Swedish school bans 'him' and 'her'

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Let's play one more round of Who Was Called A Boy At Birth!
A OR B OR C

A looks to boyish, she could be unlucky. I hope B is trans, and I couldn't access

I'm going to assume your final answer was B, and you're wrong.

[Skappola]

A looks to boyish, she could be unlucky. I hope B is trans, and I couldn't access

I'm going to assume your final answer was B, and you're wrong.

He very clearly said "A looks boyish"

[Nature-Spirits]

I'm going to assume your final answer was B, and you're wrong.

He very clearly said "A looks boyish"

He also said that he "hope[s] B is trans", though I'm not completely sure why.

[Patria Magna]

So they censor reading material, try and remove basic biological differences, and butcher language? Not good. Especially the part about books, that's propaganda pure and simple.

[Skappola]

He very clearly said "A looks boyish"

He also said that he "hope[s] B is trans", though I'm not completely sure why.

Her face is very angular. Looks like she had plastic surgery.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

I'm going to assume your final answer was B, and you're wrong.

He very clearly said "A looks boyish"

And yet said "Hope B is trans."
He didn't say anything about A being trans, only that she was a bit boyish.
Which honestly what the fuck does he think looks "feminine" because every single transwoman I have shown him is 150% more feminine looking than I am.

[Edgy Opinions]

Transgenders do include those who look like girls but have male genitalia? Or is that something completely different?

Green indicates relationship with sexual corporeality, lavender with psychic identity, red with cultural expectations and impositions

Intersex = you have congenital physical characteristics that do not enable you to be classified as fully male or fully female. Chromosomal, gonadal, genital, endocrinological and neurological development of humans happens in different parts and the last four fully depend on environment to sexually distinguish (i.e. it can't be done by genetics alone)

Trans = you identify with a gender different from the one you were designated to at birth; there is DMAB/AMAB - designated/assigned male at birth -, DFAB/AFAB - designated/assigned female at birth -, and UAB - unassigned at birth. I personally prefer DGAB because assigned can be also used to convey surgeries in the context of intersex infant mutilation.

Non-binary = you identify with a gender different from the one you were designated to at birth, said new gender is neither male nor female (might be both, neither as in "something else" or neither as in "none")

Non-Western gender = your culture has a non-male and non-female gender role that you identify with

Trans people might be intersex, but are generally dyadic (not intersex). Non-binary gender people might be intersex, but are generally dyadic. Non-binary people generally identify as trans. Trans people might be binary (trans men and trans women), non-binary or non-Western. Non-Western genders might be intersex-only, intersex-majority, or intersex-minority (in a fashion similar to Western trans people).

People of non-Western genders might identify as trans, as non-binary, as both and as neither. They might also identify as trans men or trans women in context.

[Esternial]

I never said heterosexuality. I said sexuality...in general. The way you phrase it indeed makes no sense, but that's not what I was saying.


Good for you. Whether that's terrible is a personal opinion and no objective fact...anything to add?

That still doesn't make any sense. Why would being disgusted by kissing a man make a person insecure about his/her sexuality?

So you think it's okay to disgust people by withholding information?

We're talking about kissing a man that looks like a woman, so from their point-of-view the person they're kissing is a woman, which they enjoy until they find out she's actually a man. If they're disgusted, it's because they committed the deed of kissing a man. They're disgusted by their own action and it's the insecurities that lie at the root of that disgust. Those that feel confident enough wouldn't experience intense disgust, as if they've done something morally wrong.

Whether or not you're disgusted is a problem on your part. People don't have the right not to be disgusted. There are people that feel disgusted by homosexuals kissing in public. Too bad, so sad.

[Nature-Spirits]

So they censor reading material, try and remove basic biological differences, and butcher language? Not good. Especially the part about books, that's propaganda pure and simple.

Yes, adding books that feature non-normative family situations (even though many families are in those kinds of situations) to the collection is propaganda. Clearly all children's books must feature married, white, heterosexual parents raising a child born to them biologically, so that, say, a black child adopted by two white homosexual males who divorced a few years later feels really out of place in society, because that's what they deserve.

[Occupied Deutschland]

So they censor reading material, try and remove basic biological differences, and butcher language? Not good. Especially the part about books, that's propaganda pure and simple.

I'm not sure how any of this is aimed at removing 'basic biological differences', though. I mean, contrary to the jokes I may tell self-deprecating or otherwise, women aren't inherently better cooks than men and men aren't inherently better builders and the only real example of operation we got on that front was their play-toy availability.

THe language thing is a similar non-issue, particularly when a dedicated neutral gender pronoun exists in Swedish. We've changed language all the time, replacing all the funkiness of gendered descriptors (particularly, as I mentioned, in Swedish where a neuter descriptor exists) with a common form doesn't seem all that objectionable and certainly isn't 'butchering' the language.

Honestly, the only thing that bothers me here and that I can agree with you on is the deliberate skewing of the reading material available.

[Fartsniffage]

So they censor reading material, try and remove basic biological differences, and butcher language? Not good. Especially the part about books, that's propaganda pure and simple.

Yes, adding books that feature non-normative family situations (even though many families are in those kinds of situations) to the collection is propaganda. Clearly all children's books must feature married, white, heterosexual parents raising a child born to them biologically, so that, say, a black child adopted by two white homosexual males who divorced a few years later feels really out of place in society, because that's what they deserve.

The article says - Meanwhile, nearly all the children's books deal with homosexual couples, single parents or adopted children.

[Nature-Spirits]

Yes, adding books that feature non-normative family situations (even though many families are in those kinds of situations) to the collection is propaganda. Clearly all children's books must feature married, white, heterosexual parents raising a child born to them biologically, so that, say, a black child adopted by two white homosexual males who divorced a few years later feels really out of place in society, because that's what they deserve.

The article says - Meanwhile, nearly all the children's books deal with homosexual couples, single parents or adopted children.

Well, I'm not sure I think that most of the collection should be made up of those books, but a significant portion should.

[Fanosolia]

So they censor reading material, try and remove basic biological differences, and butcher language? Not good. Especially the part about books, that's propaganda pure and simple.

I'm not sure how any of this is aimed at removing 'basic biological differences', though. I mean, contrary to the jokes I may tell self-deprecating or otherwise, women aren't inherently better cooks than men and men aren't inherently better builders and the only real example of operation we got on that front was their play-toy availability.

THe language thing is a similar non-issue, particularly when a dedicated neutral gender pronoun exists in Swedish. We've changed language all the time, replacing all the funkiness of gendered descriptors (particularly, as I mentioned, in Swedish where a neuter descriptor exists) with a common form doesn't seem all that objectionable and certainly isn't 'butchering' the language.

Honestly, the only thing that bothers me here and that I can agree with you on is the deliberate skewing of the reading material available.

Thank you!

The rest I'll admit is annoyance, and clearly if you're doing the homosexual, adopted, or whatever family unit, you might as well equally represent them. Or you can go the myth route that someone on this forum did as a good example.

[Ethel mermania]

Where o where has the topic gone
, oh where oh where can it be?
The thread's been jacked so long ago
a toddler could not even peeee

[Olthar]

The article says - Meanwhile, nearly all the children's books deal with homosexual couples, single parents or adopted children.

Well, I'm not sure I think that most of the collection should be made up of those books, but a significant portion should.

Don't worry. Literally the entire rest of society will make up the difference. Those kids will still have an obscenely large amount of reference to straight couples.

[Skappola]

That still doesn't make any sense. Why would being disgusted by kissing a man make a person insecure about his/her sexuality?

So you think it's okay to disgust people by withholding information?

We're talking about kissing a man that looks like a woman, so from their point-of-view the person they're kissing is a woman, which they enjoy until they find out she's actually a man. If they're disgusted, it's because they committed the deed of kissing a man. They're disgusted by their own action and it's the insecurities that lie at the root of that disgust. Those that feel confident enough wouldn't experience intense disgust, as if they've done something morally wrong.

You approach the disgust like it can only be intense disgust. Some people are just grossed out by it, which is still disgust, but not the sort of moral anguish you describe.

Whether or not you're disgusted is a problem on your part. People don't have the right not to be disgusted. There are people that feel disgusted by homosexuals kissing in public. Too bad, so sad.

I never claimed people don't have the right to not be disgusted. I'm saying it's a dick move to purposely withhold information from him/her to cause him/her to do something that you know has a high probability of disgusting him/her.

[The Order of Christ]

CAN EVERYONE PLEASE REFRAIN FROM DERAILMENT AND GET BACK ON TRACK.

Thanks.

[Krieg-Deathworld]

Transgenders do include those who look like girls but have male genitalia? Or is that something completely different?

Green indicates relationship with sexual corporeality, lavender with psychic identity, red with cultural expectations and impositions

Intersex = you have congenital physical characteristics that do not enable you to be classified as fully male or fully female. Chromosomal, gonadal, genital, endocrinological and neurological development of humans happens in different parts and the last four fully depend on environment to sexually distinguish (i.e. it can't be done by genetics alone)

Trans = you identify with a gender different from the one you were designated to at birth; there is DMAB/AMAB - designated/assigned male at birth -, DFAB/AFAB - designated/assigned female at birth -, and UAB - unassigned at birth. I personally prefer DGAB because assigned can be also used to convey surgeries in the context of intersex infant mutilation.

Non-binary = you identify with a gender different from the one you were designated to at birth, said new gender is neither male nor female (might be both, neither as in "something else" or neither as in "none")

Non-Western gender = your culture has a non-male and non-female gender role that you identify with

Trans people might be intersex, but are generally dyadic (not intersex). Non-binary gender people might be intersex, but are generally dyadic. Non-binary people generally identify as trans. Trans people might be binary (trans men and trans women), non-binary or non-Western. Non-Western genders might be intersex-only, intersex-majority, or intersex-minority (in a fashion similar to Western trans people).

People of non-Western genders might identify as trans, as non-binary, as both and as neither. They might also identify as trans men or trans women in context.

That's. .....extensive.

[The Order of Christ]

CAN EVERYONE PLEASE REFRAIN FROM DERAILMENT AND GET BACK ON TRACK.

Thanks.

[The Alexanderians]

Well, I'm not sure I think that most of the collection should be made up of those books, but a significant portion should.

Don't worry. Literally the entire rest of society will make up the difference. Those kids will still have an obscenely large amount of reference to straight couples.

true....given that many of us know little of swedish culture we all probably thought that the rest of the country was doing like the schools

[Skappola]

CAN EVERYONE PLEASE REFRAIN FROM DERAILMENT AND GET BACK ON TRACK.

Thanks.

This is the expanded topic of transsexuality discussed in the article. Now stop spamming that.

[Krieg-Deathworld]

A looks to boyish, she could be unlucky. I hope B is trans, and I couldn't access

I'm going to assume your final answer was B, and you're wrong.

A looks like a boy got reassignment, not a man, B is just so disturbing I wish she could use that as an excuse. C I could not access.

[Nature-Spirits]

Well, I'm not sure I think that most of the collection should be made up of those books, but a significant portion should.

Don't worry. Literally the entire rest of society will make up the difference. Those kids will still have an obscenely large amount of reference to straight couples.

True. I remember being somewhat confused when I was younger and my sexuality didn't match anyone else's. Society is overflowing with heteronormativity and cisnormativity.

We're talking about kissing a man that looks like a woman, so from their point-of-view the person they're kissing is a woman, which they enjoy until they find out she's actually a man. If they're disgusted, it's because they committed the deed of kissing a man. They're disgusted by their own action and it's the insecurities that lie at the root of that disgust. Those that feel confident enough wouldn't experience intense disgust, as if they've done something morally wrong.

You approach the disgust like it can only be intense disgust. Some people are just grossed out by it, which is still disgust, but not the sort of moral anguish you describe.

Whether or not you're disgusted is a problem on your part. People don't have the right not to be disgusted. There are people that feel disgusted by homosexuals kissing in public. Too bad, so sad.

I never claimed people don't have the right to not be disgusted. I'm saying it's a dick move to purposely withhold information from him/her to cause him/her to do something that you know has a high probability of disgusting him/her.

Just saying: I'm gay, but I'm not disgusted by heterosexual couples. I mean, I'm not attracted to vaginas, but they don't particularly bother me.

[The Order of Christ]

This is the expanded topic of transsexuality discussed in the article. Now stop spamming that.

This is about the use of pronouns in a Swedish school, not debating about transexuality like every thread pertaining to this topic ever.

Now stop derailing.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

I'm going to assume your final answer was B, and you're wrong.

A looks like a boy got reassignment, not a man, B is just so disturbing I wish she could use that as an excuse. C I could not access.

Rosario Dawson is an extremely beautiful woman. Stop calling women "disturbing."