I’m not really sure how or why my daughter started seeing the world in terms of “for girls” and “for boys” because my wife and I have been very diligent in not labeling things as such. Yes, our kid has princess toys and pink shoes, but she also has blocks and dinosaurs and we have never at any point told her that those things are specifically for girls or boys. I believe that pigeon-holing a child into such a limited scope of gender identity can have far-reaching consequences on self-esteem, self-perception and relationships with the opposite sex. Ideally I would like my daughter to grow up knowing that girls can do anything boys can do, but if she can’t wrap her mind around the fact that a blue backpack with airplanes is unisex, then we have some work to do. It’s not easy to raise a child with a healthy outlook on gender equality, and I’m finding that out. No matter how much you try to harp on female empowerment, emotional sensitivity, positive body image or self-reliance, you can’t shield your child from television, magazine covers or even the toy aisles that perpetuate the preconceived roles and limitations of gender stereotypes. For a child, all you need to see is the simple juxtaposition in a toy store between the “girl aisle” rife with numerous iterations of Pretty Princess Polly Petunia With Purse Accessory For Girls, and the “boy aisle” lined with LEGO ROBOT PLAYSETS WITH GUNS AND EXTRA TESTOSTERONE FOR GROWING MAN-BOYS.
Ebola and the weak link of public health | Resource Insights
It has long been my contention that one of the chief symptoms of the age of constraints we have now entered would be the decline of public health systems globally. This comes at a time when our vulnerability to a worldwide epidemic is increasing because of widespread international travel, the proliferation of densely populated megacities and the general trend toward urban living. Of course, urban environments are ideal for spreading disease because of the proximity of the residents.
1 week ago