what is your opinion on raising children without gender like

>>8670761
Go away /pol/
Hopefully trump won't mention us again during his new 17 day vacation so you'll forget about us again.

>>8670761
It can only be a good thing for both trans and cis children.

If /pol/ is right that trans is a mental illness then this should eliminate it too.

>>8670761
It can't possibly be any worse or more damaging than raising a child to be religious and/or ignorant and terrified/hateful of anyone who is different than them (ie. the way you were raised)

File: 49f34deb75dc5c4bc0c7b927df982d0b58246b3d7a908b5547600eec6d0a80f8.jpg (49KB, 225x566px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 225x566px

Gender roles are a sexual bdsm fantasy made up by perverted cis dudes so they can ensure their sons and daughters are properly trained to prostitute themselves for shelter later in life.
It's good that the child abuse known as gender is finally no longer being forced upon innocent children.

>>8670761
It's not only retarded, it's terribly hypocritical as well.
"HURR DON'T ENFORCE GENDER ROLES ON YOUR CHILD."
"NO TIMMY YOU ARE GENDER NEUTRAL YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO PLAY WITH CARS HERE PAINT YOUR NAILS INSTEAD"

I thought the entire point was to not force a gender on these kids and allow them the freedom to discover themselves.
Apparently the entire point is to erase gender altogether and force kids into some frankensteined genderless identity.

Results:
Trans kids still feel dysphoria and would have to transition.
Cis kids develop some sort of dysphoria as well, and would need to be taught to be their gender.

Those responsible should be arrested for child abuse, and whoever supports this 'crime against children' should be arrested for inciting child abuse.

>>8670761
My parents already did that to me and they were conservative as fuck and black.

>>8670828
Stop trying to force your fetish on children creep
>not forcing gender roles on children is just forcing gender roles on them
No they're not

Just ew

these parents have an unhealthy obsession, obviously not good for the kids cause they probably talk about gender more than anything else.
I like what Sweden is doing though, I wish I hadn't been forced to avoid 90% the girly stuff I wanted to do when I was younger, I was forced to cut my hair against my will and discouraged for skipping instead of walking and shit like that.

>>8670839
Stop trying to force your disgusting gnc ideology on children, pervert
>If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
Same goes for genders, you pissnigger

Now piss off back to pissniggerland.

>>8670761
they are still enforcing gender roles and concepts just not the natural and traditional ones, its still bad and will hurt the children

Forcing children to express certain behaviors based on what sex they are was weird in the first place, it's almost baffling to me that there are people who are opposed to the idea of letting kids be themselves.

>>8670828
They aren't forcing kids into any boxes tho, that's all. Just avoiding the typical shit kids are forced into.

>>8670865
>they are still enforcing gender roles
[citation needed]

>>8670880
>They aren't forcing kids into any boxes tho, that's all.
They literally are.
They just stamped the word "genderless" on theirs and pretend it's not a box.

There is a difference between allowing a child to discover who they are and what identity they're comfortable with, and forcing them into some gnc identity you made up for them.

You're supposed to raise them gender neutral, not genderless.

>>8670911
And where is your evidence that they're raising them genderless instead of gender neutral?

>>8670922
At the top of the page?
Christ it's like the goddamn elephant all over again.

>>8670938
>a video about gender neutral schools in Sweden

Alright, now where(asides from your ass) do you derive the idea that they're being raised without the ability to express themselves in masculine or feminine ways however they wish? It seems to me they're just raising them without gender expectations or enforced gender roles.

>>8670761
Meh. Using your offspring to challenge gender expectations is pretty much like shopping at Whole Foods. It’s not really progressive anymore. It’s just something trendy hippies do.

>>8670957
>where?
>right there
>yeah but where?
>right there like I said
>yeah but I want to know where
Do you hear that?
it's the sound of goalposts migrating to a warmer climate.

>>8670959
It shouldn't be considered progressive to not force a child to act a certain way based off their genitals, it should just be the norm.
>>8670975
Just because you pull shit out of your ass doesn't mean I'll smell it anon. What about the video(and give me a reason other than "THE VIDEO") makes you believe they're specifically denying these children the right to express themselves however they please? Why should I believe you're not just assuming that for the sake of getting offended?

I think it's less raising them genderless, and more not enforcing a gender on them at all

Like, you're pretty much just letting them be as masculine or feminine as they want

If that's the case, then I think it's absolutely fine. People won't feel pressured to be a person they don't want to be.

>>8670979
>it's not evidence until I say it's evidence
>you're just doing this because it offends you
Normally I'd continue this, but I can see that you're so stuck in your own delusions that you'll never change your mind on your precious genderless utopia.
You're probably gonna call me a dogshit pedophile somewhere down this thread as well.

If only your parents were faggots instead of you.

genderless is homo-fascist code for female

>>8671112
Imagine being so terrified of females that you unironically believe all the supposed superiority of your own gender will be instantly forgotten and discarded the moment young children aren't forced to believe it means something.

Must suck to live in fear like that.

>>8670980
This.

>>8671050
You're fucking stupid, you haven't watched the video and you're just assuming. You can't use the video as evidence of your fears/made up worries if the video doesn't actually confirm the shit you're saying. It's like if I tried to convince you that Jurassic Park was about a bunch of children who have their right to freedom of expression denied by a bunch of mean dinosaurs. You'd probably want a little more evidence than "the existence of this movie in itself proves me right." Yeah? Same shit. As far as I can tell you're just making up shit to get triggered about, you probably haven't even watched the video yourself.
>If only your parents were faggots instead of you
I'll be pleased to tell you that my parents actually aren't me, so you don't gotta worry about that.

File: carlin_knowledge.jpg (47KB, 500x655px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 500x655px

>>8671152
So howcome all the genderless people just look like girls? And genderless children just means boys with girl clothes and long hair? Did you watch the video?

And im not afraid of homos or females at all but when they get into large groups and start enacting revenge laws or dictating what people must do with their children like in canada that is what is scary.
Imagine a five year old saying he is a girl one day then a hetero hating teacher getting him taken away and put into the foster system. Anytime you give humans a chance to abuse a law like that they will, and that will inevitably happen now.

>>8670980
/thread
Spooks busted

File: IMG_1662.jpg (36KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 1280x720px

>>8670839
Someone sat back in their chair, typed this out, proof read it, and thought it wasn't insane.

God bless America.

>>8671187
But if you stop making shit up about the video then there's no reason to be upset and that makes me VERY ANGRY
>>8671192
Not like it makes any less sense than "not enforcing gender roles is still enforcing gender roles"(which makes absolutely no sense)

>>8671152
Imagine being so braindead you cant realize how forcing this gender marxist garbage on children and bannig any masculinity is as bad as religious nuts enforcing strict gender

File: 20161217_214601.jpg (34KB, 208x207px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 208x207px

>>8671192
I'll make a very general criticism on a half-baked post to appear smart now.

>>8671200
>bannig any masculinity

Oh anon, it seems like you're confused, this video actually has nothing to do with banning masculinity and is instead about raising children without enforcing any gender roles. Hopefully now that I've cleared that up for you you'll stop being so upset about nothing.

>>8670761
Children shouldn't be "raised with gender" beyond educating them about relevant biological differences when they reach the appropriate ages. Nothing wrong with allowing them to partake in masculine and feminine activities and forms of expression, as long as it's their own decision and not something forced on them by their parents based on their anatomy/chromosomes.

>>8670864
They're not doing that though, they're specifically saying that we shouldn't force ANY ideology on children. You on the other hand seem to think that forcing gender roles on children is somehow necessary to keep children safe and healthy; go ahead and believe whatever you want, but realize that you don't have any kind of high ground to stand on when accusing others of forcing ideology on people.

>>8671200
>bannig any masculinity
[citation needed]

>>8671200
>banning of masculinity
"Ch-children can't be allowed to CHOOSE if they want to live up to this stupid archetype, y-you might as well be banning masculinity because no one will want to do it!!"
Perhaps if you can't get a single child to follow your message, your message is dead and hollow.

>all these people jumping to conclusions without watching the video.

Guys, mapa has a goatee, do you really think they despise masculinity?

>>8671218
Don't bother arguing with them. They don't care about what videos actually about, they just want an excuse to be offended.

File: bike_chick.jpg (161KB, 1080x1350px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 1080x1350px

Literally how many people actually are misgendered? 1 percent?

>>8671224
>"toxic masculinity" goal posts wider by the day
>decent western men shamed for the actions of subhumans
>women doing what ever the fuck the want are celebrated and when they get themselves in trouble it's societies fault.
>"intersex" woman is a girl wearing jeans and a t shirt while a man wear skirts and fish net.
Please tell me how they are not making the western fish tank more effeminate by the day.

>>8671307
>people expected to have manners more and more
>unrelated shit(although I do actually agree with you that most liberals are doing gold metal gymnastics in their mind for the sake of rapefugees, but that's a different conversation)
>vague strawman
>people are wearing whatever they're comfortable with

Who cares?

>>8671282
Yes, but in this stealth communist utopia it's better to make sure 100% grow up gender confused because equality

>>8671307
>Toxic masculinity!
Maybe you should try a non-toxic version?
>Western men shamed
Shame is something only you can put on yourself, just like guilt. If you're ashamed, then you need to look within to see why it is happening.
>Doing what they want!
Here is the crux of your problem - you want control and haven't yet figured out such a thing doesn't exist. There never was a past where 'men kept women in line', you do realize that, yah?
>intersex!
You don't understand what intersex means in any way, shape, or form. You apparently have problems with the clothing someone else wears though, which is a perfect example of Fragile Masculinity (the same as Toxic, but toxic is the 'strong side' and Fragile is the rest of it).

>>8671369
>"gender confused"
What is there to be confused about? The only 'confusion' nowadays is people like me who were given one socially-required gender when it was the incorrect one. If you people would stop trying to pretend people fit in little boxes, then there would be no confusion of a gender nature left to experience.
>m-muh commyuunests!
Seriously?

If I have a kid, I'll treat them like the sex they are, but not deny them if they want things traditionally proscribed to the other gender.

I really don't think I'll traumatized a child because I called my trans daughter with masculine pronouns until she was old enough to fucking express her dysphoria. Not going to treat my kid like a weirdo because there's a 1% chance they'll be trans.

>>8671385
You don't fit into little boxes. The 99% does though. You're making it seem like everyone is like you

>>8671307
>>decent western men shamed for the actions of subhumans
So when a Muslim man does something bad, it's automatically a "Muslim problem", and not a "man problem"?

>when they get themselves in trouble it's societies fault.
Too vague to mean anything.

>>"intersex" woman is a girl wearing jeans and a t shirt while a man wear skirts and fish net.
That has nothing to do with "intersex" though. And you're saying it's considered unacceptable for trans women to wear "modest" feminine clothing?

>fish tank
???

>>8671399
>The 99% does though.
And putting them into boxes helps them how exactly? Why not just let everyone choose their own boxes, if they want to fit in one at all, rather than forcing it on them.

>>8670831
How did they do it?

>>8671411
If it ain't broke, don't fix it

>>8671388
So other than pronouns and stuff like potty training, what does treating them like the sex they are mean? Surely you shouldn't be treating boys that much differently than girls.

>>8671388
This isn't about the handful of children that end up trans though(at least not entirely). Even if they're cis, gender roles still prevent children from expressing themselves as they please and sets them up to have gender related insecurities that can haunt them for the rest of their lives(and if you don't think that's a thing that happens to cis please go browse some incel/foreveralone/whatever subreddits full of self-hating and self-defeating young men who will never live up to unrealistic male expectations and some pro-ana forums full of young cis girls starving themselves to death so they can come closer to being a pretty princess model stereotype and get back to me)
>>8671399
See above, very few people perfectly fit into these boxes and it hurts just about everyone else.
>>8671419
You say that but I've got a feeling you probably prefer colored television and smart-phones to black-and-white tv and landlines. There's no reason to enforce something that works for most people(and even then it honestly doesn't) but not all when you can implement something that works for everyone.

>>8671399
Everyone is potentially me until they're not, just like I was potentially normal until I wasn't. So yes, you have to treat everyone as if they could be me, just as we have to treat everyone as if they could be you. If they're you, treating you like me will change nothing. If they're me, treatimg them like me will change everything. This isn't a hard thing to understand for anyone with the slightest shred of empathy.

Even though it's less than one percent (i'll stipulate with .3% for this), that's still over one MILLION people in the United States. That's the entire population of Dallas, Texas, for reference.

>>8671208
are blind or hallucinating?

>>8671419
But it IS broke, if for nearly 1% of people it doesn't work. The alternative would make it work for those 1%, WITHOUT making it stop working for everyone else.

>>8671432
>See above, very few people perfectly fit into these boxes and it hurts just about everyone else.
>very few
You mean the 99%? The boxes really aren't as small as you're making them out to be.
>You say that but I've got a feeling you probably prefer colored television and smart-phones to black-and-white tv and landlines.
Not an argument
>There's no reason to enforce something that works for most people(and even then it honestly doesn't)
Yeah, keep telling yourself that
>but not all when you can implement something that works for everyone.
Prove that your system is better. Time will show, Sweden is the canary in a cage on this one. Amazing how you guys want the rest of the world to change because you don't fit in.

>>8671429
That's my point. I'll raise my kid normally and call them fucking he or she from the moment of birth. It won't make much difference.

>>8671432
Calling a child by a certain pronouns doesn't fucking oppress them

First of all, these parents aren't forcing the children to be genderless or feminine. They're giving them the option to be.

Secondly, you say that forcing childre to be genderless is just as bad as forcing them to be masculine or feminine, yet you poltards aren't appearantly triggered by the latter. It's only when people do the former that you start hyperventilating, so I don't buy it when you say that it's just as bad. You're irrational and on the wrong side of history.

Now scurry away and write opinion pieces about how horses should have diapers or whatever the fuck.

>>8671388
>If I have a kid, I'll treat them like the sex they are,
What does that even mean?

>>8671468
>Prove that your system is better. Time will show, Sweden is the canary in a cage on this one. Amazing how you guys want the rest of the world to change because you don't fit in.
So you think coercion is a good thing? Because that's the only thing we want to change, we want to get rid of coercion. People will still be free to engage in whatever forms of gender expression they want to, they just won't be forced into a specific form of gender expression just because of the genitals they were born with.

>>8671446
>Everyone is potentially me until they're not, just like I was potentially normal until I wasn't.
And then the world started treating you differently after the fact
>But it IS broke, if for nearly 1% of people it doesn't work. The alternative would make it work for those 1%, WITHOUT making it stop working for everyone else.
My bets are on this progressive hysteria causing even more gender confusion, but I digress. Taking away children's role models and giving them parenting unit 1 and 2 surely can't do any harm

>>8671469
This anon >>8671432 obviously is not talking about pronouns. Gender roles are not just which pronouns you use and when you said "treat them like the sex they are" that doesn't just sound like pronouns either.

>>8671475
>So you think coercion is a good thing? Because that's the only thing we want to change, we want to get rid of coercion. People will still be free to engage in whatever forms of gender expression they want to, they just won't be forced into a specific form of gender expression just because of the genitals they were born with.
It's coercion to raise you a certain way even before you know yourself you are any different? Coercion just lost any meaning it had

>>8671484
Yes, it's fucking coercion to raise your girls to be feminine passive housewifes-to-be and raise your boys to be masculine emotionless breadwinners-to-be, even if they aren't old enough to object.

Just to be clear I do not advocate against trans acceptance. I just think assuming anyone might grow up trans or queer and therefore we should effectively remove all gender boundaries to not induce gender dysphoria is taking it a step too far.

>>8671503
But beyond trans people, why should gender boundaries exist? There's plenty of gender non-conforming people that suffer from them, and even people that do conform are often hurt by them. Like boys being unable to express their emotions because that's sissy stuff or girls who feel like they have to be stick thin to be feminine.

>>8671477
I was responding to people who responded to my post, not that person's post. Not everything is an attack on you.

>>8671494
>Yes, it's fucking coercion to raise your girls to be feminine passive housewifes-to-be and raise your boys to be masculine emotionless breadwinners-to-be, even if they aren't old enough to object.
How do you do it, and who is doing it exactly? By misgendering kids? Nice strawman though, you're writing as if we lived in the fifties

>>8671468
>The boxes really aren't as small as you're making them out to be.
And yet they're still small and harmful enough that they cause damage to tons of cis people, the people that are supposedly supposed to fit these gender roles the best.
>not an argument
Neither is "if it ain't broke don't fix it"
>Yeah, keep telling yourself that
Not an argument.
>Prove that your system is better
It works for everybody, doesn't do any harm to cis people or trans people, unlike strictly forcing gender roles which observably harms many people, both cis and trans.
>>8671469
>Calling a child by a certain pronouns doesn't fucking oppress them
Nice straw man.
>>8671510
>I was responding to people who responded to my post, not that person's post.
Quote their posts then, not mine.

>>8671373
that is normal masculinity that you feminists and gender marxists hate so much you are going as low as indoctrinating and brainwashing small children, potentially crippling them in your inhuman - yes, they go against the human nature - experiments

its staggering how irresponsible and absolutely heartless you are

>>8671507
>Like boys being unable to express their emotions because that's sissy stuff or girls who feel like they have to be stick thin to be feminine.
I totally agree with you, I just don't think this is the way

>>8671520
>It works for everybody, doesn't do any harm to cis people or trans people, unlike strictly forcing gender roles which observably harms many people, both cis and trans.
That remains to be seen

Oh fuck, I stopped the video when it got to "the partner that gave birth" being the one identified as "Mama" on the child's drawing. GEE, REALLY MAKES YOU THINK.

My mother had kind of a similar idea to these people when I was a kid. She was totally swept up in that "gender is a social construct" bullshit, and she thought that she would try to raise me and my little sister as "gender-neutral" as possible, with no gendered or stereotypical toys or anything of the sort. The goal wasn't for us not to have a gender at all, but to be "strong women" and free of all stereotypes.

Guess how well that worked? Not at all, that's how well it worked.

My mother THOUGHT it was working great on me at first. Whenever her mom-and-tot group played the What Do Little Boys Do Vs. Little Girls game, my mom would always BTFO them by pointing out that I consistently did the described "boy" thing despite being female. Man, she thought she was so smart. Then my sister got old enough to do her own thing and was simply the girliest thing that had ever fucking lived. Princess everything. Pink everything. Tea parties. Hating sports. My mom was so worried. My parents painted her room teal instead of pink and refused to repaint it.

>>8671524
>letting children be themselves instead of enforcing a weird genital based social-order is indoctrination and brainwashing

You've got an interesting definition of indoctrination.
>>8671525
How is no longer enforcing gender roles not the appropriate way to deal with the harm that comes from enforcing gender roles?
>>8671530
>That remains to be seen
Coincidentally that also applies to the supposed pros of strict gender role-enforcement, but doesn't apply to the cons of strict gender role enforcement which we are aware of.

Really makes you think huh

>>8671544
This post gave me the sad. I'm sorry anon ...

>>8671544
[cont]
Then I started say I was a boy and asking to be called by a boy's name. More panic. I was supposed to be a badass girl, not think I had to be a boy! I got showered in "feminist" things, which I despised. I don't recall anything that makes me think my mother's actions even made a difference: I thought of myself as male from my earliest memory. And all my mother's attempts to tell me that I could be "anything" I wanted to be told me that I could be anything except masculine, because masculine was bad. I liked boy's toys, but my mother didn't - not only were they NOT gender-neutral, but they were typically "violent," so less permissible than girl's toys.

My sister went on to become a heterosexual woman, and I went on to transition.

During the first few years of my transition, my mom and I talked a lot because she kept coming to me with things she'd remembered about me as a kid. It was all this stuff about people mistaking me for a boy, me doing very masculine things, that kind of shit, all the way back to the womb. (When she was pregnant with me, I kicked so much and so hard that everyone told her she was going to have a boy.)

I think my transition gave my mother a real come-to-Jesus-type moment of realizing how wrong she had been. Despite all her efforts, she had never been able to make my sister less hyper-feminine, and she'd ALSO never managed to make me less interested in stereotypically masculine things...although since I was trans, that failure to change my gendered behaviour had not be obvious at first. When I came out, it clarified any lingering confusion over the failed project.

So what do I think of this stuff? I think it's horrifying and abusive. There's literally no way these people don't think as much my mother did that masculine = bad. The /pol/ criticisms are RIGHT, this isn't "neutral" at all, it's about punishing the natural instincts of the children.

But ESPECIALLY the boys.

>>8671520
>Saying that you'll let your kids do whatever they want but you'll call them by their genetic sex unless they articulate dysphoria isn't liberal enough for me.

Lol.

>>8671515
The only strawman here is you trying to make this about "misgendering". That's not even what we're saying, nobody here is saying "don't call children he or she". We're talking about gender roles, that whole package of "men act, women are", how it's okay for girls to wear dresses but not for boys, etc. We're saying that people shouldn't be raised differently on the basis of their anatomy, EXCEPT in situations DIRECTLY affected by their anatomy.

>>8671524
>that is normal masculinity
NO, it's normal IN THE CONTEXT YOU WERE TAUGHT ABOUT IT. I'm not sure why you lot have such trouble understanding these underlying concepts, but often you do. The only 'normal' outside of a PURELY GENETIC FORCE is relative, not static, and since dysgenics is a thing, not even a purely genetic force is guaranteed to remain static.

The 'masculinity' you've been taught is poison. That's why it's CALLED 'toxic'. It's poison TO YOU, and then once your emotional blockage is in place, it's toxic to society at large. It has a very specific purpose, and that is to make you DUMB, MEAN, and EASY TO COMMAND. Now, whether that succeeds on any individual is thankfully a matter of willpower on some level, and maybe you aren't one of the bad ones. Most people are. And once you've seen it in action, it's so blatantly transparent that it makes my skin crawl. That's not masculinity.

Masculinity is strength in poise, not strength in fear. Its resilience to change, not terror of change. Its application of knowledge, not rejection of knowledge. It protects the weak, not protects the strong. It finds balance in its feminine half, not considers itself superior and attempts to crush it. Your masculinity is Jupiter Ascendant, but so ascendant he has become the braggart, the fool, the corpulent king. Come back to Earth, men, we really need you. We could REALLY use some actual men about now.

And I'll go on my way now, I'll all passioned out.

>>8671544
Your mom fucked up. The whole point is not to enforce gender roles at all, including gender neutrality, but to let the kid pick. It's not goddamned rocket science, when your kid gets old enough to pick out outfits and toys for themselves, you let them pick whatever, regardless of whether it fits stereotypes for their sex or not.

>>8671555
Here you go again with your misgendering strawman. They're not saying that we shouldn't use gendered pronouns, just that we shouldn't raise children differently based on their genetic sex.

>>8671564
But I've never advocated they should. They misunderstood my post and got defensive about it.

>>8671544
>>8671552
>My mother had kind of a similar idea to these people when I was a kid
>tells a personal anecdote not about gender neutral parenting but instead about enforced gender-non-conformity

What's your point? If your parents really raised you in a gender neutral fashion it wouldn't be a big deal to them if your sister embraced feminine gender roles. Clearly you're situation isn't the type we're discussing.
>>8671555
Nice straw man.

File: 1f1xy6.jpg (54KB, 991x902px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 991x902px

>>8671546
>How is no longer enforcing gender roles not the appropriate way to deal with the harm that comes from enforcing gender roles?
Because it's the gender roles that are too draconian, but they are still good guidelines. Allowing boys to cry and like girly things is okay, but you're advocating being something radically different
>Coincidentally that also applies to the supposed pros of strict gender role-enforcement, but doesn't apply to the cons of strict gender role enforcement which we are aware of.
It has gotten us this far
>Really makes you think huh
Holy shit you must be the most buttblasted person on /legbutt/ today, pls get a tripcode

>>8671562
But it's NOT just my mother, anon. You should pay attention to these kinds of debates playing out in parenting publications and so on - parents don't know how to handle their children picking "stereotypical" things because they don't know if it's really the child's choice or SO-SY-A-TEE telling the child to pick that thing. Parents like my mother aren't TRYING to fuck up; they're trying to perform what they THINK is a balancing act.

In reality, the basic premise is wrong - society is mostly the way it is because gender is biological.

>>8671570
Every level of whoosh.

>>8671581
And what part of let the kid pick is so hard? It doesn't matter if it's society, biology or the kid's actual choice, if they want feminine stuff or masculine stuff, let them have their choice.
Your child will not live in a void apart from society, so even if they pick stereotypical stuff, that's fine. Just as long as they aren't forced to pick it.
You know, if your girl picks a barbie, remind her she can have anything of that price in the store and if she still wants the barbie, let it go.

>>8671569
>thread about raising children without gender roles
>well I'm gonna raise my children like their birth sex!
>wait no guys I was talking about pro-nouns, not gender roles!

Seems like you misunderstood this thread buddy.
>they are still good guidelines
Why? What and even if they are, what makes them better than just letting a child do whatever they want and treating them like the individual they are?
>It has gotten us this far
Yeah and cancers come with us a long way too, that doesn't mean I'm gonna advocate against a cure for it.
>u mad
Whoa, calm down there buddy, don't epic troll me now.

So I have very little interest in seeing little kids being raise genderless as they don't have a gender identity really. I would like to see what would happen when these kids are preteens and teens and how they feel about their gender or lack of.

I could only stomach to watch a few minutes of the OP video but the "Mapa" was born intersex and therefor misgendered and now he has an axe to grind, but its weird that he forces this on his kids who are not intersex.

>>8671590
Second half is targeted at >>8671575

>>8671507
>why should gender boundaries exist
Because in the old days, if you weren't sufficiently manly or womanly enough, you and your lineage simply died and that was that. As civilization continued to advance, it was decided that establishing "gender boundaries" aka sufficient levels of genderness was better than letting people die or carrying useless/inefficient people. It's precisely those advanced societies that even allow gender arguments to take place in the first place.

Once womb transplant technology gets perfected, sex will be completely removed from the equation and it will be ideology vs ideology, and I just don't see how a bunch of faggots will be able to compete with millenia of testosterone when they can't even bring themselves to kill fucking chickens and cows, let alone another human.

>>8671601
>once artificial wombs are perfected that is when THE GENDER WARS SHALL TRULY BEGIN

What planet are you living on?

>>8671575
>Allowing boys to cry and like girly things is okay, but you're advocating being something radically different
What, SPECIFICALLY, do you consider them to be advocating?

>It has gotten us this far
That still means there's zero evidence that it's actually better than the alternatives being offered. And since those alternatives don't involve coercion, they're better BY DEFAULT, they would have to be considerably WORSE than what we do right now for them to be regarded as a worse choice. So basically burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that the coercion is justified by the benefits it provides.

>>8671581
So then you're okay with society being gender-neutral then? Because if gender is primarily biological, then people won't "lose" anything from being raised in a gender neutral society. It's a win-win for everyone.

>>8671608
Some weird "men are from mars, women are from venus" world where men and women are two different species that only ever live together and tolerate each other because it's essential for reproduction.

>>8671601
Yet we do live in an advanced society where gender boundaries serve essentially no practical purpose. So there is no valid reason for them to exist in our current society.

>>8671544
>>8671552
Giving gendered or stereotypical toys isn't the problem; giving only ones for the child's assigned sex is.

Not no guns and no barbies, but both guns and barbies. Not teal room and no boys names, but rooms and names the child picks.

Forcing "gender neutral" is no different to forcing a trans child into their assigned gender, or forcing a cis child into the other gender.

The problem with pink isn't that a child might want to be girly, it's that girls are made to be girly and boys aren't allowed to be. If a boy or girl wants a pink princess room, they should get it, without being forced into it because they're a girl or refused it because they're a boy or their parents want them to be gender neutral.

>Despite all her efforts, she had never been able to make my sister less hyper-feminine, and she'd ALSO never managed to make me less interested in stereotypically masculine things
This sums it up: she was replacing boys must be masculine and girls must be feminine with forbidding both femininity and masculinity. That's not what gender neutral parenting should be.

tl;dr this>>8671562

>this isn't "neutral" at all, it's about punishing the natural instincts of the children.
It should be the former. The latter is just a different kind of forcing stereotypes.

>But ESPECIALLY the boys.
Why the boys especially?

>>8671626
Because that anon is convinced all "gender neutral" stuff is just punishing boys for being masculine. You get that from MRAs too, that current society is forcefully feminizing boys and not allowing them to be real men anymore just because beating each other with sticks is no longer an accepted childhood pastime or whatever.

>>8671632
I think there's some truth in that but fundamentally any roles forced on children, whether it's making girls be girly, stopping boys being boyish, forcing trans kids to act cis or enforced neutrality, is harmful.

>>8671608
https://www.google.ca/search?q=womb+transplant+2017

>>8671590
>Seems like you misunderstood this thread buddy
Nope.

>>8671680
whoosh

>>8671693
>thread talking about gender roles
>makes an unrelated post about pronouns

Yeah.

>>8671712
Nope. But keep replying. This is funny.

>>8671716
>This is funny
Like when you threw an internet temper tantrum over people responding to your comment under the assumption that it was about the same topic as the rest of the conversation going on at the moment?

>>8671737
>He did it again.
Can I have another, ma'am? (male)

>>8671747
I'm just gonna take the choice to revert to shitposting when people called you out on your shit as a sign that you've gave up on trying to defend yourself. Have a nice day, I won't be mean to you on 4chan any longer.

>>8670761
I think it's fucking stupid, honestly. Implementing this into any educational system will confuse both dysphoric and non-dyshopric children.

Fucking SJWs I swear.

>>8671773
>no gender
>confusing
???

>tfw reading this thread makes you realise how much gender roles are a nasty collectivist spook for people too weak-willed to define themselves (so they need society to define them) and essentially afraid of their own freedom

>>8671783
>no gender
>confusing
>???
??? exactly. What fucking parent tells their kid "you are genderless and the rest of society is fucked up"? Irresponsible as fuck.

>>8671823
A truthful one.

File: IMG_2654.jpg (99KB, 483x512px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 483x512px

>raise boy and girls the same~~~
>there's literally nothing different about biological males and females

I want all trannys and gender neautral weirdos dead. I'm so happy you live a life of depression and anxiety and dysphoria, fucking freaks. Not everyone wants to be miserable like you

>>8671829
So what exactly do you think people should do to raise boys and girls differently?
Other than stuff that directly involves those differences, like potty training, why and how should a female be treated differently from a male?

>>8671829
Name one biological difference that means they should be raised differently.

Pretty sure there's no gene for liking blue that only comes on the Y chromosome.

>>8671203
if that looks like an attempt to appear smart, you need higher standards friendo

>>8671858
>>8671854
In the video they even say the kid likes to play with cars mostly but the freak parents buy him dolls and put dresses on him because his their little progressive science project. If you think that's not gonna fuck him up in some way, you're as mentally deranged as his parents. Poor kids gonna have masculinity and confidence problems his whole life

>>8671828
>A truthful one.
A truthful parent denies gender, yet they fulfill gender roles by mating, an act by ONE female and ONE male, and produce a child. They probably teach the child that two women can make a baby too. You fucking idiots. This is why no one likes you.

>>8671868
>replies to two posts
>doesn't answer the questions of either of them

>>8671868
That's not an answer to what I asked. I think we can agree that kids should be allowed to play with what toys they prefer, regardless of sex.

If a girl preferred to play with cars and wear boys clothes, then would be just as messed up for the parents to put her in dresses and make her play with dolls.

>>8671868
But putting girls in dresses isn't going to harm their confidence?

>>8670761

why does this guy look like a meth addict ?

>>8671878
"As it turns out, the toys the kids requested for themselves were more likely to be gender-stereotyped (e.g., boys asked for “masculine" toys). When parents chose the toys, they tended to give gender-neutral gifts, like art supplies, musical instruments, and educational toys (Robinson and Morris 1986).

Not terribly surprising, right? But here’s the kicker. In the Robinson and Morris study, it was mostly the boys who were requesting gender-stereotyped toys.

At every age, about 75% of their requests were for “boy toys." But girls didn’t show a similar preference for gender-stereotyped toys until they were 5 years old."
http://www.parentingscience.com/girl-toys-and-parenting.html

>>8671885
Still haven't answered either question >>8671858 >>8671854 you chicken.

>>8671891
I'm not that anon faggot. I was just wanting to contribute to the conversation by providing some more information.

>>8671879
Go ask some girls if wearing dresses make them feel ugly and unconfident

>>8671878
Agreed but these parents clearly are raising the kids with their own gender less agenda in mind by putting the little kid in a dress, he doesn't know any better and will just wear it. He is most likely a regular cis male who is being for being forced to partake in feminine activity.

>>8671872
http://www.fitbrains.com/blog/women-men-brains/

>>8671611
>So then you're okay with society being gender-neutral then?
It's unnatural and I'm extremely against it.
>then people won't "lose" anything
Yeah, other than the natural expression of their gender.

>>8671626
>Forcing "gender neutral" is no different to forcing a trans child into their assigned gender,
Correct, and that's my point.

You GENUINELY believe that people are going to be able to pull this theoretical "gender neutral" parenting off without being biased in any direction. That's very nice-sounding, but we're operating in the real world here where that is NOT going to happen.

>Why the boys especially?
I explained this already, but I'll repeat it: if you draw a Venn diagram of the people who believe gender is a social construct and that assigning a child a gender is "wrong" AND the people who believe in "toxic masculinity," you are likely going to get close to a perfect circle.

My mother didn't JUST take masculine toys away from me because they weren't "neutral" enough - that wasn't the whole problem. It was also that "violent" toys reinforced the "wrong" gendered ideas. So I was not allowed toy weapons, not allowed to play "violent" video games, not allowed to get most of the toys on the boys shelf specifically because they involved soldiers or something like that.

Girl's toys are not "toxic," therefore they are ALL allowed and the overall result is skewed against boys.

>>8671632
I'm "convinced" of that because it was literally what happened to me.

>>8671811
tfw people are really this invested in believing nature don't real

>>8671829
I'm telling you, no actually tranny is going to put their "yea" behind this insanity, stop blaming us.

>>8671885
You're going to have to explain how this is proving anything about my post. I literally said kids should get to play with the toys they prefer. If a boy prefers toys that are stereotypical for boys, he should get to play with them. I just think he shouldn't be forced to if those aren't his preference and that a girl who prefers those toys should also get to play with them.

>>8670792
And Im glad we have a VP that'll zap the fag outta all you.

File: stirner.jpg (46KB, 600x706px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 600x706px

>>8671897
>muh nature makes boys like cars and girls like dolls
guess the real power of spooks is how good they are at making people believe they're simply "how things work"

>>8671896
At this point, I don't think anyone is talking about the people in OP. The people in OP fucked up by forcing kids into stuff, but just because they fucked up doesn't make the whole idea of gender neutrality bad.

>>8671897
Your mom did not actually raise you gender neutrally from what you said earlier. She simply inverted the stereotypes and forced you into them.

>>8671911
In specifically talking about the freaks in OP

>>8671899
I agree with you though...

>>8671823
But nobody's saying that kids should be told that they're "genderless". They're just saying that you shouldn't be treated differently because of gender. Kids aren't born with the idea that people should be automatically treated differently on the basis of gender; what's confusing to children is that society is so visibly gender segregated in the first place.

>>8671829
>>there's literally nothing different about biological males and females
Nobody's saying that, they're just saying it's stupid to use as a blanket response to treat males and females as fundamentally different in every absurd way, REGARDLESS of whether it actually makes sense when considering biological differences.

>>8671870
>>8671870
>A truthful parent denies gender, yet they fulfill gender roles by mating, an act by ONE female and ONE male, and produce a child
Except that isn't really "gender roles" because that's one of the FEW situations where the biological differences actually are relevant. Reproduction can only occur between a fertile biological male and a fertile biological female, nobody's arguing otherwise. But to use that to "justify" the idea that boys should be forbidden from wearing dresses, or that boys should be active and girls should be passive, is utterly nonsensical.

>>8671896
>Go ask some girls if wearing dresses make them feel ugly and unconfident
Why don't you ask them how they feel about being coerced as children into expressing their gender in a certain way? You honestly should have done that before you decided to defend this coercion.

>>8671896
>http://www.fitbrains.com/blog/women-men-brains/
Still not an answer to either of the questions. The article itself admits that it's only talking about averages. What you're defending is essentially the idea that if a girl is KNOWN to have a more male-like brain, you should still raise her as if she has a completely average female brain. Which is just plain silly.

>>8671896
So is your point that if girl doesn't want to wear a dress, she should be forced to because she has a female brain?

>>8671897
>It's unnatural and I'm extremely against it.
Natural isn't always good, unnatural isn't always bad. But coercion is almost always bad.

>Yeah, other than the natural expression of their gender.
Except they're not forbidden from doing so. People can still be masculine men or feminine women, IF THEY WANT TO. The only thing that's being forbidden is coercing people into expressing themselves that way.

>You GENUINELY believe that people are going to be able to pull this theoretical "gender neutral" parenting off without being biased in any direction. That's very nice-sounding, but we're operating in the real world here where that is NOT going to happen.
Non-gender-neutral parenting is BIASED BY DEFINITION. You say bias is bad, but apparently you only criticize it when it's bias AGAINST traditional gender roles. I think ALL bias is bad, which is why I support gender-neutrality. It's not going to completely eliminate bias, but it's a move away from the systematic bias we have today. It's an improvement, it's less biased, even if there is still SOME bias.

>I explained this already, but I'll repeat it: if you draw a Venn diagram of the people who believe gender is a social construct and that assigning a child a gender is "wrong" AND the people who believe in "toxic masculinity," you are likely going to get close to a perfect circle.
The WHOLE POINT of toxic masculinity is that not all masculinity is toxic, that's why they call it "toxic masculinity" not just "masculinity". You're basically saying that you refuse to tolerate ANY criticism of ANY form of masculinity without taking it as a personal attack.

>>8671928
>what's confusing to children is that society is so visibly gender segregated in the first place.
It's not confusing. It's how society has always been, has always developed, and has gotten to this point in history. Men and women provide different roles. If evolution didn't care for gender specific roles, we'd all be a mix of men-women hermaphrodites (we're not).

Trannys and genderless people: I feel uncomfortable with gender norms so everyone should. Everyone who feels secure with their gender is wrong and was forced to feel like that from birth. I am the normal one!!!11

>>8671928
>But to use that to "justify" the idea that boys should be forbidden from wearing dresses, or that boys should be active and girls should be passive, is utterly nonsensical.
No one is believing this and it will never catch on to the greater masses of society. There is a right and wrong, whether you like it or not, that dictates how one should act according to ones own gender. If we stop that, it bleed over into kids acting like animals or people we deem sick in the head.

>>8671951
But a lot of gender stereotypes have nothing to do with biological roles.
When a little kid asks why can't boys wear dresses and gets told because dresses aren't for boys, that has nothing to do with biology.

>>8671934
No my point is that girls feel comfortable and confident in dresses. Pretty simple actually

>>8671928
>What you're defending is essentially the idea that if a girl is KNOWN to have a more male-like brain, you should still raise her as if she has a completely average female brain.
Lol where did you get that from. My whole point is that on average boys and girls are wired differently, the toys they play with reflect their specific interests, and forcing a boy to wear dresses and play with dolls because it fits into your idea of gender is dumb and harmful.

And now you'll respond "durrr well forcing girls to play with dolls is bad blah blah". The average girl enjoys that naturally. Just because you're non binary and all messed up, doesn't mean every girl is

>>8671897
>My mother didn't JUST take masculine toys away from me because they weren't "neutral" enough - that wasn't the whole problem. It was also that "violent" toys reinforced the "wrong" gendered ideas. So I was not allowed toy weapons, not allowed to play "violent" video games, not allowed to get most of the toys on the boys shelf specifically because they involved soldiers or something like that.
Do you not see how a parent might be opposed to "promoting violence", without it being a gender thing? I mean, there used to be this whole controversy about violent video games, that wasn't really about gender, it was about the belief that exposure to violent media would cause people to become desensitized to violence.

And yes, to an extent, such policies will have a greater effect on boys, if boys are indeed more drawn to violent toys and games. But saying such policies are "bad" because "anti-violence campaigns" or whatever disproportionately affect boys, that's kind of like saying basic Western secular laws are "bad" because they're at odds with the cultural values of immigrants from the other side of the world.

>I'm "convinced" of that because it was literally what happened to me.
They did say ALL. You're basically condemning the entire principle of "gender neutral" based on how your mother treated you, even though it's been repeatedly specified that "forced genderlessness" is not what people are talking about when they advocate gender neutrality. Do you really want to become the next Walt Heyer?

>>8671969
But there are girls (or children perceived as girls) that do not want to wear dresses and not comfortable or confident in them. You ever hear of a tomboy or butch lesbian before?

They shouldn't be forced into dresses any more than a boy that doesn't want to wear dresses should be. Just because the average girl likes dolls and dresses doesn't mean they all do and it's wrong to force kids into gender stereotypes, either way.

>>8671897
>You GENUINELY believe that people are going to be able to pull this theoretical "gender neutral" parenting off without being biased in any direction. That's very nice-sounding, but we're operating in the real world here where that is NOT going to happen.
My parenting was very gender neutral. Maybe not 100% but I can't think of any way it wasn't besides being dressed as my assigned sex.

>>8671897
>tfw people are really this invested in believing nature don't real
It's not that "nature isn't real", it's that we've built up this whole belief system that we use nature to justify, even though it doesn't actually derive from the nature of reality in any meaningful sense. The existence of nature doesn't deny us our free will - gender roles, however, do. By treating nature and gender roles as one and the same, we have convinced ourselves that certain expressions of our free will are unnatural.

>>8671951
The roles of men and women do differ between times and cultures though. And the commonality between gender roles of different societies is not strictly biological, rather they arose because of CONSEQUENCES of biology. In other words, people aren't born thinking men and women are fundamentally different, or that they should have fundamentally different roles. That's something that has to be learned over time. One can be fully aware of the biological differences between men and women, while also finding gender roles absurd. Not to mention that you're basically denying that society has any meaningful existence - there definitely are different "roles" in terms of say reproduction, but that's not what "gender roles" generally refers to. Gender roles are something far broader, like differences in acceptable clothing and behavior, things like that. At most those are only indirectly related to biology, and in reality are maintained largely through upbringing, not genetics.

>>8671953
No one's saying that, next time read the thread before you respond and make a fool of yourself. We're just saying that gender roles shouldn't be forced on people, not that "traditional" gender expression should be shamed or criminalized. "Normal" is irrelevant - plenty of people aren't "normal", and there's nothing wrong with that so long as their abnormality isn't of a form that harms people.

>>8671897
So you said you are trans, presumably FtM? Would your childhood really have been better in a household where you were just forced into female stereotypical stuff, aka a normal household? A lot of people won't let their "girls" be tomboys either, after all, especially when they start getting older.

>>8671959
Give me an example of something that's right for one gender and wrong for the other.

>>8671969
>No my point is that girls feel comfortable and confident in dresses. Pretty simple actually
On average they do. The question is how you would respond to those girls who don't to wear dresses.

>>8671969
>Lol where did you get that from. My whole point is that on average boys and girls are wired differently, the toys they play with reflect their specific interests, and forcing a boy to wear dresses and play with dolls because it fits into your idea of gender is dumb and harmful.
>And now you'll respond "durrr well forcing girls to play with dolls is bad blah blah". The average girl enjoys that naturally. Just because you're non binary and all messed up, doesn't mean every girl is
Once again my whole point is that people shouldn't be forced into anything. People shouldn't be forced to be gender-conforming, or forced to not be gender-conforming. That's what "gender neutrality" means, it doesn't mean forcibly suppressing "gendered" behavior, it means letting people decide as individuals. If a girl wants to be feminine, she'll be allowed to. What won't be allowed is forcing girls to be feminine, or boys to be masculine, against their will.

>>8671977
Agreed but my entire point pertains to OPs people. They are putting their kid in a dress not because he walked up to them and asked, but because they're forcing onto him their own idea of gender , and i believe this will have negative effects on the kids masculine identity and sense of self in the long run, considering he more than likely is just a regular cis boy

>>8671753
Thank you ma'am (male). May I have another?

>>8672006
>Once again my whole point is that people shouldn't be forced into anything. People shouldn't be forced to be gender-conforming, or forced to not be gender-conforming. That's what "gender neutrality" means, it doesn't mean forcibly suppressing "gendered" behavior, it means letting people decide as individuals. If a girl wants to be feminine, she'll be allowed to. What won't be allowed is forcing girls to be feminine, or boys to be masculine, against their will.

THIS.

>>8672009
Yeah, I think everyone here agrees if a boy doesn't want to wear a dress, he shouldn't be forced to and the people in OP fucked up there. But the way you responded implied to me that you think it's wrong to force a boy into dresses but it's okay to force girls into dresses. Am I right or did I fuck up?

>>8672024
Im saying on average, girls feel confident and pretty in dresses so the vast majority of the time it's not being forced. But for the few who don't, shouldn't be forced to obviously.

>>8671967
Gender stereotypes reinforce cultural and biological norms that we have deemed acceptable in society. End of story. Parent your kid however you want, just don't enforce that degeneracy on others through legislation or activism.

>>8672034
We're only proposing legislation that forbids coercion and force. If you oppose coercion, then we have no issue with what you want. On the other hand, if you think forcing children to follow "traditional values" is acceptable, that's another matter.