Sweden Aims for "Gender Neutrality"

[Violet]

Whilst I think the idea of "gender neutrality" has good intentions, I think some of the things talked about in that article would just lead to unfairness. For instance, ignoring the physical differences between male and female athletes and having them compete against one another would in most cases lead to male-dominated sports victories.

The physical differences between males and females are unrelated to gender. That is entirely a sexual matter

Even regarding that it is a sexual matter... I think society's expectations of them has a greater impact than their physical capabilities. I refuse to believe that you could replace my abilities on the fish site with most men ^_^

What does everyone else think? Should we ignore the genetic / physical differences between males and females in order to promote a "more equal" society, and is such a society really more equal?

I don't believe we should ignore the differences of people... such a society sounds bland and depersonalizing. It breeds the sort of thought that anyone can be replaced.

Although I greatly appreciate the possible recognition of genderqueer individuals: I don't believe this is 'the answer' (that would be the societal acceptance of individuals outside the bi-gender system)...

---

If I go to a Swedish strip club and a gender neutral waves its neutralhood at me, ill fuck it up.

Thats so stupid, no one can ignore obvious differences. Good idea, clearly the wrong way about it.

Well... I would.

One man wears a black top hat, the other a white fedora. There's obvious differences... I find them easy enough to 'ignore'

---

Does gender neutral Swedish person of the chromosomally X-Y pursuasion suckle their infants from their own mammary glands?

Boy do I wish, honey. While your at it: give me a womb. I want to make some babies

Although I wonder... maybe I can get my mammary glands to pump out milk anyway ^_^

---

It’s not about the people that recognize the differences and feel comfortable with that, it’s about those who don’t.
It’s about the people who fall outside of male and female.
It’s about the people who are Androgynous, Neutrios, Intergender, non-gender etc and anything else that may fall in to the Intersexual category.
It’s not about forcing people to use gender neutral pronouns against their will; it’s about making the option available.

That's somewhat better... but that isn't what I read in the article.

As far a a gender neutral socity goes I'm all for unisex bathrooms, I refuse to use any other kind. Bowling is a sport that can be gender neutral but there are others that can't; like wrestling, it would become unfair.

* Violet dearly wishes that unisex bathrooms were more common... she's tired of keeping her head low in fear every time she uses a public bathroom.

Usually rather hold it till I get home

---

Well the problems guys have about wrestling girls is not so much about the strength of the two genders. It is the state of sexual arousal druing a man vs. woman match. The man is crawling on the matt, grasping at her femine body, and WHOOPS! Out comes the invevitable erection in a skin tight uniform screaming, "LOOK AT ME!" I have seen it happen, folks.

Well then we have to deny gay men from wrestling. Can't even be slightly gay, got to be 100% no erections. Also, all people with erectile dysfunction.

Do it as the greeks did: naked.

So what about the arousal? If it is a professional sport about winning they probably aren't about to screw each other. Not that I'd mind, it's just you people with your rules and regulations that y'all follow.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

For instance, ignoring the physical differences between male and female athletes and having them compete against one another would in most cases lead to male-dominated sports victories.

Agreed to a point,overall males are usually physically stronger than females..

Things may change long term. Eg right now the trucking industry in Western Australia is trying to get more women truck drivers. So far they have attracted ONE. (pay is $70 to $90k pa)


I applaud the Swedish initiative in principle,but think it might take a few generations, which is fine.

[Violet]

For the most part I agree with Sweden on this. High-strength sports, such as competitive fighting etc, would be the only exception. And obviously if someone commits a crime, you should be allowed to describe them as "male" or "female", since there is clearly a biological distinction. There should not be any societal distinction other than where absolutely necessary, however.

* Violet dresses in male drag and commits a crime.

Haha... now you are looking only for people of the wrong sex! I am a genius!

Don't think I couldn't do it too... I'm right at the mid-stage here. (Not that I can act like a guy...)

---

How many guys have just posted on this thread protesting this? I don't see a single woman that's posted so far.

How about now?

[Handprint]

How many guys have just posted on this thread protesting this? I don't see a single woman that's posted so far.

How about now?

I'm satisfied now.

[Epimethean]

So we have guys and almost gals, and one gal who hasn't really entered an opinion but simply questioned those who did.

This initiative is left crossing so far over it does a loop-de-doop.

[TheJackel]

It depends if they are trying to be gender neutral in every respect, or where it's actually needed. If they are going to say male and female bathrooms are segregation and should be neutral to where there is only one bathroom for both, there might be some problems

[R-e-n-n-a-t]

It depends if they are trying to be gender neutral in every respect, or where it's actually needed. If they are going to say male and female bathrooms are segregation and should be neutral to where there is only one bathroom for both, there might be some problems

I'm not sure how that's a problem. The current separated system only feeds the belief that there are two separate species. There's no reason for it really.

[Shell B]

I happen to find traditional gender roles adorable for those who embrace them. Stay at home moms are awesome, but I really don't care if it is the mom or the dad. My point is that taking this "neutrality" thing too far will detract from the good in traditional roles. That being said, I think people should choose if they want to feel neutral, overtly feminine, overtly masculine or overtly something in-between. The differences between typical males, females and every other gender should be noticed and embraced. The only thing that should count is that one is not discriminated against for their gender. Neutrality does not accomplish that.

---

I'm not sure how that's a problem. The current separated system only feeds the belief that there are two separate species. There's no reason for it really.

I beg to differ. There is a very good reason for it. When a woman sees a male in the woman's room, she knows to go on the defensive.

[Epimethean]

I think there is something to be said for segregation of the sexes. It is nice to value the differences. If the Swedes want to get jiggy with erasing the separations, romance will take a hit. We may be animals, but it is nice not to have to see just how base we can get. I don't see a true benefit to suggesting there is no true difference between the sexes.

[R-e-n-n-a-t]

I happen to find traditional gender roles adorable for those who embrace them. Stay at home moms are awesome, but I really don't care if it is the mom or the dad. My point is that taking this "neutrality" thing too far will detract from the good in traditional roles. That being said, I think people should choose if they want to feel neutral, overtly feminine, overtly masculine or overtly something in-between. The differences between typical males, females and every other gender should be noticed and embraced. The only thing that should count is that one is not discriminated against for their gender. Neutrality does not accomplish that.

---

I'm not sure how that's a problem. The current separated system only feeds the belief that there are two separate species. There's no reason for it really.

I beg to differ. There is a very good reason for it. When a woman sees a male in the woman's room, she knows to go on the defensive.

And I disagree, there's not a good reason. If there was a dude in a female restroom right now, that'd be creepy since they're currently separate. If, however, some law gets passed like this, there'll be no argument. Actually it'd be safer, since there'd be twice the number of people around.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-...e-violence

BTW, just as many females are creepers as males.
http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/ID41E2.pdf

Actually, I take it back. Unisex restrooms are a terrible idea, I don't want you violent, creeper females looking at the guys. (only kidding, but you see the point)