Once again, we see that those who scream the loudest about “diversity” are those who take every measure to abolish it:
“In an effort to support gender neutrality, Sweden recently added a gender-neutral pronoun, ‘hen,’ to the country’s National Encyclopedia. Slate reports that several preschools in Sweden have stopped making references to the gender of their students. Instead of calling children ‘boys and girls,’ teachers are referring to students as ‘buddies.’ One school even stopped allowing free playtime during the day because stereotypical gender patterns are born and cemented. In free play there is hierarchy, exclusion, and the seed to bullying.’ And the country just published its first gender-neutral children’s book, ‘Kivi och Monsterhund.’“
Pardon my bourgeois instincts, but wouldn’t true “gender neutrality” entail teaching respect for others’ differences and for encouraging individuality?
There’s nothing we can do about Sweden; it’s a utopian socialist enclave run by “Harrison Bergeron”-inspired technocrats. But we can do something about the United States, and that is to remain fiercely vigilant about these types of stories emanating from the fallen parts of the West. Stay mad and stay loud: it’s the only way.
They have not thought this through enough. You can’t call them “buddies” that is exclusionary and heirachical. They should be called “trees”.
This actually has nothing to do with government spending, levels of taxation or social programs, so hyperbolic comments about Sweden being “socialist utopia” are unnecessary in this story. This is the age old insistence of man to redefine his existence, this time it’s gender and its role in society.
For once, it’s not the fault of a failed economic system.
The key to understanding this phenomenon is assuming a view of human freedom that human beings should be able to do whatever they want. This view is incompatible with the existence of objective morals (moral statements that are true independent of human beliefs about them).
By a strange trick of mind, this kind of freedom is good as in itself and should be pursued by itself (contradiction #1), and hindering its progress is bad, very bad (contradiction #2).
A better formulation of human freedom is that one can choose to do the right thing. This concept of freedom leads to discussion of ethics and what is right and wrong.
“For once, it’s not the fault of a failed economic system.”
True.
I do think, however, that the Gnostic revolt against material reality (in this case against sexuality) is almost necessarily associated with a contempt for private property or for any economic individuation. At least that has been true historically.
To the extent that there is any cause and effect, I’d say that Gnostics are necessarily socialists, but socialists are not necessarily Gnostic.
(Good thoughts about freedom, BTW.)
Actually, it does because in Sweden, EVERYTHING is about the government, spending, and social programs. The general populations mildly resist the governmental messages, and deep down they know the messages are often ridiculous, but the government continues it’s messages. I’ve lived there- obviously with the name “Hejsan” and I saw many, many billboards and advertisements solely designed to promote the government’s social messages! They even use nudity! True-only in Sweden! Here in American we see billboards, advertisements, etc. to market a product of some sort, NOT the governmental views (though Obama would love to market more his liberalism and have even more control).
Is this about the _current_ Swedish government, though, or is it the product of education bureaucrat leftovers from former Social Democratic governments?
I would not be so sure that it is not happening here. Without realizing it, I was pretty much raised to be a man. I was constantly pressured to turn off my fertility with pills, convinced that the only purpose in life is to pursue a career, introduced to the idea of sexual pleasure in public schools before I even had an ounce of sexuality in me. Never was I taught that I had a choice to a life with deeper meaning. When I was 28 and pregnant my internal women came roaring to life within me. Deep down I had always known that I wanted to be a mommy and a wife. Now I am the counterculture, a radical, because GASP I am a mommy.
I think it is abusive to raise children in a forced genderless environment. They even admit that free play leads to natural gender differentiation. It is biological and natural. They are an abusive cult. It is not right to intentionally suppress and pervert natural identities and maternal desires.
You’re not supposed to notice the world is run by an abusive cult. Time to write sentences.
“This is just normal politics” 50x
“Our humanity is a curse” 50x
“Green is our salvation” 50x
“One gender is our way” 50x
“Brainwashing is bliss” 1,000x
Oh right. I will go get the chalk. I am a bad girl… er I mean uh what am I? Oh right, a hen.
One of the worst experiences of my entire life was being forced to play coed dodgeball in PE class. I am not innately competitive and boys are physically stronger than girls. It was loads of fun having balls whipped at my face by the boys. What an awesome idea. Newsflash, I am not a man nor do I want to be a man.
Being a stay at home mom is kind of like skipping gym class. I would rather be playing with dollies than getting smashed in the face playing with the boys.
Well, Sweeden scores better in private property protection than the USA even with a conservative Court .30th for Se , 38 for USA
Maybe it’s just a Swedish-to-English translation thing, but I cringe at the notion of using the term “buddies” to describe the teacher-student relationship in elementary schools. I grew up with a bit of a rough crowd, and I can recall at least a half dozen crude jokes about what the definition of being a real “buddy” implies.
Using the titles “Professor X” and “Student X” would be a better way to demonstrate mutual respect between teachers and students.
hens? that is the best they could come up with? not pickles, or cabbages? i don’t have much faith in the psychological “sciences”; however, this bunch sounds like they would be right at home in a woody allen movie. i really liked the one where they had a sex machine. woody kept hiding in it. i’m definitely getting one of those someday. probably have to order it from japan, or china. think i’ll call it hen, or buddy.
The reference to Mao is not inappropriate, in a way you evidently are not aware of. TheChinese have no differentiation in their language for human gender. A Taiwanese business man once informed me, “My wife, he is very sick.” They have been getting along with this for thousands of years, long before Mao came along and he, despite his fascination with all things “western”, made no effort to change it. Even Communists aren’t as dumb as swedish educators.
What a waste! At one time Swedish chicks were the international gold standard of hotness. Remember the Swedish Bikini Team?
If Swedish culture adopts this gender neutrality nonsense, within a generation Sweden will go from being the world’s acknowledged leader in producing hot chicks to being a runner up to perennial back-markers like Bulgaria.
Just imagine an entire population of “gender neutral” Swedish people. For sure they’d be clean, non-threatening, artsy, and sensitive. But they’d also have absolutely no mechanical aptitude. So who would they get to fix their Volvo’s and SAAB’s?
I am Swedish and I am so embarrassed that this ridiculous non-event is getting notice. It is true that we have some very active feminists/homosexuals with too much influence in the cultural debate and the results of their crazy ideas are among other things this “hen” pronoun and this silly little book. But I can assure you that people in the real world never use that word and most people just yawn and think, oh, let these lunatics play their little games. They are just attention seekers.I mean, you have Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan and others of similar kind. But I really think we shouldn´t be so tolerant, they should be stopped sometimes.
“Pardon my bourgeois instincts, but wouldn’t true “gender neutrality” entail teaching respect for others’ differences and for encouraging individuality?”
Maybe even better would be for the federal government to leave education to local school systems. If individual states within the United States wish to govern with a “progressive” bent, then according to original constitutional intent, citizens could vote with their feet and move to a state with laws that suited them better. In fact, maybe we should concentrate on ways to limit the grasp of the federal government in every respect in accordance with the original intent of the framers of the constitution.