Jun 28 2011: Regarding the "no gender" dream, I have to mention that there are huge cultural barriers, not in the form of traditions, but specially in the form of languages.
English language is mainly genderless, but Spanish for example is genderful (everything has a gender, from a chair to the clouds). A genderless world would require to rip the language apart. The current attempts to de-genderize the language are based on either repetition (using both terms everytime, like "todos y todas"), or changing the characters that indicate gender by neutral characters ("todxs, tod@s, etc").
Both attemps are controversial and go against the most basic rules of language. In the first case goes against the simplicity. And the second one cannot be pronounced or demand the creation of whole new terms that sound just ridiculous.
Languages evolve naturaly and changes like these are completely un-natural in gender based languages. Do you think that the benefits of a genderless reform surpass the drawback of destroying the essence of a language?
Jun 28 2011: The "born this way" approach has a risk that is "when to stop". If we are to accept as normal gay relationships because they are born that way, then society will have to make a decision regarding how to face the rest of the sexual leanings. Obviously it is about consent, and I am not saying that these other tendencies should be embraced.
What I mean is that there are tendencies which people are born with and go against the roots of the current society, and they don't get any kind of support.
Would the acceptation of gay marriage make it easier to accept to help out who were born with these other outlawed tendencies?
TEDCred score: 0.00 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A reply on Conversation: LIVE TED Conversation: Join TED Speaker Alice Dreger
English language is mainly genderless, but Spanish for example is genderful (everything has a gender, from a chair to the clouds). A genderless world would require to rip the language apart. The current attempts to de-genderize the language are based on either repetition (using both terms everytime, like "todos y todas"), or changing the characters that indicate gender by neutral characters ("todxs, tod@s, etc").
Both attemps are controversial and go against the most basic rules of language. In the first case goes against the simplicity. And the second one cannot be pronounced or demand the creation of whole new terms that sound just ridiculous.
Languages evolve naturaly and changes like these are completely un-natural in gender based languages. Do you think that the benefits of a genderless reform surpass the drawback of destroying the essence of a language?
A reply on Conversation: LIVE TED Conversation: Join TED Speaker Alice Dreger
What I mean is that there are tendencies which people are born with and go against the roots of the current society, and they don't get any kind of support.
Would the acceptation of gay marriage make it easier to accept to help out who were born with these other outlawed tendencies?