Sweden Moves Towards Gender Neutrality [Support Thread]

[bananafishtoday]

It's not going to abolish all gender distinctions and transform everyone into gray unisex blob people.

Jesus, this really is the generation of the spineless and the oversensitive

"We rather not want to have equality with the freedom of our individualism, let's just dump everyone into a grey social blob where no differene is allowed. PRAISE SOCIAL JUSTICE"

I'm... actually kind of amazed by this. Literally 20 mins after my mock-hyperbolic comment, someone posts almost the same thing in total seriousness.

On topic: I've never understood the need for this term. Most people identify themselves partially by gender. If it's about transgendered people feeling discriminated, then wouldn't it just be easier to refer to them by teir own preference (i.e. men who identify as female will be refered to as female). I really cannot see the need for a completely gender neutral term, unless your name is Metatron.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genderqueer

Not everyone thinks of themself as a man or a woman. Also, "themself" in the previous sentence is an example of how a gender-neutral pronoun is useful for everyday speech/writing.

 

[ImmortalDrifter]

That's not what Fascist means. Authoritarian might be a better word. But again, that's not part of the proposal.

I looked into the term just now and apparently it's still up in the air what fascism really means. I referred to it as that because under my impression fascist meant government imposed and enforced moral values. It may or may not be right. Regardless, I wasn't referring directly to the proposal, but the stigma that appears to surround it. Honestly though, if this was a lapse purely involving the language, you'd think someone would have brought this up sooner.

I'd like you to prove that. I used gender role to refer to the stereotypes surrounding genders which are a part of society that impact on personal gender identity. So the words appear in close proximity, because the way a person identifies and expresses their gender is related to the roles that society expects of their sex. My point was that to call it sexist is flat out wrong.

The gender-deconstruction position didn't say anything about the sexes needing to be eliminated, or focussing on sex, but rather on the social construct of gender. Hence, you've conflated the two, in an attempt to label the opposition as sexist, which is hardly a classy move. If you can detail how people trying to eliminate the idea of gender are discriminating on the basis of sexual biology, I'll consider it. You play a similar rhetorical game when I address this and attempt to call me out for conflation. Even if you had a point, and I don't think you do, as it stands, you'd still have to address the fallacy in your argument. Tu Quoue.

You ask me to prove my definition of a debateable sociological term? You ask far too much. The aforementioned article the stepped into femanazi territory may have biased my perception too much though. My reasoning comes from the gender deconstruction argument coming from a perceived (but debately present) form of discrimination (against women, but that is again in that specific article). Calling it sexist was wrong on my part, it involved a lack of understanding of the concept. My view of the gender deconstruction platform remains the same, though. I don't see this gender constraint that seems to be a problem. It occurs to me that anyone can do anything they want. I honestly don't think gender roles still exist, regardless of the movement. As I said before gender roles as they seem to be described (Women wear dresses, as exampled in this very thread) is lost on me because I grew up with parents who didn't conform to them. I don't see the platform as sexist now, I just see it as vehemently unneccesary. Also it's spelled Tu Quoque, but that's unrelated.

If there's already a non-gender specific singular, it's redundant, and someone more familiar with Swedish would be the best to assess that.

And yes, the mire around it is a bit ridiculous. But that's not to do with the word or the policy.

Actually it appears to have a lot to do with the policy. At least if these comments are to be believed. To restate my first point, if this was a problem purely with the language someone would have brought in up long before now right? Of course that arguement dips into assumptions, but I feel they're vindicated when it comes to proving the connection between this and the "Politically correct" movement.

Also, I apologize if any of my arguements are repeats. I'm on zero hours of sleep and I'm now going to bed.

For my last note (today at least) the CoC does not dismiss anyones opinion or exclude people with a certain view point. The intro to this page did not ask them to stay on topic, it asked them to only participate if they held the same viewpoint as the OP. If you tell people they shouldn't do something, and there is not a single consequence for doing said thing then you can bet people are going to do it. Especially when it involves surpressing opinions. If the OP's original request was heeded, this thread would probably be dead by now. But everyone loves to ***** at each other. You and I, we're perfect; Quod erat demonstrandum. You never avoid flame wars by participating hahaha.
Goodnight

 

[BlazeRaider]

If all he wanted was a bunch of people congratulating him and Sweden for their support of this specific idea, then allow me to add this video which will remove the need for this thread. Enjoy.

http://youtu.be/oyFQVZ2h0V8

I love the comments thread on that video xD

Maybe the Escapist team could arbitrarily turn every post in this thread into "Congratulations!"?

That'd be worth a good laugh.

The comments section is like pristine white snow.

 

[zumbledum]

seems a bit silly to me, gender equality is fine im all down with that , but gender neutrality? not for me sorry. it doesnt matter how much people want to forget or ignore the fact but the genders are not the same there are a lot of clearly demonstrated and documented differences in not only the physical but mental characteristics between the genders.

Equal means equal not the same.

sorry if this opinion bothers the op but this is a forum after all

 

[Woodsey]

But what's new in Sweden is not analogous to they. Hen was originally intended to behave like singular they, when gender was unknown. But a children's-book author has recently adopted the radical feminist position of using it to replace han and hon entirely. This would be a little bit like saying

Steve left their jacket here. They're going to really be cold outside without it

Mary is getting bored in their marriage and is considering leaving their husband

You fight stereotyping and prejudices and racism and sexism by teaching people that it's fine to be different because everyone is fucking different, not by pretending we're an amorphous blob.

 

[Jamash]

It's been around for a while, but isn't really used since it sounds really silly. It sounds like calling someone a hen. The English word. I think han/hon works just fine.

Now that you mention it, in English the term "hen" is a slang word for woman and not gender neutral at all. It's particularly used as a term of endearment in the Scottish dialect:


Not that the informal usage of the word in English should matter too much since English and Swedish are two completely different languages and the two uses of "hen" are in complete different contexts, but even if you ignore the informal slang use of "hen" in English, it's proper meaning it still synonymous with a female animal and not gender neutral in it's most widely accepted meaning, even if it is in another language.

It's a bit like if for English, alongside he/him/his and she/her/hers they decided to use ho/hos as a gender neutral term. Despite the term being declared gender neutral, most people will automatically associate ho and hos with a feminine (albeit disparaging) term.

 

[kaizen2468]

Can't we just use marklar?

 

[redmoretrout]

Well changing the correct grammar of an entire language just so people don't feel oppressed by pronouns seems ridiculous to me.

 

[Jayemsal]

Gender deconstruction is a terrible idea, both the genders are equal in worth but they have very big differences and roles. Hypothetically if you let a little boy identify as a girl, have fantasies of being a mother and carrying a baby in a womb that can lead to some issues in later life. There are physical differences, if you claim that race and gender are social constructions you have to go up against years of confirmed genetic science.

Its a step in the right direction. Breaking down how genders are constructed is the easiest way of creating equality. In a way it is similar to the Marxist view on race (Race being a construction, not a reality). This fits in with my own view on race relations and the end of racism.

Equal societies are what this world should strive for. Things like this give me a little bit more hope for humanity in general. I fucking love Sweden, I think I should just give up, learn Swedish and move. I am sick of the morally bankrupt little rock I live on.

"Race is a construction, not a reality" Please elaborate? The Marxist view of race, gender and class is a flawed idea because it says that everyone is a victim of a broken system and everyone is both oppressed and oppressor. It's a theory composed of a victim complex ideology that insists in poking holes in a system. It's cool to look at things differently with a different mind set but fucking with things practically like the raising of children (putting them in a gender neutral environment) without prior controlled experiments is highly unethical.

Race is a myth.
There are no significant biological differences between anyone of any "race."
All variations can be attributed to biological mutation, and offer no significant reason to qualify as a category.

 

[Busard]

"We rather not want to have equality with the freedom of our individualism, let's just dump everyone into a grey social blob where no differene is allowed. PRAISE SOCIAL JUSTICE"

I'm... actually kind of amazed by this. Literally 20 mins after my mock-hyperbolic comment, someone posts almost the same thing in total seriousness.
[/quote]

Well sorry to find this kind of thing is not only mildly insulting and silly but also promotes this kind of "we must not offend at all cost" attitude that's been ramping up. It's part of this constant hammering of trying to replace people, language and system with a bunch of happy soft dolls that can't offend and can't perpetrate any kind of scaaaaaaaaary social faux pas.

It might not be a big deal to you, or even progressive, but for me I find this really regressive and tedious. Instead of going toward a goal of just accepting that there are different things that can be considered as such, we try to dumb them down to the simplest denominator.
Especially when it comes from a really really small minority (yeah, sorry, deal with it) that takes issue over something that is not even meant as an insult in the first place, just a pronoun/harmless denominator. Like you said, "he" and "she" is also simply a word.

Equality by suppression doesn't work, and will never will in my book.

 

[Vareoth]

This is a somewhat pointless gesture. Rather then trying to live with a diverse group of people in harmony you try to generalize them into a single entity so people don't have to be offended by basic linguistic pronouns. It almost seems childish. There are much more important steps to take.

Also, saying to you won't allow differing opinions is neither feasible nor allowed on a public forum.

 

[redmoretrout]

Race is a myth.
There are no significant biological differences between anyone of any "race."
All variations can be attributed to biological mutation, and offer no significant reason to qualify as a category.

That is the single most ridiculous thing I have ever heard, of course there are genetic differences and trends between races of people. For example African Americans are more likely to contract sugar diabetes or lupus than Caucasians, proving a genetic difference between the two races. I'm against discrimination and all, but pretending races don't exist will not cure racism.

 

[Aramis Night]

I have no issue with the "hen" word being used to describe an ambiguous individual whose gender is unknown, but in place of the appropriate gender pronoun of a person whose gender is known, it's offensive. Are people this ashamed of their genders now? If this is the case then i can't think of a more tacit implication that feminism has failed it's goal.

I really wish that people would let go of this whole idea that "gender is a social construct". It's like a religion with some people. This has been disproven with the most basic of scientific observations regarding our biology. It's like they are trying to create more David Reimer's( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer ).

What always gets me about these discussions about gender is we concentrate too much on the genital's of the people in question and not on all the other characteristics that are a result of gender. Both sexes have vastly different brain characteristics for example, and these tend to affect us far more than our genital's in terms of how we behave.

I suspect i understand why feminists are loath to see the discussion get that honest as i'm sure they fear that such information would possibly be used to justify treating them differently. Seeing as we already do treat them differently, i don't believe this is a justified concern. Truth in the end may in fact benefit their side. Some differences are good, some are bad. Some are just differences.

So instead of trying to understand our differences and why, we get these little campaigns and ideas from them to distract us from ever really joining the debate in earnest as long as they can convince us that they are looking into it and doing something about it so that we don't have to. I'm less than satisfied if this is the result. I especially don't appreciate the way they attempt to stifle discussion from other parties on the matter as well, as the OP attempted.

 

[Xan Krieger]

Just seems like another case of political correctness gone mad. So instead of he or she you call them chicken.
That joke aside I'm serious, there are men and women and we are different. Different in ways that have an effect daily. You can't remove that from life entirely like it seems they're trying to do.

 

[Yuno Gasai]

However, I would like to point out that demolishing gender is completely pointless. It will always exist and there is no reason for it to be done away with. There should absolutely be equal rights and opportunities for all sexes, but I personally find the thought of saying there is something wrong with being "boyish" or "girly" and forcefully trying to destroy it is absurd. You can have an amalgamation of both and people who find certain behaviors attractive can come together.

I really don't understand why behavioral divides bother people so much.

I couldn't agree with this more if I tried.

The issue isn't with the fact that some things are inherently branded as "boyish" or "girly", it's that some parents are trying to pigeonhole their children into being a certain way, or liking a certain thing. Having toys/clothing which are openly boyish or girly is completely fine, as long as you give the child the option to play with the opposite of what you've given them (or let them choose themselves, depending on their age).

I don't understand what demolishing gender is supposed to actually achieve, other than adding extra honorifics.

 

[DarthSka]

Seems like this is taking what we've had before, but just applying it to the opposite end of the spectrum, from forcing gender norms to forcing gender neutrality. That toy car bit really bugged me. If one wants to be gender neutral, then fine, let them. But if one wants to be or deal with something that is considered stereotypical to their gender, that's bad? It's basically forcing a lifestyle on someone that they may not want it. The solution is not to get rid of gender, but to get the point where we realize that we're all equal no matter what gender is involved.

 

[Muspelheim]

Hey, if you too think this is all very well-intended, but cripplingly, annoyingly silly, then imagine having to live with this...
I do like the general idea, in a way. Far too many social topics eventually devolve into a question of "is it a penis or a vagina involved?", and trying to make that less of an important factor is a good thing in itself. But as have been pointed out, you don't overcome aversion to differences by pretending they don't exist. You overcome them by coming to terms with them.

Heh, beyond DIY-furnture and meatballs, now we've got well-intended but flawed ideas to export. Wonder if there's a market for that?

Still, it's a useful word when you're not sure. Like a simplification of the He/She-thing.

Sure we have. Subjective third-person plural personal pronoun: "De". We also have the usage of "man" which could in a way substitute for the English usage of "one" (something many posters have written the Swedish language does not provide).

One does not have to...
Man behöver inte...

While not a direct translation the substance will be the pretty much the same.

That being said, Swedish is a silly language.

That's true, but it can be great fun sometimes. Throw a few random words and terms in a concrete mixer and see what pours out, like.

 

[Fnuff]

"Hurr durr oh no don't take my gender away" said the bumbling idiots while steadily clutching their private parts.

As if there was some leftwing-feminazi conspiracy out to neutralize everything they hold dear and identify with, oh my.


Seriously though, the word is only meant to be used for situations when a gender-specific pronoun isn't necessary or if you don't know the gender of the person in question. It's not a word that was just made-up either, it's been around since the '60s.

OT:

Feminism isn't about forcing people to ignore the biological differences between the sexes, it's about the fact that everyone is equal despite these differences. It's also about not forcing people into a stereotypical gender role just because they were born with a certain set of genitals.


Please disregard my subpar use of the english language. :3