like gender expectations should serve only as a guideline, not a black and white rule book.

[Coffinspire]

Even though we are different genetically, there are things that men and women both share equally. I don't exactly want someone to assume I make the food because I'm the woman, since men can cook too and I don't want anyone telling me what to do and how to do it because I am a woman (same things go for men I'm sure) so in that sense gender neutrality makes more sense than the other. It's such a big gray area lol

[M_A_X]

It's okay to assume the woman makes food in the relationship if you see two people together. That's how things *usually* are, so that makes sense. HOWEVER, you keep that assumption to yourself until you're sure. We aren't supposed to make decisions based on assumptions about people, we're supposed to know for sure before we do.

". I don't think there is a problem giving you kid a push in a certain direction that would compliment their skills genetically (because our brains are good at certain things than others) but forcing them to conform into something they'll never be, is wrong. Things like gender expectations should serve only as a guideline, not a black and white rule book."

Thank you for saying what I was trying to say, but better.

[bunnyy]

I think the way you handled this topic was very fair and you explained it well, but no matter what there are reactionaries who will rant and rage before they even try to understand what you are getting at, which is disappointing. Many people freak out and spit vitriol as soon as something even echos feminism because they lack the patience to try to look objectively and try to understand clearly valid points. It saddens me that boys are forced to bottle up normal human emotions until they become crushed under these expectations. Then they grow up just to turn around deny this negatively affected them and do the same to their sons. And they rage at anyone who questions this status-quo just like their parents before them!

[Mesonfielde]

I actually don't understand why people eventually grow up and forget how these influenced them. Is it denial? It's the same mechanism as those that were physically abused by their parents, but say "oh I worked out fine so this might be the right way" and ends up beating their kids... same thing. Just in a different way.

[bunnyy]

it's astounding! It might be denial but one thing it certainly is is logical!

[bunnyy]

*isn't

[Imupforit]

When military regulations are the same for all genders I'll start to believe it. I doubt females will be willing to give up the leeway alloted them in deference to their gender though.
There was a female I served with in Afghanistan that met or exceed male standards in all the areas it was possible. She refused to let her gender be an excuse. We trained for the physical fitness test together. I wouldn't have believed it if I had not seen it with my own eyes. Her standard was to meet or exceed male standards for her age, which she did every time. The thing is, she was the only one I have ever known.
I don't know if it's because they can't, won't or don't have to by the regulations but the overwhelming majority of females in the Army that I've known don't seem to want gender neutrality. I would think that would be a great place for them to show they don't want special treatment because of their gender but they don't seem to want to change that.

[MaskedSanity]

I don't know whether it's worth trying to explain to guys on here that when you speak about gender neutrality, you're actually referring to treating each person as an individual, rather than placing them in male/female boxes and expect them to "act accordingly".

Whenever you try to explain it, every guy on this website thinks you're trying to wipe out gender differences completely and attack your person and your romantic life.

[Mesonfielde]

It's funny because I am pretty sure clearly stated these in bold. I think they just don't like not being privileged just by being male or something, so they think the idea of actually treating people as people is a threat to them.

[MaskedSanity]

I find it odd that people would get so confrontational and angry over your take. That not having preconceived ideas about what each gender "ought to" look like, act and such is somehow a threat to society.

[Mesonfielde]

I know right? And yet, people think I am crazy when I say there is a problem in this regard. The existence of people who oppose the idea of "treating people as individuals" is proof on its own. Just ask @M_A_X why he feels threatened, heh.

[M_A_X]

I get angry whenever any dumbass with limited information decides it's their job to change the entire fucking world, and uses underhanded tactics like in the topic title, or the small bits of shit talking you're doing right there.

[MaskedSanity]

@M_A_X

The world seems to be exactly the same as before this take was posted, you need to untwist your panties, love.

It would be great to hear your in-depth counter argument for asker's take without you getting angry and throwing random personal attacks at them.

[M_A_X]

Well, feel free to read all of my comments on the page. I can't be bothered to explain it all again.

He doesn't deserve me to give him a better explanation by this point. His little snide remarks (which he doesn't get called out for, because the underhanded and manipulative save more face) have pushed me to the limit.

At least when I'm an asshole, I'm upfront about it. I don't act like a shitty little politician or a child whose afraid to say whats on their mind. Act like an adult, or is it wrong for me to ask you to act like that, because it's a stereotype?

His personal attacks are worse than mine, because he doesn't say them straight. He throws in little childish remarks to try to call them out without being a man about it. I bet he doesn't like being called a man either. Sure doesn't act like one.

The existence of people who oppose the idea of "treating people as individuals" is proof on its own.

Yeah, keep telling little half lies about what I believe and how I feel

[M_A_X]

I swear to god, pray, Mesonfielde. Pray you never try any of this on an aspie in real life. I would beat you half to death for this shitty little childish attitude of yours, and I wouldn't give any fuck who saw, or who would try to stop me. You are the dirtiest little piece of garbage I've ever had the displeasure watching spray bullshit all around, and it's my wish that somebody gives you exactly what your little underhanded ass deserves, and I hope you get it hard, hard and fast, and I hope you cry like the little baby bitch you are.

If you were a real fucking man, you wouldn't hide behind little pussy tricks. With that, fuck you, and I'm done

[Meee97]

I'm deffinetly in favor of gender neutrality, because, society would be able to unite better, if there wasn't sexism and stereotypes to force on people... Like I've been told to be more feminine, and that I shouldn't be certain ways, that I am, and that really annoys me, cause I am gonna remain the way I am... And also many times I've noticed, that someone won't take a certain person seriously, cause they are of opposite gender, and they simply alienate the person... And since our intellect evolves through time, I believe, it's only normal, that our primal instincts, so to say, slowly back away... And that's what makes us different, than animals.

[GirlScoutsRevenge]

I don't think the issue is with gender traits or behaviour, the only real issue I can see is judgment of those who dont fit the classic roles. That is the only negative aspect. If people are doing what makes them happy and not just because they feel a social pressure then it's all good.

[Mesonfielde]

Well, the primary scope of this take was stereotypical thinking, sexism, peer pressure and how there isn't really a point in trying to be "masculine" or "feminine" as it doesn't really mean anything specific. That doesn't mean people can't do what is already found as "feminine" if that's what they so desire. And that applies to roles and tasks as well - do what you are interested in and better at.

[Aud_Queen]

I like genders for what they are. Male and female sex. I think the focus should be on treating everyone as individuals with no preconceived notions on what they should be. But I am female. That's what I want to be identified as, because that's who I know I am biologically. It makes no sense to 'sweep it under a rug' as someone already mentioned.

[Mesonfielde]

And I actually do agree with that.

[Knitted123]

Sex is not the same thing as gender

[Aud_Queen]

I looked it up for ya
Gender
the state of being male or female

grammar : one of the categories (masculine, feminine, and neuter) into which words (such as nouns, adjectives, and pronouns) are divided in many languages

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gender

[Aud_Queen]

Sex is actually the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex.

but there are many definitions of sex

Sex: either of the two major forms of individuals that occur in many species and that are distinguished respectively as female or male especially on the basis of their reproductive organs and structures

Sex doesn't just apply to humans, but I see what you mean.

[Aud_Queen]

forgot the source https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sex

[Mesonfielde]

@Knitted123 for reference

People nowadays tend to use "gender" to mean the social and cultural and psychological traits associated with biological sex.

[geekylady]

Oh wow THIS!
Hands down.
This is what I believe in, everything on this take is the perfect example of how we should really feel about equality. Not only with genres, but also with so many things like races, religions, etc... if only everybody could understand this.

[Mesonfielde]

I'm glad you agree! :D

Although, apparently a bunch of guys don't agree with that they should treat females like actual human beings, individuals and people. I'm a bit flabbergasted when I see that in numeric values. Oh well, haters gonna hate.

If there is one thing I slightly disagree with, it is that races and sex are biological qualities, they don't give proper basis for generalization - but religion is a shared system of ideology.

[geekylady]

Yeah, what I meant about races and religions is that we should start giving them some neutrality when it comes to dating, like some people would say I would never date a black man, I would never date a Jewish... Is like when they say I wouldn't date a woman that isn't feminine. We have come to an era where this isn't what we should be worry about. Hope a little bit clear.

I think is hard enough to be human already to label yourself like something else. I'm sure not a lot of people will agre with how you and I think, this is a main issue for me when it comes to dating, because I never fit in the prototype that guys are waiting to see.

[alb84]

"Is like when they say I wouldn't date a woman that isn't feminine"

I'm not sure if you are aware... but most men, won't date a women like that... including myself ;) I have nothing against a manly women, and she can be/do what she likes, I just won't date with her...

Let me ask you something.. with how many "femenine" men have you been in your life? jejeje and don't lie ;)

[Mesonfielde]

@alb84 well good for you, I'm glad you're taking the stuff I would not even consider, at least we're both happy :P

Non-feminine females are the way to go. Although I do admit I like shoulder-length hair most, but that is a question of style.

[geekylady]

@alb84 does not being feminine means being manly? I dot consider myself as a manly person at all but neither as feminine. Finding a balance with some stuff is good because you don't have to be extreme about anything (unhealthy) there should be always a balance. To me a feminine guy is one that understands being a female, that will understand more women feelings, without the necessity of acting feminine. This is the main issue, a definition taken as an expression? Understanding something doesn't mean that we are like that. People has it all wrong, stereotypes makes us miss on some great people that we could meet, just because they don't look like this or like that. cwhat about what's inside? I can dress one way and be whomever I want without the exteriors representing who I am. I've been told by many people that I don't look like a girl that reads comic books and I have no idea why. how should I dress then?

[alb84]

Ok, I'll give you that... I shouldn't have used the word “manly”, but, at any moment, I have said that the interior is not important ;) About the effeminate guys... don't you see, that you are placing upon them another sterotype? assuming that this is the only kind of man capable of understanding feelings? and also, why is it that we (very “manly” men XD) are the ones that always need to understand female feelings? when will be the day someone talks about the lack of understanding that most women have about “male” feelings? … nah, forget what I've just said.. I hate talking about feelings!! jajajaja

y no te lo tomes a mal, que no era mi intención ofenderte :)
besos!

[geekylady]

I'm not offended ;)
I'm also not stereotyping but contextualizing

[Mesonfielde]

@alb84 I personally wait for the time when we stop using terms like "feminine", "manly", and "male feelings" and stuff like that. I'm not even sure why I used the term "feminine girls"... it literally is just a placeholder for "extroverted loud girls who like shoes, partying and Twilight/50 Shades of Grey".

[nikiroxs]

I really did enjoy reading this take, and I completly agree that we as society need to stop seperating people with gender roles and their descriptions, b/c a majority of people dont even fall under "their category", but each person is entirely different in their own way and for that great take :)

[Mesonfielde]

I'm glad you liked it! :D

[M_A_X]

Nobody is separated under gender roles like that. THEY CAN be used in a sexist way, but they aren't inherently sexist, and they are extremely vital in our ability to mate/repopulate. This guy really doesn't know what he's talking about, don't fall for his politician-esque speeches.

[Mesonfielde]

@M_A_X you don't need these concepts, neither to fulfill the tasks given (child raising, cooking, earning financial resources, etc), nor to be able to assess whether a person is attractive and suitable for you as a partner or not. Stereotypes don't help. They just restrict you from learning about others.

[M_A_X]

I'm sorry, but they really don't. Maybe you just don't understand what a stereotype is, and what it's actually used for, because you see it like it's all black and white. Stereotypes don't restrict you from learning about others, but the fact that you think so simply proves the above. You don't know what they are or why we need them. You yourself use them in the wrong way, so you really don't need to be talking about getting rid of them.

[nikiroxs]

@M_A_X look im gonna give you my perspective: do u know why so many girls dont lift? b/c they were told that it is a masculine quality and its different from what girls are "supposed" to do... why should guys or girls be told what to expect from them, and why can't they decide on their own? yes i think in this day and age we have come so far and removing this gender sterotypes which is great, but its not like its not still there... even some guys feel they can't really express themselves the way they want to because it will be deemed as "gay" and people shouldn't have to supress how they want to act b/c it doesn't fit the gender role.. and all the take owner was doing was making people aware of this, its not anyone specific job to get rid of them, just by letting people know that everyone is different, no need to judge is the best way...

[M_A_X]

Yeah, because they were afraid of not fitting the stereotypes. Nothing is stopping women from actually lifting, they just don't want to look bad. Lots of guys do things like learn how to cook, which are predominantly.

Looking gay has nothing to do with stereotypes. It has to do with people see it, and they think it looks gay. The problem is that gay is used as a derogatory term. You don't have to completely abolish gender roles because of things like that. It's not all black and white all the time. Jesus. I have aspergers syndrome. I used to ACTUALLY see the world in black and white terms. The fact that I'm telling you that this isn't so cut and dry should mean something

[Longblackveil]

I'm indifferent to gender neutrality, you can choose to ignore the differences between sexes all you want. Doesn't bother me. But I don't like when gender neutrality is institutionalized. Such as schools refusing to call kids boys and girls and instead using "gender neutral terms" like "hens" and "penguins". I fail to see how that is necessary, and I fail to see how giving kids animal names is not insane. You can't ignore the verifiable fact that you are teaching boys and girls, not animals.

[Mesonfielde]

I don't see what they are planning to achieve by calling someone a penguin, or especially a hen. Your language does make this slightly more difficult, as you guys don't have a real gender neutral pronoun apart from "they" as singular. If they want to use gender neutral terms, just say "children".

[Longblackveil]

That wouldn't bother me as much, but what's wrong with just calling them boys and girls? I think the teacher should be able to address her class however they (!) see necessary as long as it's not totally offensive. A boy is a boy a girl is a girl, why mess with that?

I don't see what they're trying to achieve by ignoring the sexes either. Don't you think it would be more healthy to call things as they are instead of skating around the issue?

[Longblackveil]

by the way, the "hens" example comes from Sweden where they have went way overboard with gender neutrality. Including gender neutral bathrooms, boys being named with traditionally girl names and vice versa and schools having curriculums designed specifically to counteract traditional gender roles

[Mesonfielde]

Technically I don't see a problem with accepting that yes, there is a biological difference. The problem is that when I say something like "boys are boys, girls are girls", or more obviously if I say "boys will be boys" or "girls will be girls", we don't just think of it as a difference between biological sex. We attribute an expected behavior. We expect boys to be aggressive and rebellious, while girls to be passive. The problem with these expectations that it might match some, it might not match others, and in the end, it's proven that the Pygmalion-effect (self-fulfilling prophecies regarding our expectations) is a significant factor in how people are shaped. Mostly, these expectations are enforced by peers, although it can be enforced by parents, too.

[Longblackveil]

Here's a good article talkin about the schools in Sweden I mentioned, and it does a good Job explaining the major cons of institutionaliZed gender neutrality.

www.slate.com/.../...noun_causes_controversy_.html

Especially the paragraph below

[Longblackveil]

"Ironically, in the effort to free Swedish children from so-called normative behavior, gender-neutral proponents are also subjecting them to a whole set of new rules and new norms as certain forms of play become taboo, language becomes regulated, and children's interactions and attitudes are closely observed by teachers. One Swedish school got rid of its toy cars because boys "gender-coded" them and ascribed the cars higherstatus than other toys. Another preschool removed "free playtime" from its schedule because, as a pedagogue at the school put it, when children play freely "stereotypical gender patterns are born and cemented. In free play there is hierarchy, exclusion, and the seed to bullying." And so every detail of children's interactions gets micromanaged by concerned adults, who end up problematizing minute aspects of children's lives, from how they form friendships to what games they play and what songs they sing"

[Mesonfielde]

They're not calling them animal names though. "hen" is an altered edition of "han" and "hon". It's like the initiatives for he, she, and zhe, but zhe looks silly.

Technically, they're not doing it perfectly right - the means to eradicate stereotypical thinking is through interaction that disproves it. They should put emphasis on group activities with mixed groups of 4 to 6 kids, and facilitate teamwork.

While I do admit there is logic behind trying to prevent "gender-coding" and the like, people could claim "hah, this disproves the argument that stereotypes are completely cultural as they are kids" but this is what they learn from a VERY early age from their parents. Institutions seem to try to do their best to dismantle this, even though the methods seem suboptimal and somewhat questionable.

I can't foresee the results of this at the moment.

[Longblackveil]

Yes I did realize after reading that article that hens was actually just an altered word and not an animal.

But it's still newspeak in my opinion. They're making up words and probably confusing the hell out of kids

[Mesonfielde]

Eh, let's not underestimate the learning capability of kids. I think being restricted from playing cards confuses them more than the usage of a new gender pronoun that just doesn't indicate a gender.

[Anonymous]

I'm not surprised that you would start off your latest gender neutrality rant with "this is what I think and you are wrong if you disagree".

What you and people like you are not bright enough to see is that "gender neutrality" has always been nothing more than a euphemism for "tailored for female needs without any consideration for male needs". That kind of idiocy is why boys continue to get fucked over in our school system in the US. Males and females are not the same and when we try to treat them the same it has always been males who have gotten the shaft.

It's moronic to ignore the differences between the genders. What we should be doing is trying to better understand those differences and celebrating them rather than ignoring and sweeping them under the rug, which does far more harm than good.

Your social agenda is growing tiresome, Mesonfielde.

[Mesonfielde]

"""tailored for female needs without any consideration for male needs"""

I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, I'm pretty sure I represented issues on both sides equally. This is not a "female-exclusive" thing at all.

[alb84]

"What we should be doing is trying to better understand those differences and celebrating them"

amen to that XD

"I'm pretty sure I represented issues on both sides equally. This is not a "female-exclusive" thing at all"

you are wrong... you are seeing "male problems", from a female perspective. You say that men cannot show their emotions, etc.. that's not true at all, we do it as well, but we have different ways than crying or talking in order to express our emotions. By the way... the reasons for men crying less than a women are 100% biological... you can google it, and you will see that even our tears are made of different “material” ;)

[Mesonfielde]

@alb84 none of your "biology" actually addresses the fact that stoicism and unemotionalness is seen as a "masculine" trait, and that "masculinity" is the male ideal, even though it's a broken and detrimental concept in some regards, including this one.

[alb84]

Unemotionalness is a masculine trait? are you calling us psychopaths, or what? XD jeje there is a big difference about having feelings, and express them... I can assure you... I am a very emotional person inside me, but I don't feel any need to express those feelings to other people, cry, talk endlessly about them, etc... that will not make me feel any better!!. You want to end all these social constructs, stereotypes, etc? that's fine by me... as long as you don't create new stereotypes, like feminism is constantly doing ;)

[Mesonfielde]

@alb84 oh heavens no, I don't need more stereotypes. I just want the ones attributed to males and females gone, because they make no sense, and just allow us to dehumanize others rather than do something useful.