tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post7196085451960011622..comments2023-12-23T19:04:18.739-05:00Comments on The Crow's Eye: EgaliaJack Crowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07499087036876745723noreply@blogger.comBlogger56125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-62427536625067805812011-07-15T20:23:36.899-04:002011-07-15T20:23:36.899-04:00Sure, absolutely. That's a good distinction t...Sure, absolutely. That's a good distinction to make. Though, actually, even the educational materials my school uses now often teaches bad gender messages, in ways both big and small. But you're right-- and I bet that the average kid is much more influenced by, say, the TV they watch than the educational materials their school uses. Like I said, I'm not sure Egalia is the best answer. But it does at least acknowledge the problem, which is something.Quinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-31121602951167861402011-07-15T17:20:42.615-04:002011-07-15T17:20:42.615-04:00Quin,
Yes, I have noticed that I'm not the on...Quin,<br /><br />Yes, I have noticed that I'm not the only one (besides my wife) influencing my daughter's views on gender, but the "girls do this, boys do that" stuff seems come more from peers (and even at that, it's pretty limited) than from the school itself. Honestly, at this point, I'm more concerned about how school inculcates a blind obedience to authority than I am about how or whether it deals with gender issues.Joehttp://successisoverrated.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-76579864695305713672011-07-15T14:09:03.686-04:002011-07-15T14:09:03.686-04:00Joe: "In fact, if anything, I’m more likely t...Joe: "In fact, if anything, I’m more likely to encourage her to do 'boy' stuff because, properly socialized male that I apparently am, I’d rather play with legos than barbies..."<br /><br />It sounds like you have a good relationship with your daughter. But the issue isn't really about how parents raise their children, but about how society, and more specifically <i>schools</i>, socialize children. As the father of a seven year old girl, you have of course noticed that you're not the only one influencing you're daughter's views on gender. Hence often unhappy parents and books like <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Cinderella-Ate-Daughter-Dispatches-Girlie-Girl/dp/0061711527" rel="nofollow">"Cinderella Ate My Daughter"</a>. I don't really know attending to a school like Egalia is the best answer, but based on the limited information given, it seems to me like a perfectly valid strategy to try. <br /><br />Karl: "Telling a boy that he MUST be more feminine is fucked up. But I guess that's how some people see 'gender equality'..." <br /><br />I think you're reading too far between the lines and ending up in a place that doesn't actually exist. Who are these "some people"? Who in this thread, or in the linked article, are even hinting at telling boys to be more feminine, or girls to be more masculine? Please be specific. Maybe I've just missed it.<br /><br />The "some people" that I'm actually seeing are the ones who want to <i>allow children to make more of their own natural choices</i> in terms of what behavior is acceptable. To teach boys <i>and</i> girls that it's completely okay to act both in the ways that are traditionally considered to be feminine <i>and</i> the masculine ways. That it's okay for boys to cry and take care of others; that it's okay for girls to be adventurous and to stand up for themselves even if it means not seeming "nice".Quinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-23179590867023648062011-07-15T13:50:54.552-04:002011-07-15T13:50:54.552-04:00I don't need to psychoanalyze you, Karl, when ...I don't need to psychoanalyze you, Karl, when you so eagerly display your preoccupations. We all see the world as our Rorschach, and your accusations that I'm playing to some PC audience or that people are saying "penis bad, vagina good" work better than anything I could do with an observation window and a DSM.<br /><br />Whatever your issues are or aren't, the fact is that your argument doesn't hold water. You employ humanistic rhetoric when you please and disregard your earlier claims of sexual essentialism. You say things that haven't been proven, and then retreat to more defensible, relatively minor points in your overall rants, such as that children learn by imitating elders.<br /><br />Yes, Karl. That is correct. You're absolutely right--about that. I didn't disprove it, because I'm not trying to. What I tried to do was point out other things. And don't continue to insult everyone's intelligence by pretending that this was about poor widdle Kawl making an argument about parental/guardian influence or about the moral dubiousness of men and women alike. You're the one who's threatened, or at least I guess, because you're the one who's flailing. I don't see anybody here who's threatened by your Searing Truth, because so far you're not making much sense.Cüneythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09839492265797382364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-64361993864599174602011-07-15T11:11:52.002-04:002011-07-15T11:11:52.002-04:00A much simpler thing is to prevent a boy from usin...A much simpler thing is to prevent a boy from using "he" referring to a girl, or vice-versa.<br /><br />Telling a boy that he MUST be more feminine is fucked up.<br /><br />But I guess that's how some people see "gender equality" -- erasing everything but the sex organs, which must be preserved to make new sex-organ-and-biochemistry-specific but behavior-neutral tiny humans.<br /><br />"Jens, that penis makes you BAD!"<br /><br />"Linette, that vagina makes you GOOD!"<br /><br />And again, Cuneyt, you can fuck off for your armchair-shrink assessments of me. I could easily turn the tables on you, but I prefer to make absurdly rude comments to show you how absurdly rude YOU are. Fucker.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-43984601755788809692011-07-15T11:01:41.626-04:002011-07-15T11:01:41.626-04:00fish has proved nothing, but has offered tangentia...fish has proved nothing, but has offered tangential points which stray from what I said.<br /><br />fish wants my general assertion to be squeezed into what was supposedly "negated" by the things fish has read.<br /><br />fish... out of water. <br /><br />fish doesn't know anything about me or what I know, or what I have learned.<br /><br />they believed in alchemy once, fish.<br /><br />some believe in it today, only it's called something else.<br /><br />and you think I'm arguing for sexual determinism.<br /><br />what an asshole you are.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-28737682157244069182011-07-15T10:58:44.307-04:002011-07-15T10:58:44.307-04:00Cuneyt, your sense of superiority here is intact, ...Cuneyt, your sense of superiority here is intact, worry not. You don't have to attack me for disagreeing with you. Your desire to belittle me for not buying your appreciation for an absurdly PC schooling scheme was noted by the Political Correctness Police and you'll be receiving a Citizen's Commendation for protecting the New Order.<br /><br />I made a blanket statement of truth, that children learn by watching their elders and imitating them. You cannot disprove this general truth, so you attack ME.<br /><br />Oh, the silliness and haughtiness combined is a great cocktail of amusement to wide-open thinkers like me. <br /><br />Feel superior if you must. Denigrate me -- as you will. But don't believe you're "fixing" me, appropriately chastising me, necessarily correcting me, or anything else like that.<br /><br />What you're doing is hiding behind a PC posture and expecting a gang-up.<br /><br />A gang-up on me, a Shakesville confab of man-hatred.<br /><br />Sheesh.<br /><br />Since your need to correct others who threaten you reminds me so much of a particular person:<br /><br />You can go fuck yourself, Dick Cheney!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-73710268038994001992011-07-15T09:34:11.002-04:002011-07-15T09:34:11.002-04:00Resources refuting Evolutionary Psychology (i.e. g...Resources refuting Evolutionary Psychology (i.e. gender roles are primarily a function of biology), I am sticking to lay summaries as most of you will not have access to primary sources without paying:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Adapting-Minds-Evolutionary-Psychology-Persistent/dp/0262025795/ref=pd_sxp_f_pt" rel="nofollow">A solid refutation</a> of the methodology by David Buller.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2124503/" rel="nofollow">A Slate article</a> outlining Buller's arguments.<br /><br />A good essay by <a href="http://www.kenanmalik.com/essays/fallacy.html" rel="nofollow">Kenan Malik</a>. <br /><br /><a href="http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1997/jun/12/darwinian-fundamentalism/" rel="nofollow">Stephen J Gould</a> (recommended). <br /><br />I am sure this won't qualify as "proof" because proof is a bullshit concept in internet comment threads tossed up as way to shut down discussion, but suffice it to say that very smart individuals specifically trained in the fields of evolution and/or psychology have significant issues with the assertion that specific behaviors can be explained by the presence or absence of the Y chromosome. The interplay of genes and environment (e.g. society) are too complex to reduce any behavior to simply sexual dimorphism.fishhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01522672049371678717noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-45132529485957847622011-07-14T16:22:53.527-04:002011-07-14T16:22:53.527-04:00Quin,
It sounds like you gave the article a close...Quin,<br /><br />It sounds like you gave the article a closer read than I did, and when you put it the way you did, I have less of a problem with it. But like I said, I don’t really have a problem with a gender-neutral approach. I do it with my own daughter who’s seven. I’m pretty sure I’ve never encouraged or discouraged any kind of play based on gender suitability. In fact, if anything, I’m more likely to encourage her to do “boy” stuff because, properly socialized male that I apparently am, I’d rather play with legos than barbies (I’d rather wallow in shit, to be honest, than play with barbies). It’s more the institutional setting that I have a problem with (I said “any form of” in my original comment and didn’t mean to exclude conventional schools or imply that they were, as Jack put, “value neutral” or that there weren’t any more “gender issues” out there to be dealt with). I’ll admit, my distaste for institutional education occasionally puts me in some seemingly untenable positions, where it appears I’m taking a reactionary stance on an issue when it’s really the whiff of “cultural brainwashing by the PC police” that I’m opposed to.Joehttp://successisoverrated.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-15833092964092916912011-07-14T16:16:08.220-04:002011-07-14T16:16:08.220-04:00Longer form of my response, after considering it o...<a href="http://conepost.blogspot.com/2011/07/narrative.html" rel="nofollow">Longer form of my response, after considering it over.</a><br /><br />Jack, I happened to catch your comments over at SMBIVA, the bit about pins dancing and what is more valuable is concrete action to prepare for what we think it will take. Let me just state for the record that we are on the exact same page, if there is any perceived difference in our opinions on this owing from what I've said, rest assured that this is either a failing on my part to communicate clearly (quite likely) or on your part to interpret what I appeared to intend - not as likely, given how often I forget to enumerate the letters of how I get from A to Z. This often does make it appear that I am failing the sobriety test.<br /><br />Glad you are feeling better.<br /><br />humbly,Justinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02924326177370725150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-48406811096299089832011-07-14T16:10:01.573-04:002011-07-14T16:10:01.573-04:00And a few words on humanism.
"Gender 'ro...And a few words on humanism.<br /><br />"Gender 'roles'... exist because there are behavioral, psychological, biochemical and even... ANATOMIC differences between XX and XY human genotypes.<br /><br />Now if only we could destroy those differences, everything could be hunky-dory, eh?<br /><br />No."<br /><br />"Humanism is where it's at."<br /><br />Now I can't make straight those two statements, but I don't have the rigorous learning I should. I just hear human difference emphasized when one feels it and then dismissed when one feels it. Follow that up with Karl's claim that he's being accused of hating women for supposedly denying their own sex's capacity for evil and I really wonder where the real meat of his argument is.<br /><br />But humanism. Since it came up. I've found it funny how certain people speak of universals. It's as if they expect others to "catch up" with them, to see things as they "ought," which is of course to see them as the speaker does. Queer activism is a waste of time! Liberate humanity. Racism is a charade; fight for every human being! There is no sexism, no persecution of this or that class or ethnic group--these are all fictions anyway, and it's people who persecute people. Plain and simple.<br /><br />I can't blame someone who's a feminist first. If they see the conflict as occurring along gender lines, who's to say it hasn't happened that way for them? And is it not possible to be a feminist, a humanist, and an anti-racist?Cüneythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09839492265797382364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-5155994229643680472011-07-14T15:41:55.174-04:002011-07-14T15:41:55.174-04:00Jack, feeling of weakness has a lot to do with it....Jack, feeling of weakness has a lot to do with it. You've posted some pretty vitriolic stuff, and God knows I have. We may be confident in our choices of target, but the fact is that there is powerful magic in rejection, in saying no, in saying those cunts don't know what the real fight is, in saying it's not about <i>that</i>, it's really about <i>this.</i><br /><br />And Karl, never said I knew your childhood. But then again, you started out by aggressively telling us what is and what isn't regarding the entire human race, so I'll let your little hornet's nest of a mind figure out who's the more presumptuous.Cüneythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09839492265797382364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-59070198685256754422011-07-14T15:24:55.996-04:002011-07-14T15:24:55.996-04:00My thought is a evidence of one the many uncertain...My thought is a evidence of one the many uncertain initial steps of human conciousness, to be honest. Its an effort to move past basing our inherent worth of humanity on particular facets of our selves and self-image. They are trying to move to a concept where our worth is derived in our capacity to relate to one another as equals. Patriarchal gender roles get in the way of that owing to historical and contemporary status afforded to white, heterosexual males above all others.<br /><br />I believe the way past that is not to make boys become girls by adopting the grafting traditionally feminine roles onto masculinity or vice versa, in fact, that approach is still rooted in self-image, which is the question I think Jack is asking. The way past that, in my view, is to treat personal tastes and preferences as just that, personal taste and preference, as much a coin toss as being physically male or female. <br /><br />To suggest that raising a bunch of kids to consider their tastes, gender and preferences independently of one another and indpendant of their self-worth as humans, and, in turn, considering the worth of others similarly, is the opposite of not preparing them for success in the real world.Justinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02924326177370725150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-49784024217120401482011-07-14T14:24:12.086-04:002011-07-14T14:24:12.086-04:00@ Quin:
"And I'm sorry if you feel like I...@ Quin:<br />"And I'm sorry if you feel like I'm bullying you, as it's honestly not my intent. But I can't control what goes on in your mind."<br /><br />And I'd like to formally apologize for having made this kind of weak non-apology, which I always hate when given by others.<br /><br />Said better: <br /><br />I'm not trying to bully you, just have a conversation with you about our disagreement. Please allow me and others to critique the content of what you say, without taking it as an attempt to bring you down a notch. Otherwise, how can you expect us to allow the same of you?Quinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-26644165683375212742011-07-14T14:17:45.006-04:002011-07-14T14:17:45.006-04:00Karl, speaking as one humanist to another, sorry a...Karl, speaking as one humanist to another, sorry about the @ symbol. I'm in the recent habit of using it before names and quotes for readability's sake, and sometimes stick an extra one in by mistake. And I'm sorry if you feel like I'm bullying you, as it's honestly not my intent. But I can't control what goes on in your mind.<br /><br />You're quite right about blind spots, though. I'd like to point out that you're far from the only person here to have expressed an anti-Egalia opinion. If people are directing an uneven amount of fire in your direction, it's probably because (A) you are leaving the most comments, and (B) you keep on telling people to suck your dick.<br /><br />I guess it feels like self-defense to you. By my count it was you who dished out the first personally-directed insult of the thread ("Don't know where you were larn'd, fish, but I'm guessing it wasn't rigorous"). Just... keep in mind that it might-- possibly-- feel like self-defense all around.Quinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-50839131296824927392011-07-14T13:43:20.100-04:002011-07-14T13:43:20.100-04:00oh, and Quin:
stop objectifying me with that &quo...oh, and Quin:<br /><br />stop objectifying me with that "@" symbol.<br /><br />I'm not a target. I'm a fellow human. Maybe an XY genome, yes. But a fellow human regardless.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-4878539659664871632011-07-14T13:32:15.185-04:002011-07-14T13:32:15.185-04:00Quin, everyone sees what they want to see. Some o...Quin, everyone sees what they want to see. Some of us are better at knowing our own blind spots.<br /><br />Others of us can't even be convinced that we have blind spots.<br /><br />*********<br /><br />Curiously, everyone who is against me in this thread is standing against a view that is ascribed to me, but oddly hasn't been presented by me.<br /><br />Thus you and others are reading into my posts what you want to read into them: bullying me, even.<br /><br />Hilarious, that is.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-18145284716466150692011-07-14T13:29:26.772-04:002011-07-14T13:29:26.772-04:00Thanks, Jack!
I see your point now. I think it...Thanks, Jack!<br /><br />I see your point now. I think it's a good one. <br /><br />But I also imagine that there's something else bothering the naysayers here. More of a gut feeling thing. I think some people are turned off from Egalia because of the possibility that this is some kind of cultural brainwashing by the P.C. police. I saw this not because of any particular comments here, but because it was <i>my</i> first gut reaction, probably due to the way that the HuffPo article kind of hints at this point of view around its edges. <br /><br />I really don't know what Egalia looks like in practice. But when I see comments such as @ Karl: <br /><br />"[Kids] learn the identity by seeing and copying, not by listening to a super-pwog adult lecturing them as if they were 25, about the role of gender identity" <br /><br />(a sentiment I actually agree with if taken in isolation), it looks to me like my imagined Egalia is a very different place from yours, Karl. A pre-schools kind of <i>has</i> to be an interesting place for the kids, or else it just ends up turning into mayhem all the time.Quinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-27494210468208426562011-07-14T13:29:26.333-04:002011-07-14T13:29:26.333-04:00I do, Jack. And I have no problem disagreeing wit...I do, Jack. And I have no problem disagreeing with you on it.<br /><br />I tire of "feminists" proving they are the most femme-able man. It's an underhanded way to get in a woman's pants, apparently. Or a way to prove more-progressive-than-thou.<br /><br />Humanism is where it's at. Not gender-specific hate or praise.<br /><br />Humanism.<br /><br />Women can be cruel, destructive and murderous. There's no benefit to praising women and heaping scorn on men, from a gender perspective.<br /><br />Individual men, individual women... they are the malefactors.<br /><br />Spin it up to a cultural thing if you want, I can't stop you and most likely cannot persuade you of the wrongheadedness of that direction.<br /><br />I'm surely not going to sit still and be accused of hating women merely for pointing out that their gender has the capacity for destruction, deceit and murder just like the male gender.<br /><br />And I'm not going to allow someone to label me as a "patriarchist" or whatever for pointing out that there are distinct differences between genders, and that the differences are not just anatomic.<br /><br />I don't really care what "fish" says he/she can "prove" otherwise, but fails to prove. I really don't.<br /><br />And the superiority angle plied by several here: they can eat my dick!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-86003067941199011422011-07-14T13:17:14.892-04:002011-07-14T13:17:14.892-04:00Cuneyt,
I'm still working this all out for my...Cuneyt,<br /><br />I'm still working this all out for myself, but I sometimes wonder at the resistance to changing males norms as if it were more an indication of how weak men feel - as a loss of armoring - than an expression of vitality or strength.<br /><br />I think about masculinity, as a set of physical traits, and try to understand where it <i>does not overlap</i> with the learned postures of machismo.Jack Crowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07499087036876745723noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-8443939582158298342011-07-14T13:09:29.873-04:002011-07-14T13:09:29.873-04:00Karl,
I have my problems with how "patriarch...Karl,<br /><br />I have my problems with how "patriarchy" is defined, articulated and used - but I don't think it's reasonable to assume that feminist = wronged by dudes.Jack Crowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07499087036876745723noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-29637664689710386462011-07-14T13:06:06.023-04:002011-07-14T13:06:06.023-04:00For example:
I am not "afraid" of femin...For example:<br /><br />I am not "afraid" of feminism, any more than I am "afraid" of alchemy, economics, psychiatry, 3-card-monte, the Spanish Prisoner gambit, or the Nigerian cashier's check scam.<br /><br />You have no clue what my childhood was like, Cuneyt... no more than fish has.<br /><br />You don't know what sorts of experiences I had at the hands of men, versus at the hands of women.<br /><br />"Feminists" love to imagine that it's all down to XY vs XX and patriarchy vs feminism. I presume that's because "feminists" have been wronged by men, and attribute the wrong to maleness.<br /><br />Nice job, missing the details that don't fit your worldview. Congrats on that. Big kudos, and all.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-32191833266616845352011-07-14T13:03:11.537-04:002011-07-14T13:03:11.537-04:00Cuneyt, your snide snark not only is unwarranted, ...Cuneyt, your snide snark not only is unwarranted, but appears to be based on a caricature of views I have not even expressed.<br /><br />So thanks for that. You sure are superior! And progressive too!<br /><br />But you forgot to call me a part of the patriarchy, didn't you?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-5056869989863875542011-07-14T12:08:49.996-04:002011-07-14T12:08:49.996-04:00Well, it's nice to see the Internet male resen...Well, it's nice to see the Internet male resentment. Some things never change in this world. Karl should go read Scott Adams' blog; it'll be more his flavor.<br /><br />As far as this, I'm skeptical. I don't think "partner" is the answer to "husbands and wives," personally. I delight in calling lesbian couples "wife and wife," and "partner" only serves to render more vague what should be openly declared. Likewise, I don't mind "boys" and "girls." I wish there was another word added to our vocab--something for the intersexed--but I don't know what's wrong, in and of itself, with calling biological sex by its proper name.<br /><br />However. And here's where my anger at the "women are women, men are men, just 'cause!" argument comes in. However--there is so much that is engendered (pardon the pun) in children, about what "the roles" are. Fuck you for not letting my boys cry. Male emotionality was tolerated a lot more in some cultures before industrial civilization dared to tell us what men "were" and "are." Fuck you for telling me that some people clean and cook while others delegate, rule, and direct. I can't stand that shit.<br /><br />And the fact is that school is nothing less than an indoctrination machine. Sure, children learn from their parents, but school isn't insignificant just because parents wield greater influence. I just watched pre-schoolers sing Lee Greenwood, though, so maybe I'm just painfully aware of the indoctrination that so many of us accept as given.<br /><br />But oogy boogy! Feminism scary! It's no misogyny when you pose as a victim!Cüneythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09839492265797382364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102937856333775840.post-89215189070773907802011-07-14T10:25:37.845-04:002011-07-14T10:25:37.845-04:00Glad to, Quin.
I was out running, which for some ...Glad to, Quin.<br /><br />I was out running, which for some reason helps to clarify my thoughts, and I was thinking over my own initial rejection of Egalia, plus the replies which took umbrage with it, here.<br /><br />It occurred to me that the arguments against seem to imply that, first, children are quite easily socialized. I think that's what underlies the entire, "but, once they get out in the real world" dispute. It also seems to color the conviction that children are predominately the produce of their parents.<br /><br />[As an aside - my own two sons are more clearly influenced by school, our larger family, their friendships, some popular culture and our parenting than by any largely fictional parental domination of their worldviews. I've no doubt that if we could have managed a gender neutral terminology, they'd have picked it up. My oldest, to whom I don't preach, has nonetheless absorbed some of my political views. He's also definitely be "genderized" by association with his male peers, who are cliche macho teenagers. He's not macho himself, but there are behaviors, clothing and even commodities with which he will not associate, because it's "social suicide, Dad." School is not a value neutral environment, as some seem to be implying.]<br /><br /><br />Children are rather obviously and easily socialized. That's what we do to our kids. And to other people's children. It's easy to do, precisely because we're not born with identities, worldviews or concepts of self. <br /><br />Where the argument against Egalia type experiments fail, is in the implication or assertion that because children are so easily socialized everywhere and anywhen, the task of undertaking a different treatment of gender is insurmountably difficult, because countering all those competing socialization efforts is hard. <br /><br />I just don't think the argument has much in the way of internal logic, since it concedes its main objection in order to make it.Jack Crowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07499087036876745723noreply@blogger.com