|
News: Forcing gender roles on kids is harmful, study shows.
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 23,374
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Rihinvention
The key word here is "forcing" though.
Most boys will naturally gravitate towards trucks and football. And most girls will gravitate towards Barbies, fairies and Disney Princesses. What's harmful is when boys would rather play with Disney Princesses and girls would rather play with trucks, but we force them not to, because of gender roles.
But for the most-part, an overwhelming majority of people slip in to their natural gender roles anyway, regardless of societal pressure.
|
Sorry but there are no natural gender roles. People "slip in" to them subconsciously because it is presented by social norms and rules as the correct thing to do - not because it is natural. Boys gravitate towards cars and sports and w/e because these things are advertised towards them, and the same for Girls and dolls.
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/8/2009
Posts: 6,473
|
The teens who participated in the Lisbon study — including the kids who bullied others and the kids who were victims of bullying themselves — weren’t happy about the gender roles they were expected to follow. In their one-on-one interviews, they all said they didn’t actually like paying so much attention to the right “feminine” and “masculine” behaviors, and just assumed that’s what they were supposed to do. When Pereira concluded her research and held a group meeting to explain her results to the kids, they were amazed to learn that everyone was on the same page about that.
“It was a revealing experience for them to be in that room and realize they were all performing and no one was happy about it,” she recounted. Slowly, things started to change. Pereira acknowledges it’s not like it was “suddenly paradise,” but she noticed the kids stopped mocking their peers as much for falling outside the bounds of traditionally gendered behavior. Girls and boys started to become more integrated in athletic activities. There was less physical fighting. And some of the kids’ parents even started calling Pereira to tell her about positive changes in their behavior.
Although Pereria’s observations took place at a school in Lisbon, she believes her results have widespread implications for Western nations that are subject to similar cultural messages about gender. Indeed, previous research in British and American schools has reached many of the same conclusions as her study. Sociologists agree that children “learn gender” from being subjected to society’s expectations, even though pressuring kids to conform to those rigid roles can end up having serious mental health consequences for the children whose parents try to over-correct their behavior. There are countless examples of schools becoming environments where gender stereotypes are strictly policed and kids are even sent home for wearing the “wrong” type of clothing.
...
“Sometimes adults think it’s impossible to change gender norms because they’re already so deeply entrenched. But they’re much more entrenched in adults than they are in young people,” Pereira pointed out. “It’s actually fairly easy to reach young people if you create opportunities for discussion, if you get them to think about their own experiences.”
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 23,374
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Rihinvention
But that has nothing to do with forcing it on children. Yes, it's a widely held view that pink is for girls and blue is for boys, but when you really think about it, there's no such thing as boy colours and girl colours. They're just different pigments on a colour scale that we traditionally associate with different things. But the fact that those associations exist isn't detrimental to children. Certain colours were always going to be linked to certain genders. In a parallel universe, pink is for boys and blue is for girls. What's detrimental to children is when a girl wants to wear something blue and her parents say no, or a boy wears a pink shirt and people call him a "fa**ot." And that's only detrimental/hurtful if he's actually gay. I know plenty of straight guys who wear pink shirts and if someone called them gay, they'd just laugh it off and probably throw a gay-slur right back.
|
Colours have no reason to be associated with gender Calling a boy ****** is also detrimental if he is straight - because it causes him to feel uncomfortable with possessing any feminine traits because other people will negatively judge him for it.
Quote:
We're never going to get rid of the fact that some things are deemed masculine and some are deemed feminine. That's always going to be there. And we just had a straight girl come in to this thread say "I naturally gravitated towards barbies, ponies and the colour pink...I didn't feel any societal pressure." And I think most straight people would agree. They didn't feel any pressure. They just naturally gravitated to feminine things if they were a girl and masculine things if they were a boy. Or maybe if they were a girl, they were a tomboy and loved sports, or if they were a boy, they were a bit metrosexual and liked clothes and playing with dolls/figurines.
|
Yeah the reason they don't feel pressure is because the things they like are acceptable according to social rules. They don't feel pressure because naturally they go along with it.
Quote:
This seems to be an issue only affecting gay/trans people, because most straight children/teenagers conform to traditional gender roles anyway.
|
So wrong. You cannot generalise straight/gay people in this sense. All straight men are NOT 100% masculine and gay men are NOT completely feminine.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/3/2014
Posts: 19,477
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Badger
Sorry but there are no natural gender roles. People "slip in" to them subconsciously because it is presented by social norms and rules as the correct thing to do - not because it is natural. Boys gravitate towards cars and sports and w/e because these things are advertised towards them, and the same for Girls and dolls.
|
But why do advertisers advertise cars and sports to boys and dolls to girls in the first place? Because they demand them. They're simply meeting that demand with supply. It's not like they're a bunch of evil conservatives, sitting in a room going "muahahaha, we will force masculinity onto little boys and femininity onto little girls! "
Did the fact that Sailor Moon and The Little Mermaid were targeted towards girls stop me from liking them as a child? No. I gravitated towards them naturally because that is just want interested me as an individual.
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 4/7/2012
Posts: 14,466
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Rihinvention
The key word here is "forcing" though.
Most boys will naturally gravitate towards trucks and football. And most girls will gravitate towards Barbies, fairies and Disney Princesses. What's harmful is when boys would rather play with Disney Princesses and girls would rather play with trucks, but we force them not to, because of gender roles.
But for the most-part, an overwhelming majority of people slip in to their natural gender roles anyway, regardless of societal pressure.
|
girl, what? Barbies and trucks did not exist when humans were first created, birthed, whatever.
These are things humans MADE, along with gender roles.
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 23,374
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Rihinvention
But why do advertisers advertise cars and sports to boys and dolls to girls in the first place? Because they demand them. They're simply meeting that demand with supply. It's not like they're a bunch of evil conservatives, sitting in a room going "muahahaha, we will force masculinity onto little boys and femininity onto little girls! "
Did the fact that Sailor Moon and The Little Mermaid were targeted towards girls stop me from liking them as a child? No. I gravitated towards them naturally because that is just want interested me as an individual.
|
None of it is evil, but advertisers DO consciously market certain commodities to certain genders. Gender roles are enforced on both a conscious AND subconscious level.
And it's good for you that you did not adhere to gender roles as a child. But not all children are comfortable with being themselves, and have to monitor their own behaviour to what they're taught is gender-appropriate.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/3/2014
Posts: 19,477
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Badger
Colours have no reason to be associated with gender Calling a boy ****** is also detrimental if he is straight - because it causes him to feel uncomfortable with possessing any feminine traits because other people will negatively judge him for it.
|
I never said they did I simply brought up colours because I was responding to Newt, who brought up colour. In fact, I even said in my post that there was no such thing as boy colours and girl colours. They're all just pigments on a colour scale.
And I think that comes down to whether or not a straight guy is secure with his sexuality. Teenage boys are different because there's a fear of being perceived as gay. Adult men don't give a ****. Pretty much all my mates come gay clubbing because they do Molly and coke, which are really easy to get in gay clubs. Gay clubs in Sydney are full of straight, rugby-playing types.
Quote:
Originally posted by Badger
Yeah the reason they don't feel pressure is because the things they like are acceptable according to social rules. They don't feel pressure because naturally they go along with it.
|
Yes. That was my argument in my second last paragraph of that? (the big one)
Quote:
Originally posted by Badger
So wrong. You cannot generalise straight/gay people in this sense. All straight men are NOT 100% masculine and gay men are NOT completely feminine.
|
I never said they were?
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/1/2012
Posts: 7,895
|
Gender norms are so rooted in our culture(s) that it'd be impossible to raise a child truly gender neutral and unaffected. You'd have to dump it on a secluded, abandoned island alone.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/3/2014
Posts: 19,477
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Giliap
girl, what? Barbies and trucks did not exist when humans were first created, birthed, whatever.
These are things humans MADE, along with gender roles.
|
Gender roles are not limited to childhood toys. Since the ages of cavemen, men have defended their families, fought in wars and hunted food for their families. While women cared for children and often acted as each other's wet nurses. Do you know what those are called? Gender roles. Gender roles have always been prevalent. We're distinctly different creatures. That's why feminism is so great, because it works towards achieving gender equality in the adversity of gender roles.
But to say that gender roles is as simple as Barbies and trucks is so stupid. Just because I used them as an example doesn't mean that's all gender roles are.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/3/2014
Posts: 19,477
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Badger
None of it is evil, but advertisers DO consciously market certain commodities to certain genders. Gender roles are enforced on both a conscious AND subconscious level.
|
Yes. Because children demand that. Are we really going to sit hit and say "how dare Disney market toy dolls to little girls when they know little girls will love it and it will make them billions of dollars." Very often, boys and girls like different things. That's ok. That's not the end of the world. Boys and girls are different. And just as often, they'll end up liking the same things, which are gender-neutral, like The Simpsons, Rugrats, Harry Potter, Poke'mon, and that's great too. All I'm saying is that there's nothing wrong with gender roles simply existing. They're always going to exist. The problem arises when you force a child to go against what they're naturally interested in, which in the grand scheme of things is relatively rare. Which is why I said, in my first argument in the first page, MOST children will naturally comply with their gender roles, and will be happy little boys and girls. Why? Because they will. And there's nothing wrong with that.
Quote:
Originally posted by Badger
And it's good for you that you did not adhere to gender roles as a child. But not all children are comfortable with being themselves, and have to monitor their own behaviour to what they're taught is gender-appropriate.
|
Yes. I know. Hence why I said "most" children adhere to their gender roles and not "all." I can recognise that not all children are comfortable with being themselves and have to monitor their behaviour to what is gender appropriate, but just because I pointed out the fact that most, I repeat, most children do not fall into that category does not mean I was saying "HAHAHA! Sucked in to the ones who do!"
Far out.
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 23,374
|
Quote:
Originally posted by toanythingtaboo
Gender norms are so rooted in our culture(s) that it'd be impossible to raise a child truly gender neutral and unaffected. You'd have to dump it on a secluded, abandoned island alone.
|
Very true
Quote:
Originally posted by Rihinvention
Gender roles are not limited to childhood toys. Since the ages of cavemen, men have defended their families, fought in wars and hunted food for their families. While women cared for children and often acted as each other's wet nurses. Do you know what those are called? Gender roles. Gender roles have always been prevalent. We're distinctly different creatures. That's why feminism is so great, because it works towards achieving gender equality in the adversity of gender roles.
But to say that gender roles is as simple as Barbies and trucks is so stupid. Just because I used them as an example doesn't mean that's all gender roles are.
|
What about the Amazonian female tribe? They were warriors, but female.
I will always maintain that Men and Women are not distinctly different. Personally I believe that the viewpoint that men and women are different is responsible for a lot of inequality and social grievances.
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 4/7/2012
Posts: 14,466
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Rihinvention
Gender roles are not limited to childhood toys. Since the ages of cavemen, men have defended their families, fought in wars and hunted food for their families. While women cared for children and often acted as each other's wet nurses. Do you know what those are called? Gender roles. Gender roles have always been prevalent. We're distinctly different creatures. That's why feminism is so great, because it works towards achieving gender equality in the adversity of gender roles.
But to say that gender roles is as simple as Barbies and trucks is so stupid. Just because I used them as an example doesn't mean that's all gender roles are.
|
bish I know that. Don't talk down to ME like I'M the one who brought up childhood toys. Your first post was limited to toys so don't imply that I don't know anything else beyond the example I was replying to.
and yes, everyone knows what the basic gender roles are but we have progressed far enough to know that they're bogus to their core.
You have no idea what you're even arguing. You said "We're distinctly different creatures" then said how great it is feminism fights for equality.
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 8,969
|
I found out that pink was once seen as a masculine colour and blue a feminine colour. I don't know why the perceptions were changed, but surely this is evidence that gender roles/behaviour/interests are not inherent.
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 4/7/2012
Posts: 14,466
|
this person has no idea what they're even saying.
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 23,374
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Rihinvention
Yes. Because children demand that. Are we really going to sit hit and say "how dare Disney market toy dolls to little girls when they know little girls will love it and it will make them billions of dollars." Very often, boys and girls like different things. That's ok. That's not the end of the world. Boys and girls are different. And just as often, they'll end up liking the same things, which are gender-neutral, like The Simpsons, Rugrats, Harry Potter, Poke'mon, and that's great too. All I'm saying is that there's nothing wrong with gender roles simply existing. They're always going to exist. The problem arises when you force a child to go against what they're naturally interested in, which in the grand scheme of things is relatively rare. Which is why I said, in my first argument in the first page, MOST children will naturally comply with their gender roles, and will be happy little boys and girls. Why? Because they will. And there's nothing wrong with that.
|
I guess I can never agree with you on this. As a society, i don't think things should be divided on the basis of gender, and I don't believe that children indistinctly gravitate towards things that are gender appropriate - because very few things in life are innately geared towards genders.
Personally, I feel that gender roles are wrong and unneeded. The behaviour and personal tastes of boys/girls men/women should not be generalised or viewed as natural.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/3/2014
Posts: 19,477
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Badger
What about the Amazonian female tribe? They were warriors, but female.
I will always maintain that Men and Women are not distinctly different. Personally I believe that the viewpoint that men and women are different is responsible for a lot of inequality and social grievances.
|
What about them? Their existence doesn't change the fact that gender roles exist...
And I will always maintain the viewpoint that despite being more similar than we are different, we do have differences, and it's best to recognise those differences, celebrate those differences and love each other for those differences.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/3/2014
Posts: 19,477
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Giliap
bish I know that. Don't talk down to ME like I'M the one who brought up childhood toys. Your first post was limited to toys so don't imply that I don't know anything else beyond the example I was replying to.
|
Yes...I used toys as an example. Using something as an example doesn't mean your entire argument is limited to that example. That's not how examples work.
Quote:
Originally posted by Giliap
and yes, everyone knows what the basic gender roles are but we have progressed far enough to know that they're bogus to their core.
You have no idea what you're even arguing. You said "We're distinctly different creatures" then said how great it is feminism fights for equality.
|
Because we are distinctly different. It's all well and good to be like "~oh I don't see gender, we're all just people man~" but at the end of the day, we have completely different bodies that function in completely different ways. Men and women often think differently based on how they see the world as a man or as a woman. We're more similar than we are different. But to deny we're distinctly different is pointless. I don't have boobs. I don't have a vagina. I weight like twice as much as my best friend. I don't know what it's like to go through life as a woman. They seem pretty distinct?
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/22/2012
Posts: 5,740
|
I don't think it's very harmful, but I think it's okay if parents want to go along with the gender stereotypes as long as the child wants it. If not, then I believe they should let the child be who they are.
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 8,969
|
We also seem to be ignoring the existence of intersex/neither male nor female people. A lot of these arguments focus on only the two genders.
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/5/2011
Posts: 15,589
|
Well gender roles are there for a reason, let's face it.
Women are women. Men are men.
Blurring the lines between the two will only result in confusion and chaos, and such, everyone should stick to their lanes.
|
|
|
|
|