Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
If gender is a social construct, then teaching the details of other genders (beyond the two primary ones) would only be confusing if you start with the premise that there are “two primary” ones. Conversations about gender don’t have to be complex or get into details, but I don’t think starting with a foundation based on their being two primary genders “and then some others exist” is really helpful to anyone, especially a child. It can as simple as explaining what gender is and a handful of examples of how people identify without getting into primary/secondary/tertiary gender categories, right?
The rule does force some children to hide who they are or how they feel like expressing themselves at school, if they don’t want parents to know.
|
I'm not an expert on the topic, so forgive me if I misspeak. This topic is kinda hard to discuss at times without accidently wandering off and getting lost in a bunch of noise. I try, but at times, unfortunately I just don't get it.
IMO two primary genders is not confusing. Our current world is literally like this. The vast majority of individual for now identify as male/female and gender norms wise we typically have male/female washrooms. As such, we have a gender norm expectations for these two primary categories. My thought process is that in this era of humanity, we teach kids how things are now. Then we equip them on how to address potential future change because there are a small current minority who fall into a category that is not the vast majority two.
If we are starting from scratch, I agree with you. But my kids are not starting from scratch. They are in this world so they will be part of the generation that has to embrace the flaws of this world and then change it from within.
Whether male and female will no longer be appropriate as the "vast majority" in the future, I do not know. But my comments are based on the fact that this is the reality we have as of now. That's why I suggested the path that I did above and that's how I personally plan on teaching my kids going forward. I'm not on the cutting edge of understanding this scenario, but I can only say that I plan on doing my best and doing it in a way that I feel is fair to my wife and I and our children. I grew up in an era where there was intolerance and disrespect. I've distilled things down to focusing on the acceptance and respect of all. Beyond that, I don't know. This is ultimately is still a topic that is relatively new to me.
I will likely have to deal with people who are Christofascists whether they be parents of peers, friends etc. and honestly speaking, I find more value in not engaging morons and spending more times in developing great human being (my kids). That's my stance. I will defend those who deserve defending and extend support as I am capable of doing, I just wouldn't spend time to specifically seek these types of individuals out, if that makes sense. I had my younger years where I'd debate and argue with people about understanding gender fluidity... I've concluded this is an absolute waste of time and my path is going to be a different one.
I agree the rule can force kids to hide who they are and how they express themselves if the schools are required to disclose that information to parents, with or without being requested to do so. Sorry, I misspoke there. I do want to ensure it is known that I do think and agree with you that the rule is stupid.
I meant that in general, most kids won't really hide who they are based solely or specifically to this rule. I meant that I felt that the odds that certain kids are terrified to express who they truly are will be for reasons that likely transcend this rule. The kids will be terrified of expressing who they are based on what they know the situation at home is, not because they do some research and find out the teachers have to tell their parents if they decide to openly explore this at Junior high age vs High School age.