Posted: Dec 04, 2014 10:32 am
TMB wrote: All she is doing is promoting another version of the same indoctrinating process.
Which would be what? Not having toys designed with an obvious gender bias (pink for girls, blue for boys at the most primitive level) gives greater freedom for children to choose what they want to play with reduced risk of discrimination. Some companies, Playmobil is a good example, have been doing sterling work at producing gender neutral toys for years. So did Lego until recently, when they decided to rebrand some of their products to be more "girly."
The whole point of this idea is that whatever a child decides to play with, it is just "a toy" and not "a girls toy" or "a boys toy." The very opposite of the indoctrination that exists at present.
However, as ever, you are unable to view this material in anyway other than through the distorted lens of bashing feminism.
Case in point.
TMB wrote: More to the point this is a feminist agenda approach and shows a typical hypocrisy of selectively trying to promote a political agenda in the face of contradictions such as this one.
Classic sexist behaviour. Focusing on what the women is wearing rather than the message. You're basically saying that the senator shouldn't be able to wear clothing that she likes and feels comfortable in. If she'd been wearing jeans and a lumberjack shirt while delivering the message, it wouldn't have made the message any more credible.
TMB wrote:As it happens we are surrounded by gender stereotypes, some obviously based upon biology, others less so.
Stereotypes are bad. Ok.
Getting rid of them is good. Ok.