What's a "Purple Penguin"?The gender inclusive name for boys & girls in Nebraska public schools

[Saint Frankenstein]

Of course it doesn't pretend gender doesn't exist. It is all about gender. It presents gender as a spectrum and differentiates between physical gender, gender identitification, gender association and sexual orientation.

Read the first two suggestions in the pamplet:

http://watchdog.wpengine.netdna-cdn...014/10/Gender-inclusive-training-handouts.pdf

Yes, this is an attack on the binary and seeks to undermine that males and females exist as if even admitting that is some terrible discriminatory act.

Hardly anyone lives at either extreme of all four categories. For example, while my physical gender and gender identity is female, much of my behavior, occupation, interests and hobbies are very far toward the masculine side, and I have fallen for women a couple times. So how does enforcing a gender binary - where everyone is forced to cram into a narrow definition of a male or female - work for me? In my experience, when others expect particular behavior and interests from me because I'm female, it's just a pain in my backside, if not a major obstacle to pursuing my career. There are no benefits that I can see, unless you like dealing with people who are confused and disturbed by your nature.

You're misunderstanding me. I'm saying that most people, including the majority of trans and intersex people, fit into a binary identity. People have this idea that gender binary crossed over into behaviors, mannerisms and interests. It doesn't or it shouldn't, which is why I said that identities and behaviors/interests need to be separated. Just because one is a boy/man/male and one is a girl/woman/female does not mean that they should be expected or forced into any pattern of behavior or expected to have certain interests.

What's wrong with queer theory and post-modernism when it comes to gender is that it conflates gender identity, behavior and interests. So if a boy wears a dress, he's seen as "gender non-conforming" and shoved under the trans umbrella. Or maybe he likes to wear dresses and pants, so he's "bigender". Maybe he's effeminate and so he's "genderqueer"!

I see this a lot. Even at Pride this year, I was talking to a gay who seemed like just another run of the mill semi-effeminate gay dude and I mentioned being trans and he said that he is too and said he was genderqueer. I was astonished. This is how ridiculous this has gotten. It seems like the only people who can call themselves men with no qualifiers are super macho, heterosexual Rambo types.

There's a similar thing going on with females and it's become since become such an issue that it's now called "trans trending". Those people think that because they have short hairstyles, idolize gay men and don't like dresses and skirts that they must be transgender! They don't really have a conflict towards their bodies but, to their minds, they just can't be girls because they're not girly-girls who like pink and want to be princesses! So they say they're "genderqueer" or "bois". Some of them jump straight on testosterone (because there aren't many checks anymore and it's becoming somewhat of a free-for-all) and end up very disappointed when they don't end up looking like a sexy androgynous anime character. They think they can pick and choose which effects the hormones have on them. (Similarly, some males freak out on estrogens because they find that their dicks stop working and shrink.) Obviously, this shatters their fantasy/delusion.

Most of these people doing this are middle class white people who appear to be bored with their lives and want to be "special" or they're college students who were brainwashed by their queer theory professors. It's the same thing that happened with the bisexual fad of the last decade. In hipster circles, it's cool to be trans just like it was cool to be bi.

So this is a problem and makes transsexuals look bad. It also reifies sexism and strict gender roles.

I'm just a man. I don't even like having qualifying adjectives. Doesn't matter if I like to cross dress at times or even wear some makeup. I can mince all I want, gesticulate wildly and cross my legs over the knee. Doesn't make me any less of a man. I think that's more revolutionary than what's going on. That's what these people don't get. They're creating unnecessary ghettos, "us vs. them" situations and people are misusing terms and concepts and confusing the discussion by making up dozens and dozens of new identities, anti-identities and pronouns. I'm sure that when they get older, they'll drop it and be boring like the rest of us but the damage will have been done.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Read the first two suggestions in the pamplet:

http://watchdog.wpengine.netdna-cdn...014/10/Gender-inclusive-training-handouts.pdf

Yes, this is an attack on the binary and seeks to undermine that males and females exist as if even admitting that is some terrible discriminatory act.

You're misunderstanding me. I'm saying that most people, including the majority of trans and intersex people, fit into a binary identity. People have this idea that gender binary crossed over into behaviors, mannerisms and interests. It doesn't or it shouldn't, which is why I said that identities and behaviors/interests need to be separated. Just because one is a boy/man/male and one is a girl/woman/female does not mean that they should be expected or forced into any pattern of behavior or expected to have certain interests.

What's wrong with queer theory and post-modernism when it comes to gender is that it conflates gender identity, behavior and interests. So if a boy wears a dress, he's seen as "gender non-conforming" and shoved under the trans umbrella. Or maybe he likes to wear dresses and pants, so he's "bigender". Maybe he's effeminate and so he's "genderqueer"!

I see this a lot. Even at Pride this year, I was talking to a gay who seemed like just another run of the mill semi-effeminate gay dude and I mentioned being trans and he said that he is too and said he was genderqueer. I was astonished. This is how ridiculous this has gotten. It seems like the only people who can call themselves men with no qualifiers are super macho, heterosexual Rambo types.

There's a similar thing going on with females and it's become since become such an issue that it's now called "trans trending". Those people think that because they have short hairstyles, idolize gay men and don't like dresses and skirts that they must be transgender! They don't really have a conflict towards their bodies but, to their minds, they just can't be girls because they're not girly-girls who like pink and want to be princesses! So they say they're "genderqueer" or "bois". Some of them jump straight on testosterone (because there aren't many checks anymore and it's becoming somewhat of a free-for-all) and end up very disappointed when they don't end up looking like a sexy androgynous anime character. They think they can pick and choose which effects the hormones have on them. (Similarly, some males freak out on estrogens because they find that their dicks stop working and shrink.) Obviously, this shatters their fantasy/delusion.

Most of these people doing this are middle class white people who appear to be bored with their lives and want to be "special" or they're college students who were brainwashed by their queer theory professors. It's the same thing that happened with the bisexual fad of the last decade. In hipster circles, it's cool to be trans just like it was cool to be bi.

So this is a problem and makes transsexuals look bad. It also reifies sexism and strict gender roles.

I'm just a man. I don't even like having qualifying adjectives. Doesn't matter if I like to cross dress at times or even wear some makeup. I can mince all I want, gesticulate wildly and cross my legs over the knee. Doesn't make me any less of a man. I think that's more revolutionary than what's going on. That's what these people don't get. They're creating unnecessary ghettos, "us vs. them" situations and people are misusing terms and concepts and confusing the discussion by making up dozens and dozens of new identities, anti-identities and pronouns. I'm sure that when they get older, they'll drop it and be boring like the rest of us but the damage will have been done.

I make a distinction between stereotypical gender roles (which I think you're rejecting, and rightly so) and personal expressions of gender identity.

I agree that it's wrong to say things like "that woman likes to work on cars even though she likes men, so she must be trans", but in general, I'm going to accept and respect it when someone says "I'm trans, and (insert behaviour) is part of how I express my gender."

Is it that you reject the idea of gender expression? That's the impression I get from your arguments. My personal feeling is that even though prescribed gender roles are harmful nonsense, people do express gender to the world in manners of their own choosing.

I agree that we shouldn't pigeonhole short hair as inherently "male" or dress-wearing as inherently "female". At the same time, though, people do use behaviour and appearance to signal to people they might connect with that they're the gender that the other person might want to connect with, too... even if how this is done varies from person to person.

 

[Alceste]

Read the first two suggestions in the pamplet:

http://watchdog.wpengine.netdna-cdn...014/10/Gender-inclusive-training-handouts.pdf

Yes, this is an attack on the binary and seeks to undermine that males and females exist as if even admitting that is some terrible discriminatory act.

You're misunderstanding me. I'm saying that most people, including the majority of trans and intersex people, fit into a binary identity. People have this idea that gender binary crossed over into behaviors, mannerisms and interests. It doesn't or it shouldn't, which is why I said that identities and behaviors/interests need to be separated. Just because one is a boy/man/male and one is a girl/woman/female does not mean that they should be expected or forced into any pattern of behavior or expected to have certain interests.

What's wrong with queer theory and post-modernism when it comes to gender is that it conflates gender identity, behavior and interests. So if a boy wears a dress, he's seen as "gender non-conforming" and shoved under the trans umbrella. Or maybe he likes to wear dresses and pants, so he's "bigender". Maybe he's effeminate and so he's "genderqueer"!

I see this a lot. Even at Pride this year, I was talking to a gay who seemed like just another run of the mill semi-effeminate gay dude and I mentioned being trans and he said that he is too and said he was genderqueer. I was astonished. This is how ridiculous this has gotten. It seems like the only people who can call themselves men with no qualifiers are super macho, heterosexual Rambo types.

There's a similar thing going on with females and it's become since become such an issue that it's now called "trans trending". Those people think that because they have short hairstyles, idolize gay men and don't like dresses and skirts that they must be transgender! They don't really have a conflict towards their bodies but, to their minds, they just can't be girls because they're not girly-girls who like pink and want to be princesses! So they say they're "genderqueer" or "bois". Some of them jump straight on testosterone (because there aren't many checks anymore and it's becoming somewhat of a free-for-all) and end up very disappointed when they don't end up looking like a sexy androgynous anime character. They think they can pick and choose which effects the hormones have on them. (Similarly, some males freak out on estrogens because they find that their dicks stop working and shrink.) Obviously, this shatters their fantasy/delusion.

Most of these people doing this are middle class white people who appear to be bored with their lives and want to be "special" or they're college students who were brainwashed by their queer theory professors. It's the same thing that happened with the bisexual fad of the last decade. In hipster circles, it's cool to be trans just like it was cool to be bi.

So this is a problem and makes transsexuals look bad. It also reifies sexism and strict gender roles.

I'm just a man. I don't even like having qualifying adjectives. Doesn't matter if I like to cross dress at times or even wear some makeup. I can mince all I want, gesticulate wildly and cross my legs over the knee. Doesn't make me any less of a man. I think that's more revolutionary than what's going on. That's what these people don't get. They're creating unnecessary ghettos, "us vs. them" situations and people are misusing terms and concepts and confusing the discussion by making up dozens and dozens of new identities, anti-identities and pronouns. I'm sure that when they get older, they'll drop it and be boring like the rest of us but the damage will have been done.

See, I'm fine with you identifying as a man. But I'm also fine with other people identifying as something else, or something in between. Or a little of both. I've been a little overwhelmed myself by the proliferation of labels in the LGBTQ community, but if those categories are useful to people who want to communicate more about themselves than simply which batch of genitals they're sporting, I'm fine with that. I have a friend who was bisexual when we met, but decided to go full lesbian. She took a while to figure out how to connect online with a fairly narrow category of women she might want to date, and found that attaching a bunch of adjectives to "lesbian" really helped. I can't remember them, but I do remember her telling me how much better she felt by realizing they were useful for describing herself to possible dates .

I'm fine with you being a man, and fine with her being a femme lacto-ovo genderqueer corset-monkey lesbian or whatever it is too. As long as you're both happy, what business is it of mine how you describe yourself?

This pamphlet only suggests saying things like "let's go, athletes!" in gym class instead of "let's go, boys and girls!" It's only the thoughtless reinforcement of a gender binary world view they're advising against. Many of the rest of the points advise discussing sex and gender openly, from a perspective of being inclusive and accepting of gender diversity. And that spectrum of diversity obviously includes boys and girls. It doesn't pretend there is no such thing.

I agree with you that your physical gender shouldn't be bundled together with social expectations about your behaviour, identity and sexuality. It shouldn't be, but it is. And that binary view is very deeply entrenched. I don't see how defending a gender binary world view advances the objective of getting people to differentiate between physical sex and gender expression and identity.

 

[Alceste]

I make a distinction between stereotypical gender roles (which I think you're rejecting, and rightly so) and personal expressions of gender identity.

I agree that it's wrong to say things like "that woman likes to work on cars even though she likes men, so she must be trans", but in general, I'm going to accept and respect it when someone says "I'm trans, and (insert behaviour) is part of how I express my gender."

Is it that you reject the idea of gender expression? That's the impression I get from your arguments. My personal feeling is that even though prescribed gender roles are harmful nonsense, people do express gender to the world in manners of their own choosing.

I agree that we shouldn't pigeonhole short hair as inherently "male" or dress-wearing as inherently "female". At the same time, though, people do use behaviour and appearance to signal to people they might connect with that they're the gender that the other person might want to connect with, too... even if how this is done varies from person to person.

Exactly. The adjectives "masculine" and "feminine" are here to stay, regardless of whether we personally bundle physical sex and gender expression together or not. As long as one end of that spectrum is not thought to be superior to the other, I don't see the problem.

 

[YmirGF]

So.... what is the problem again?

 

[Alceste]

So.... what is the problem again?

Tea Partiers hate the concept of gender diversity and are outraged that teachers have the right to make their classrooms safer, more comfortable places for LGBTQ kids.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Tea Partiers hate the concept of gender diversity and are outraged that teachers have the right to make their classrooms safer, more comfortable places for LGBTQ kids.

Pretty much. In my situation, if things weren't so "male or female" in school I may not have felt such pressure to conform to regular boy habits and traits if we would have been divided by a variety of things. Kids will still gravitate towards regular boy and girl things, and you won't be eliminating such a thing even if you never verbalize people are boys and girls in school.

 

[Alceste]

Pretty much. In my situation, if things weren't so "male or female" in school I may not have felt such pressure to conform to regular boy habits and traits if we would have been divided by a variety of things. Kids will still gravitate towards regular boy and girl things, and you won't be eliminating such a thing even if you never verbalize people are boys and girls in school.

Yeah, but the idea isn't to avoid talking about gender at all. It's to avoid classroom segregation based on biological sex, dissuade students from viewing LGBTQ students as abnormal or freakish, and combat gender based bullying in schools by discussing gender as a spectrum rather than either / or.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It'd probably be a better use of energy and effort to try and come up with a gender-neutral pronoun in English that actually catches on that getting worked up over trying to brake down and archaic mold that forces kids into traditional binaries. Heaven forbid traditional Western gender roles get switched up abit (which I suspect is the real reason Fox and TTPN are against this) because we are sorting kids by more than male and female.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Yeah, but the idea isn't to avoid talking about gender at all. It's to avoid classroom segregation based on biological sex, dissuade students from viewing LGBTQ students as abnormal or freakish, and combat gender based bullying in schools by discussing gender as a spectrum rather than either / or.

Very true. I was pointing out that even if boy and girl become the "b-word" and "g-word" boys and girls will still view themselves as that, but it's putting much less pressure on children to conform to being a boy or a girl as they will be sorted in many more ways than boy or girl.

 

[Sonofason]

We could call them "children" instead of "purple penguins."

I know, it's a crazy suggestion.

But children often resent and disparage being called children.

 

[Alceste]

Very true. I was pointing out that even if boy and girl become the "b-word" and "g-word" boys and girls will still view themselves as that, but it's putting much less pressure on children to conform to being a boy or a girl as they will be sorted in many more ways than boy or girl.

Oh yeah, exactly. Relieving a small amount of the pressure to conform to gender norms is all this could ever do. Kids will still get it at home, in the media, in the toy store, from their friends, etc. But perhaps a seed could be planted at school that sprouts when the kids grow up and encounter a female construction worker or a male preschool teacher.

 

[Alceste]

But children often resent and disparage being called children.

Students, then.

 

[Sonofason]

I don't much care what particular labels people identify themselves with. Some people don't like being called fools, but if I think they are a fool, that is the label I will give them. If I see a boy that identifies himself as being a girl, I will call him a boy, because that is what he is. If I see a girl, that identifies herself as a boy, I will call her a girl who pretends to be a boy.

If I were to see a neuter child, I will call that individual by the label that seems most appropriate to me. I don't much care what others think I ought to be calling them.

If I see a man who has mutilated himself so as to appear as a girl, I will call him a man who has mutilated himself to appear as a girl.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I don't much care what particular labels people identify themselves with. Some people don't like being called fools, but if I think they are a fool, that is the label I will give them. If I see a boy that identifies himself as being a girl, I will call him a boy, because that is what he is. If I see a girl, that identifies herself as a boy, I will call her a girl who pretends to be a boy.

If I were to see a neuter child, I will call that individual by the label that seems most appropriate to me. I don't much care what others think I ought to be calling them.

If I see a man who has mutilated himself so as to appear as a girl, I will call him a man who has mutilated himself to appear as a girl.

The problem with that approach is you are going to be wrong many times, even when referring to cis gender people. There is nothing in the world quite like making an *** of yourself because you are so confident in your ability "to tell" that you end up calling transwomen women and calling ciswomen men because you're intent on being a douche. Or you could call an androgynous or feminine looking cisman a woman, that one also makes you look like an ***.

 

[Sunstone]

I don't much care what particular labels people identify themselves with. Some people don't like being called fools, but if I think they are a fool, that is the label I will give them. If I see a boy that identifies himself as being a girl, I will call him a boy, because that is what he is. If I see a girl, that identifies herself as a boy, I will call her a girl who pretends to be a boy.

If I were to see a neuter child, I will call that individual by the label that seems most appropriate to me. I don't much care what others think I ought to be calling them.

If I see a man who has mutilated himself so as to appear as a girl, I will call him a man who has mutilated himself to appear as a girl.

Very considerate of you.

 

[Sonofason]

Very considerate of you.

Don't get me wrong, It's not like I'm going to run up to a transsexual and call him/her a transsexual. If I know the person's name, I will call (him/her) by his/her name. If I don't know his/her name, but am in need of his/her attention, I will invoke their attention by addressing him/her/it in the most respectful manner that is apparent to me at the time.

 

[Alceste]

I don't much care what particular labels people identify themselves with. Some people don't like being called fools, but if I think they are a fool, that is the label I will give them. If I see a boy that identifies himself as being a girl, I will call him a boy, because that is what he is. If I see a girl, that identifies herself as a boy, I will call her a girl who pretends to be a boy.

If I were to see a neuter child, I will call that individual by the label that seems most appropriate to me. I don't much care what others think I ought to be calling them.

If I see a man who has mutilated himself so as to appear as a girl, I will call him a man who has mutilated himself to appear as a girl.

Fortunately the feeling is mutual. Others don't care how you prefer to identify them to the same extent that you don't care how they prefer to identify themselves.

 

[Sonofason]

Students, then.

That sounds perfect.

 

[Alceste]

That sounds perfect.

Great, since that's the sort of label this pamphlet recommends. So there's no problem.