• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

School Told to Call Kids ‘Purple Penguins’ Because ‘Boys and Girls’ Is Not Inclusive

Status
Not open for further replies.

freddy

Banned
The "you guys" example seems a bit odd. If they'd said "guys and girls", I'd understand, but surely simply saying "you guys" implies that it's referring to everyone and not just one gender?

Anyway, I went to an all boys school so saying "you fucking cuntholes" was pretty common, which was also mostly gender neutral.
As the language has evolved, Guys here in Australia can refer to everyone as a group(gender neutral) and is popularly used by both men and women, although some object to it OR a group of men, whereas guy in it's singular form is gender specific. Not sure how it is in Nebraska.
 
I don't think this will do much of anything. I think the kids will splinter off in recess or away from school if they don't allow it.

I feel bad for people with gender identity issues, but don't you run the risk of creating similar issues in these kids by telling them to inhibit behavior they may naturally have??
 

freddy

Banned
I don't think this will do much of anything. I think the kids will splinter off in recess or away from school if they don't allow it.

I feel bad for people with gender identity issues, but don't you run the risk of creating similar issues in these kids by telling them to inhibit behavior they may naturally have??

I don't think that much thought goes into these issues. Most of these types of responses are reactionary and there's little forward thinking involved.
 

subrock

Member
I mean, when I was young I think I would have been pretty into the idea of being called a purple penguin so right on I guess.
 

neorej

ERMYGERD!
eYXMKDB.jpg


You're creating some real psychos there.
 
It's weird, this is. Although I suppose that we'll adapt to this gender neutrality, like we have adapted to cars, longer lifespans, etc.
 
You don't need practically Orwellian language modification to create tolerance.

I'd even say you DON'T make tolerance with this sort of bullshit.
 
This is a really forward-thinking initiative, and I honestly can't see the harm in not stuffing gender stereotypes and gender binarism down the throats of kids.

With that said, I'd rather they use a different word, like, you know, child, or person, or being, etc.
 

ponpo

( ≖‿≖)
This is a really forward-thinking initiative, and I honestly can't see the harm in not stuffing gender stereotypes and gender binarism down the throats of kids.

Referring to boys as boys and girls as girls is 'stuffing a stereotype down someone's throat'?

K..kay.
 

HGStormy

Banned
I honestly don't believe that anyone is legitimately offended that a teacher would call kids "purple penguins". I really don't know if people are being very sarcastic and I'm just unable to pick up on it.

It's literally the most innocent thing I could possibly come up with, and somehow it's an awful thing to some people. How.
 
Referring to boys as boys and girls as girls is 'stuffing a stereotype down someone's throat'?

K..kay.

It is because of all the sexist baggage associated with the words "boys" and "girls", which is a lot harder to remove than simply not using those two words in question - you bypass the problem of gender seperatism through the clever use of a singly gender pronoun.
 
I really don't understand the point of all this. It seems very PC and silly.

Boys are boys. Girls are girls. If a boy feels like a girl or vice versa, the focus should be on fostering tolerance and acceptance, not erasing the difference between boys and girls. There is a difference.... And that's okay.
 
I really don't understand the point of all this. It seems very PC and silly.

Boys are boys. Girls are girls. If a boy feels like a girl or vice versa, the focus should be on fostering tolerance and acceptance, not erasing the difference between boys and girls. There is a difference.... And that's okay.

Not everyone can be neatly slotted into thoso two gender categories, there's a near-infinite number of gender categories.
 

Ikael

Member
This is ridiculous. We're a gendered species, not a gendered society. No amount of language remodelling is going to change our sexual dymorphism or the fact that sex is still a damn useful identifier / term of reference as it is age, job or complexion. Measures like this one are the epithome of attacking the symptoms rather than the cause. Wholly misguided.
 
This is ridiculous. We're a gendered species, not a gendered society. No amount of language remodelling is going to change our sexual dymorphism or the fact that sex is still a damn useful identifier / term of reference as it is age, job or complexion. Measures like this one are the epithome of attacking the symptoms rather than the cause. Wholly misguided.

Not everyone can be neatly slotted into two categories, biology & genetics can be fuzzy.
 

ponpo

( ≖‿≖)
Not everyone can be neatly slotted into two categories, biology & genetics can be fuzzy.

Not everyone, but most people can. I'm fine for teaching kids new things but the part that bothers me is:

Furthermore, it instructs teachers to interfere and interrupt if they ever hear a student talking about gender in terms of “boys and girls” so the student can learn that this is wrong.

Teaching kids that using someone's visible gender by default as 'wrong' seems
wrong.
 
Not everyone, but most people can. I'm fine for teaching kids new things but the part that bothers me is:



Teaching kids that using someone's visible gender by default as 'wrong' seems
wrong.

I think it's right, since someone's visible gender is a societal construct.
 
Not everyone can be neatly slotted into thoso two gender categories, there's a near-infinite number of gender categories.

Which is why "purple penguins" is offensive as well to otherkin who do not identify as a penguin. How is this any better for them? Are they irrelevant because they are in such an extreme minority?
 
Not everyone can be neatly slotted into thoso two gender categories, there's a near-infinite number of gender categories.

Not everyone has 2 arms or two kidneys or 5 fingers on each hand or two legs or pretty much anything we normally associate with humans. I'm not sure why kids need to be clued into these complex matters and asking teachers to "interfere and interrupt if they ever hear a student talking about gender in terms of “boys and girls” so the student can learn that this is wrong" strikes me as brainwashing. If you heard a kid say humans have two kidneys would you correct him too? Ater all, we wouldn't want to live in a world where kids think all people have two lungs, would we?

I have no problem referring to a person as he, she, xhe or anything in-between but it isn't default and efforts to not only make it default but to refer to anything else as "wrong" is based on a ridiculousness that must be challenged.
 
Last time I checked there were penises and vaginas. Is there some new sexual organ I'm unaware of?

Intersexed individuals break the binary gender system when it comes outward sexual characteristics, and if we're going by chromosomes then there's plenty of non-standard sex chromosomal configurations. Same with hormonal levels, brain physiology, etc, etc.

Human gender is fuzzy, messy, and not at all neatly divisible in man & woman.
 

ponpo

( ≖‿≖)
I think it's right, since someone's visible gender is a societal construct.

What? If you took a male and female child and just let them grow up in the woods for 25 years they would end up looking identical?

Regardless, like others in the thread have said, if someone identifies as something besides what you're assuming they do, then they tend to correct you and everyone moves on, but choosing a 'default' that applies to the majority of the world isn't 'wrong' in my opinion.
 
Intersexed individuals break the binary gender system when it comes outward sexual characteristics, and if we're going by chromosomes then there's plenty of non-standard sex chromosomal configurations. Same with hormonal levels, brain physiology, etc, etc.

Human gender is fuzzy, messy, and not at all neatly divisible in man & woman.

Okay, but I don't think "not at all" is really accurate. What percentage of people born today are intersexed, would you say? Even if it's 5% which I doubt, should the whole system change to accommodate that 5%? Or should we teach our children to be accepting of everyone while still explaining the difference in the two most common genders. I don't think erasing the difference or pretending like it doesn't exist by ignoring it (because 5%) is the answer.
 
Tolerance is "exceptions to the usual gender binary are fine".

Tolerance is not "it's wrong to even acknowledge the obvious gender binary".
 
I'm going to continue calling male looking people male and female looking people female unless that individual person tells me they are otherwise.
 

erawsd

Member
So rather than have an open and honest dialogue with the kids about tolerance, gender equality, and sexual development... They're going to stop using gender pronouns and hope that a bunch of hormonal 11-14 year olds wont notice a difference between boys and girls?
 

Ikael

Member
Not everyone can be neatly slotted into two categories, biology & genetics can be fuzzy.

Gender has indeed a hefty dose of social construct and fuzziness built into it, but sex does not, as far as I know. You can either have a penis, a vagina, or in some cases, you can be an hermaprodite and have both organs present, but that's pretty much it. Transgendered persons are either male or females that wants (well, need) to become members of the opposite sex, but are not nor want to be a "third sex", so to speak.

The problem is not the sexual difference per se, but the negative atributions that we as a society give to said difference. It is like this sci-fi short story, where an alien race deprives mankind from our ability to distinguish colour in order to stop racism... only to re-direct our discrimination impulses into fat vs thin people. The problem does not lie in our perception per se, but in our interpretation of said perception.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom