In a gender neutral future Utopia

The one way in which women have the upper hand over men is through their ability to refuse to procreate.

And even then, due to the aforementioned larger size and strength, there's only so much a woman can do to prevent that.

I still feel like this and the physical differences would define roles

Sure, if you define gender roles as being able to get things from high shelves without using a stool.. or.. err.. lifting and carrying objects heavier than about 25kg - because those are pretty much the only things that DP can do that I can't, and I can grow a baby and breastfeed it and he can't, due to our physical differences.

What else is defined by physical differences?

As they're told

The key difference between women and men is that men are bigger and stronger. That is the foundation on which society's equality is built - if one group can control the other group through physical violence and control, they will have the upper hand.

Of course in 'civilised' societies that violence and control is cloaked with moral and religious language. Threats are delivered in the form of concern - eg women shouldn't walk home alone late at night. The constant message is that men can hurt women and will hurt them, so women need to do as their told. It is very effective tactic. When subtle threats don't work men resort to explicit threats and actual violence.

The one way in which women have the upper hand over men is through their ability to refuse to procreate. Hence the absolute obsession on the part of men with controlling women's sexuality and their centring of much of their violence around sex.

My kids were little 2/3ish. They had a pile of shared toys, including "girl" toys and "boy" toys

Toddler ds pushed cars around, sometimes crashed them. Toddler dd got a piece of kitchen roll and made the cars a little bed and spoke to them in a caring manner. Neither child had been to nursery. Both had spent all their time with me

I could say the same - except mine were both boys. DS1 loved cars and crashes, and lining them up. DS2 like teddies and putting things (including his brother's cars) to bed. If I'm ill, DS1 says 'oh' DS2 proceeds to 'look after me' - TLD: Different kids are different.

Crumbs1

I completely agree there are clear biological differences between men and women. But apart from issues which require that biology, what other behaviour do you think is different because of that biology?

What are the 'good things about being a man or a woman' that are different between the sexes?

Genuine question.

I like to think that I do impose boundaries on my daughter. But those boundaries don't include "girls don't play with lego" or "you're playing with those dolls wrong - they're not pirates. Brush their hair."
My "reasonable norms" sound different from your "reasonable norms".

I don't let her "rule the roost" but I do let her play with her toys in the way that she wants (as long as nothing is getting broken etc). What is so unreasonable about that? I think that trying to force young children into a very rigid interpretation of "femininity" or "masculinity" is far more likely to result in mental health issues. I also think it is far more likely to result in confused children who believe they are the wrong gender/sex. eg a gentle, creative boy growing up thinking he must be a girl really because "boys aren't gentle and creative".

You're confusing gender with sexuality, Crumbs. And it's not clear to me what you mean by 'imposing reasonable boundaries' -- how does this relate to gendered social conditioning?

I can't be alone in thinking men and women are meant to be different? In a fair society they should be equal but that doesn't mean the same. There are clear biological differences and good evolutionary reasons we are different. I think the whole gender neutral thing is madness - we should be aiming for gender equal not gender neutral. It is absolutely vital children grow into adults who understand their sexuality and who have been taught (just like sleep or potty training) the good things about being a man or woman and supported towards becoming a healthy adult. I truly believe this ultra acceptance of children's immature wishes as paramount are quite dangerous and results in mental health issues. I mean generally not just in terms of sexuality. Children need parents that help them grow into healthy adults and that means parents who impose reasonable boundaries and uphold reasonable norms. Seems from MN that current view is that very young children should rule the roost whether it be around sleep, food, potty training or what they wear. This is very damaging to their long term mental health.

Oh and Meltor - if there's something that sounds beige to me, it's a world full of borg like woman stereotypes and borg-like man stereotypes. A world full of individuals with varied personalities (bit like the real world in fact) sounds much more fun.

People would all be different, as they are now. In fact there could be a wider variety as people wouldn't feel judged or inhibited if they like an activity or behave in a way that currently isn't considered typical for their sex.

Datun: And it was amazes me how mothers assume their daughters choosing dolls makes them feminine, then completely ignore a boy in bed surrounded by fifteen teddies.

Exactly. And I wish people would actually listen to what their toddlers are doing when they played. DS loved cars, but if you listened, they were his tool for exploring the social world. Two games he particularly liked were at bedtime "giving" his cars to his friends from nursery - he'd line them up on his bed saying "this one's Joe's and this one's Jane's and this one's..." I could always tell which friend was currently his best friend from which name got the best car.

He also used to have tea parties for the cars in my old dolls house. On one memorable occasion, the lorries showed up but wouldn't fit, the cars had a quick discussion and decided to turn the tea party into a barbecue outside so the lorries could join in.

It was brilliant to listen to and a million miles from "little boy plays with cars because insert long list of sex-role stereotypes here"

It would be a utopia because individuals would be different, in whatever way they wished, without feeling that their preferences or behaviour have to fit into a classification. Everyone wouldn't be the same.

Why? Why can't men and women be different? What's so wrong with not being the same? I think a gender neutral 'utopia' sounds like a beige boring one.

moutonfou, it's impossible to discount the whole of his upbringing since birth and decide that his reaction to emotional events is somehow hard wired and women are somehow more likely to cry. Boys and men are continually exposed to the whole boys don't cry thing, often get praised for being tough, get lots of opprobrium from adults and even peers if they are seen to be too easily upset etc etc. Girls conversely are often praised for being sensitive, etc etc.

I don't think we can see the size or nature of any "essential differences" that may exist because we cant strip away the influence of the environment.

Would it even be possible to create your utopia? Would you take people and isolate them from all of history? On an island, perhaps?

The book The Power has a really interesting take on this. Men are violent and oppress women because they have the physical advantage. Basically because they can. If women suddenly have the ability to hurt and kill men with ease, would they become the violent oppressors and would men become the nurturers?

It's really thought provoking.

One thing that's interesting for me is crying. Now I know there's an extent of social conditioning in that it's less socially acceptable for men to cry, but DH just does not cry. I cry at the slightest thing, it's a physiological reaction, and he just doesn't understand because he doesn't get that reaction. Part of me thinks women have more natural empathy as incentive to protect our children, which men maybe don't have (speaking purely in terms of the roles we would have fulfilled in a hunter-gatherer society), and that's where the crying comes from.

It's sad isn't it Datun, when they suddenly realised things are "for boys" or "for girls". My teen DS has been told he's too soft because he likes playing with babies and toddlers. Fucking ridiculous

I always find these threads quite interesting. The nature versus nurture argument.

If you stripped away social conditioning, I think the differences would be fairly minor. If you switched the social conditioning, I think it would obscure the differences entirely.

And it was amazes me how mothers assume their daughters choosing dolls makes them feminine, then completely ignore a boy in bed surrounded by fifteen teddies.

Or playing with a G I Joe or Action Man. Or super heroes.

It's the toy company that genders these little humans for children to play with.

Anecdotal, I know, but my son loved his Barbie, until he came home from school aghast because someone had told him it was girly.

Took his action man into school the next day. Suddenly not girly. Heartbreaking.

It's okay! Don't worry.

That sounded arsier than I meant it to, sorry Sylvia. I need to go to bed!

Well yes, Sylvia it would suggest that.
No flies on you are there?

'Perhaps true' suggests that it perhaps is not true.

Surely it is self evident?

That is perhaps true if we consider the "basic building block" to be the foundations of the building. Which bear all the weight yet are tucked underground out of site and largely taken for granted unless something goes wrong.