Is it sexist to only want children of one specific gender?

[Ifreann]

No. If you want a son, fine. If you want a daughter, fine. And because no one can stop you.

It's not sexist to discriminate based on sex as long as no one can stop you from doing it? The fuck?

---

Does not

I don't want children, but if i do, I'm adopting a little girl

I don't want a boy, does that make me sexist? NO

Actually it does.

[Torisakia]

No. If you want a son, fine. If you want a daughter, fine. And because no one can stop you.

It's not sexist to discriminate based on sex as long as no one can stop you from doing it? The fuck?

Sure, lets go with that.

[Eastern Equestria]

Does not

I don't want children, but if i do, I'm adopting a little girl

I don't want a boy, does that make me sexist? NO

There's a difference between not wanting children of a particular sex, and preferring to have children of a particular sex. Even the latter is still just a little sexist.

[Rio Cana]

Does not

I don't want children, but if i do, I'm adopting a little girl

I don't want a boy, does that make me sexist? NO

I cannot resist.

So you want a little girl.

Video time - http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x9n201 ... shortfilms

[Cyyro]

Well, having only males means your dynasty can continue. And you won't end up losing the game due to your heir being of a wrong dynasty or having a woman as an heir, which would lead to your vassals not liking you. But then again you can marry off your daughters to prominent nobles, so that helps.

[Deutsch Osterreich]

Not really. You may find it easier to bond with a son because you're male (vice versa).

[Rio Cana]

I do know at least in Spanish speaking nations, I have no idea if in other Romance language nations, women when they marry keep there last name. And when they have kids there last name is transferred to the kid.

For example
Maria Rivera Lopez gets married to Juan Rodriguez Oquendo.
Her name will remain the same. However, she if she wants too, she can add her husbands last name. Thus it would be
Maria Rivera Lopez de Rodriguez.

Lets say she has a son who they name Mario. He would be called Mario Rodriguez Rivera. If it was a girl named Maria then it would be Maria Rodriguez Rivera. And when this Maria gets married to Jose Dominguez Ruiz she could add the Dominguez part has
Maria Rodriguez Rivera de Dominguez. When she has kids the last name would be (First Name) then Dominguez Rodriguez. And so on.

Edit - In the US, it is common for women to take there husbands last name even though its not required. Have a US cousin who has been married twice and has had her last name change twice. I think this changing your name just because you get married is silly. They should keep there real last name.

[Torisakia]

Not really. You may find it easier to bond with a son because you're male (vice versa).

BUTT ITZ SECKSUS CUZ *insert reason here*

I don't see why people make such a big deal about these things.

[Nervium]

No. If you want a son, fine. If you want a daughter, fine. And because no one can stop you.

Your partner can.

[Rio Cana]

Well, having only males means your dynasty can continue. And you won't end up losing the game due to your heir being of a wrong dynasty or having a woman as an heir, which would lead to your vassals not liking you. But then again you can marry off your daughters to prominent nobles, so that helps.

However, it does not guarantee that your future great grandkids that carry your surname will not tarnish it by being the worst of the worst.

[Torisakia]

No. If you want a son, fine. If you want a daughter, fine. And because no one can stop you.

Your partner can.

They can now control whether their fetus is male or female?

What will science think of next?

[Nervium]

Your partner can.

They can now control whether their fetus is male or female?

What will science think of next?

Jetpacks hopefully. Fetal jetpacks.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

It's not great. This reminds me of places like India and China, where the child preference favors boys over girls. So much so that females are victims of gendercide. In these countries, the gender disparity is so big, other crimes are committed and related to the disparity. Families go as far as to kidnap the existing little girls just to ensure a wife for when their sons grow up.

If anyone's interested, watch the documentary It's a girl, and you'll see what I mean.

[Cupola]

Your partner can.

They can now control whether their fetus is male or female?

What will science think of next?

Making brain development faster and decay slower so that we can have intelligent babies.

[Indira]

Yes. You should value your child for being your child, not because of a random chance

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

-snip-

In Brazil there is no adding. People just substituted their mother's surname for their husband's father's. So Maria *mom's surname* do Rosário would become Maria *father-in-law's surname* do Rosário.

My grandma (the one that raised me, and that I carry the surname of) added, but just because she originally only had a single surname because my great-grandfather wasn't all that excited for the register to understand how to spell my great-grandmother's Polish surname.

Also, somehow the great-grandfather himself had a surname that wasn't shared by his brothers and didn't exist in both of his parents for the exact same reason (my great-great-grandfather didn't want to have trouble with illiterate registers not getting their wife's Swiss surname; it is misspelled somehow in most of my relatives who have it). o_õ

I once wanted to substitute both of my surnames for the correct versions of these so that I would be more "globalized". x3 but it is not possible in Brazil because it is already too far away up my genealogical tree. Besides, the person who likes to sign casual stuff with the Polish surname is my mom.

[Ifreann]

Not really. You may find it easier to bond with a son because you're male (vice versa).

BUTT ITZ SECKSUS CUZ *insert reason here*

I don't see why people make such a big deal about these things.

Because they desperately want to be sexist without being called sexist.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Not really. You may find it easier to bond with a son because you're male (vice versa).

BUTT ITZ SECKSUS CUZ *insert reason here*

I don't see why people make such a big deal about these things.

The problem is that having this mentality is sexist. It can lend itself to cruelty. Or, in extreme cases like it happens in areas of India, to the killing and neglet of little girls. Check gender disparity in China. You'll see why favoring one gender over the other is problematic, especially if the parents are disapponted enough to cause harm to the child for not being the gender or biological sex they wanted/preferred.

[Aurasia]

Only wanting a male or female child is not inherently sexist. Your preference for one or the other would first derive from impulse, then personal experiences and held opinions. You have your own reasons for not wanting a son or daughter, sexism being a possible motive, yet only if you decide it’s a factor in your decision. There are external reasons, such as lineage, why one family may prefer a male child over a female. This act is not sexist; it’s focusing on the simplest form of survival for the family name. The act becomes sexist when there is active, direct or indirect hostility towards the child solely or partly because of its sex. Sexism is discrimination and prejudice towards another because of their sex. Preference is not sexism, preference is personal choice.

We do not always get what we want, even if I only desire a daughter yet receive a son, it becomes sexism only when I begin to persecute him for being a male. Of course, there are a few gray areas: The child born male yet possessing effeminate qualities, or giving up a daughter for adoption because you absolutely needed a son, yet these are separate issues that may require their own discussion. In summary, the question cannot be truly answered without first dissecting the reasoning behind preferring one sex over the other; the preference itself cannot be sexist unless it explicitly is.

[Geilinor]

It's not sexist to discriminate based on sex as long as no one can stop you from doing it? The fuck?

Sure, lets go with that.

"I can do what I want because nobody can stop me" is bullshit. That's the same logic murderers and rapists use.

[Geilinor]

There are external reasons, such as lineage, why one family may prefer a male child over a female.

That's called sexism. Female children are not less important because of the tradition that wives adopt the husband's last time. In the modern day, that is not always the case, and preserving your "family name" should not be an obsession. It's just a name. How do you know that your male child will want to get married? Marriage is not for everyone. Some people decide that they do not want to marry.

[Milograd]

"I'm discriminating based on sex. Surely you're not saying that makes me a sexist?"

Discriminating based on sex does not inherently equate to sexism unless you're being a literal pedant, and completely disregarding the connotations of the word. You could just as easily say that having a sexual preference for relationships is sexism, but you shouldn't call that sexist.

[Geilinor]

"I'm discriminating based on sex. Surely you're not saying that makes me a sexist?"

Discriminating based on sex does not inherently equate to sexism unless you're being a literal pedant, and completely disregarding the connotations of the word. You could just as easily say that having a sexual preference for relationships is sexism, but you shouldn't call that sexist.

Not wanting children of a certain gender because you don't think they're good enough or don't like them enough is sexism.

[Torisakia]

Sure, lets go with that.

"I can do what I want because nobody can stop me" is bullshit. That's the same logic murderers and rapists use.

I can't fix what's true.

[Milograd]

Discriminating based on sex does not inherently equate to sexism unless you're being a literal pedant, and completely disregarding the connotations of the word. You could just as easily say that having a sexual preference for relationships is sexism, but you shouldn't call that sexist.

Not wanting children of a certain gender because you don't think they're good enough or don't like them enough is sexism.

Where did I ever say either of those things?

I said that it wasn't necessarily sexist, and was given that response. Certainly not thinking they're "good enough" or "not liking them" because of their gender, but that doesn't mean that there aren't situations where you can prefer a gender for your kid without being sexist.