Rainbow capitalism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_capitalism

 

Queer bloc protesting against rainbow capitalism during Dublin Pride 2016

Rainbow capitalism (also called pink capitalism, homocapitalism or gay capitalism) is the involvement of capitalism and consumerism in the LGBT movement. It developed in the 20th and 21st centuries as the LGBT community became more accepted in society and developed sufficient purchasing power, known as pink money. Early rainbow capitalism was limited to gay bars and gay bathhouses, though it expanded to most industries by the early-21st century.

Marketing to the LGBT community has played a major role in promoting social acceptance of LGBT people, including increased LGBT representation in media and advertising, though it has also perpetuated stereotypes of gay men. LGBT people are often poorer than heterosexual people when adjusting for other factors and often have more difficulty finding and securing work, though increased protections for LGBT individuals work to counteract this in some countries. Some governments and politicians use LGBT rights to support their foreign policy, either by supporting pressure on other countries to adopt LGBT protections or by opposing immigration from these countries.

Capitalism incentivizes corporations to promote LGBT rights to increase worker satisfaction, expand the consumer base, and maintain a positive public image. Many CEOs of corporations support LGBT rights through personal belief. Some companies in the United States have been criticized for expressing nominal support for the LGBT community while also supporting anti-LGBT politicians. LGBT people can also be victims of gentrification.

Opponents of corporate pride include right-wing and left-wing activists, who believe that corporate support for LGBT rights goes too far or not far enough, respectively. 76% of LGBT Americans support corporate presence in Pride parades.

Historical context

See also: LGBT history and Timeline of LGBT history

 

LGBT Club Eldorado in Berlin during the 1920s

According to some authors, the global evolution of "pink capitalism" has been parallel to the development of modern capitalism in the West. Although historical evidence shows that diversity of sexualities has always existed, different periods in businesses' development targeted at the LGBT community which have contributed to the construction of diverse sexual identities, can be distinguished. The creation of businesses that catered to the LGBT community corresponded to the beginning of the first drive for LGBT rights. This first LGBT movement was attacked between the First and Second World Wars, during the rise of fascism in Europe.

After the Second World War, Western culture was influenced by the homophobia of fascism. Although LGBT consumption remained marginal, during this time various homophile associations were created to seek positive assessment of homosexuality by society through meetings, publications, or charity parties. These associations opposed behaviors associated with homosexuals deemed marginal and perverted, such as promiscuity, cruising, prostitution, saunas and erotic magazines.

In the United States, marketing toward gay Americans began in "underground" gay communities in the late-19th century, occurring after urbanization allowed these communities to come together. Sellers were often unaware that a community they serviced was associated with the gay movement, though many bathhouses, brothels, and bars were sometimes operated for the gay community. The relocation of enlisted men during and after World War II allowed gay neighborhoods to form, LGBT periodicals emerged, and the 1958 Supreme Court decision One, Inc. v. Olesen legalized materials featuring discussion of homosexuality. The Stonewall riots shifted perceptions of the gay community in 1969, and the gay community was recognized as a legitimate economic market in the 1970s. Marketing to the gay community was complicated by the AIDS crisis in the 1980s, but it also further elevated awareness of the gay community.

The gay movement resulted in a negative social response, in part driven by the HIV/AIDS pandemic, which in turn led to the development of the LGBT movement by discriminated gay groups. During the 1990s, the discrimination of the LGBT community diminished, broadening LGBT people's access to formerly heteronormative jobs. This resulted in increased purchasing power for the LGBT community, or the creation of "pink money". Homosexuals in particular represented a large portion of this purchasing power. The trend is closely related to that of DINKs, couples with two incomes and no children.

Mechanisms

Social acceptance

Capitalist accommodation of the LGBT community has caused a significant increase in social tolerance for the community, contributing to the expansion civil and political rights for LGBT people. Public image of the LGBT community has been affected by the increasing acceptance of gay men in advertising, entertainment, fashion trends. In these formats, the LGBT community is primarily represented by younger white gay men, and LGBT representation is often not representative of the community as a whole. Television shows such as Queer Eye portrayed a specific identity of the gay community. These perceptions may also be shared by members of the LGBT community:

In the pre-gay period, youth is worth of sexual exchange, but the elderly homosexuals were not stigmatized. With the extension of gay model and institutionalization that this entails, a sex market is formed where one of the most appreciated goods for sexual intercourse, as well as virility, is youth. The overvaluation of youth imposed by the gay style involves an underestimation of the mature adult male.

— Pink Society, p. 93

The quantity of LGBT-friendly advertising and LGBT representation in marketing increased in the early 2010s through the use of human interest advertisement, but this increase has focused on specific intersections of sexuality, class, age, and race, while most remain underrepresented. In the 1990s and 2000s, the term "metrosexual" was often used to market traditionally LGBT trends to heterosexual men. These concepts are considered to have significantly benefited the LGBT community through increased acceptance in society and breaking down of gender norms while also contributing to the perpetuation of LGBT stereotypes.

Social marketing is the intentional use of marketing to achieve social tolerance and social acceptance. Businesses often have the advantage of needing to appease only their target market rather than a majority of the public at large, as is the case in politics. LGBT individuals are also more likely to be early adopters of new products. This has caused businesses to be more likely to accept LGBT individuals and communities before the general public and legal protections. The majority of Fortune 500 companies established nondiscrimination policies by the 2010s and guaranteed equal benefits to same-sex couples.

Politics and the LGBT movement

Historical views

The first modern political movements advocating sexual freedoms and sexual rights date back to the Age of Enlightenment in Europe, during which many traditional ideas of medievalism and feudalism were challenged. According to Michel Foucault, this period saw a movement away from religious connotations of sex to views of "unnaturalness".

The role of sexuality was debated by writers and philosophers of the era. Plays during this time would transgress gender norms, though LGBT themes were often implicit, and Libertine and Gothic writers sometimes experimented with representation of homosexual activity. Liberal philosophers such as Montesquieu and Cesare Beccaria advocated the rights of due process for those accused of sodomy, and Marquis de Sade adapted the arguments of John Locke to support sexual expression as amoral. Conservative commentators viewed these developments as having a "corrupt impact" on women. The earliest organized LGBT movements formed in the late-19th and early-20th centuries from the communities centered around specific industries that catered to LGBT groups, such as gay bars.

Economic aspects

According to the 2000 census, lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals and couples in the United States are equally as likely to be poor as heterosexual individual couples. 7% of same-sex female couples were in poverty, 4% of same-sex male couples were in poverty, and 5% of heterosexual couples were in poverty. After adjusting for various family characteristics, LGBT families are more likely to be poor than heterosexual families. Several studies conducted in the 1980s and 1990s found that the number of LGBT Americans that experienced employment discrimination ranged between 16% and 68%. Gay men were also found to earn 10% to 32% less than similarly qualified heterosexual men. Transgender people were found to have high unemployment, and those who were employed received low earnings.

In the 21st century, the gay rights movement has produced greater protections for LGBT people as workers and as consumers. In the United States, accommodation of the LGBT community through capitalist mechanisms has resulted in economic and societal protections for the LGBT community greater than those prescribed under the law. Under the American economic system, employers are incentivized to support the workforce to achieve greater efficiency. This cooperation has resulted in the creation of employee resource groups that allow for organization improvement of LGBT employment. Corporations that support workplace diversity are more likely to protect LGBT employees and executives beyond what is required by the law. Capitalism also incentivizes corporations to incorporate workplace equality policies to achieve greater customer satisfaction. Corporations with LGBT workplace equality policies are viewed more favorably by customers, employees, and partners. Corporations that implement these policies see benefits in marketing capability and overall improvement in performance.

Diplomatic aspects

The concept of "homocapitalism" is the application of gay rights issues and involvement of LGBT communities in international trade and foreign aid. In most African countries, same-sex marriage is seen as "ungodly, un-African, homonegative, unnatural and unacceptable", often invoking religious ideas of Christianity, Islam, or traditional African religions. Western nations, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, apply political and financial pressure for these countries to adopt legal protections for LGBT people. Countries that refuse to provide these protections are sometimes boycotted by governments and private donors. This is in contrast with predominantly Buddhist and Hindu countries, where homosexual activity is typically not prohibited on religious grounds.

Far-right politicians, such as British MP David Coburn, have also used LGBT issues and the persecution of LGBT minorities in other countries to advocate homonationalism. Homonationalism, a term coined by queer theorist Jasbir Puar, refers to the growing acceptance of LGBT rights by Western nations coupled with the complicity of LGBT individuals and organizations involved in nationalist politics. This ideology first arose within the context of the War on Terror, as the United States positioned itself as LGBT-friendly in opposition to the seemingly homophobic Muslim world. It has also been used by the Israeli government to justify its position in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict by comparing its stronger protections of LGBT rights to those of Palestine.

LGBT people involved in the American anti-war movement criticize the broader LGBT community for its tolerance of military activity and military enlistment. When military whistleblower Chelsea Manning’s nomination to the board of San Francisco Pride was rescinded in 2013, local LGBT groups organized and distributed petitions, claiming that the rescindment was politically motivated. Anti-war activists have also criticized weapons manufacturers such as Axon Enterprise and Raytheon Technologies for participating in Pride Month.

Corporate involvement in LGBT Pride

Major corporations have become more active in LGBT Pride events in the early-21st century. Many corporations celebrate Pride Month by incorporating it into marketing and publicly expressing support for the LGBT community. In the United States, some of these corporations have been criticized for making campaign donations to legislators that oppose LGBT rights. Other corporations are praised for providing material support to the LGBT community during Pride Month. Kellogg's has been praised for celebrating Pride Month by donating to GLAAD and featuring content about preferred gender pronouns. Many corporations release pride themed products during Pride Month, and contribute to LGBT nonprofit groups using the proceeds. Adidas, Apple, Disney, Nike, Peloton, and other major brands donated to The Trevor Project and other LGBT nonprofit organizations in 2020.

Many factors may affect whether a corporation takes a stance on LGBT issues. Protection of LGBT workers results in higher job satisfaction and increased performance. Support for LGBT rights is also associated with seeking a positive public image, particularly for corporations that have high brand-awareness. LGBT people within the company may also influence the behavior of a corporation. The presence of openly LGBT employees in a workforce correlates with corporate support for LGBT rights, and employee resource groups for LGBT workers are sometimes supported by corporations, giving these groups involvement in decisions regarding LGBT issues. Such involvement was a factor in the partial repeal of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in Indiana and the bathroom bill in North Carolina. Many CEOs and corporate executives also personally support LGBT rights and seek to direct their companies in line with their personal beliefs.

Neighborhoods

These processes are especially evident in the dynamics of gay neighborhoods, which attracted LGBT people with their affordability and the social security provided by living with other sexual minorities. These neighborhoods, after decreasing social stigma made them "trendy", then gradually underwent the gentrification process. Rising prices expelled the LGBT population that could not afford the new expenses. An increasingly specialized market developed around the LGBT community in parallel with these other events. This market specifically developed around the needs of the LGBT community, selling services and products exclusively designed to meet their needs. Different companies and firms in turn began incorporating the defense of LGBT rights into their company policies and codes of conduct, and even financing LGBT events.

This kind of sociosexual relations appraisement is characteristic of gay modelling, which has its origin in the companies' new formation of a concentrated sexual market through rainbow capitalism:

In Spain, neither virile redefinition of homosexuality, nor gay model spreading, were made from the active homosexual movement of the time. [...] The penetration of the new model is carried out through private channels: by entrepreneurs who mimetically reproduce gay institutions already present in other countries".

— Pink Society, p. 82–84

Response

Politicians

In the United States, Republican politicians have criticized corporations for taking stances in favor of LGBT rights. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and other Republicans criticized Disney for being "woke" after it challenged the Florida Parental Rights in Education Act in 2022.

Protest

See also: Against Equality, Gay Shame, Night pride, Queeruption, and Queer Liberation March

 

"Queer Liberation, Not Rainbow Capitalism", a sign held at the Queer Liberation March in 2019

Many groups protest corporate involvement and support of LGBT Pride. When Pride Glasgow started charging an attendance fee in 2015, a group of activists organised Free Pride Glasgow to be held on the same day, and on the day of Pride Glasgow every year since, as a free alternative that features protest rather than celebration. During the 2020 George Floyd protests in the United States, some groups like The Okra Project criticized LGBT Pride celebrations as overlooking the issues faced by the African-American LGBT community.

Critical Pride 2015 (Orgullo Crítico 2015) arriving at Puerta del Sol in Madrid, Spain

Following the passage of gay marriage in Spain, members of the LGBT community felt the Pride Parade was no longer protest demonstration and instead becoming a tourist business. Since 2006, several demonstrations against LGBT commodification have been held annually in suburbs of Madrid, called Alternative Pride or Critical Pride (Orgullo Alternativo or Orgullo Crítico). The first Indignant Pride (Orgullo Indignado) parade was held, calling for a different sexuality regardless of economic performance which should take into account gender, ethnicity, age and social class intersectionalities besides other non-normative corporalities. Later, the event retrieved the name Critical Pride (Orgullo Crítico), based on in part on objections to pink capitalism.

Support

Advocates of greater corporate involvement in LGBT Pride say that corporate support for the LGBT community can influence legislation, increase access for LGBT people, and reinforce broad support for acceptance of LGBT people in society. In 2020, The Trevor Project found that a majority of underage LGBT Americans felt more positively about their sexual identity because of brands that support the LGBT community. 76% of LGBT Americans supported corporate participation in Pride Month events, in contrast with organizers of many Pride events.

Mixed-sex education

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed-sex_education

 

Co-Education by Charles Allan Winter, c. 1915

Mixed-sex education, also known as mixed-gender education, co-education, or coeducation (abbreviated to co-ed or coed), is a system of education where males and females are educated together. Whereas single-sex education was more common up to the 19th century, mixed-sex education has since become standard in many cultures, particularly in Western countries. Single-sex education remains prevalent in many Muslim countries. The relative merits of both systems have been the subject of debate.

The world's oldest co-educational school is thought to be Archbishop Tenison's Church of England High School, Croydon, established in 1714 in the United Kingdom, which admitted boys and girls from its opening onwards. This has always been a day school only.

The world's oldest co-educational both day and boarding school is Dollar Academy, a junior and senior school for males and females from ages 5 to 18 in Scotland, United Kingdom. From its opening in 1818, the school admitted both boys and girls of the parish of Dollar and the surrounding area. The school continues in existence to the present day with around 1,250 pupils.

The first co-educational college to be founded was Oberlin Collegiate Institute in Oberlin, Ohio. It opened on 3 December 1833, with 44 students, including 29 men and 15 women. Fully equal status for women did not arrive until 1837, and the first three women to graduate with bachelor's degrees did so in 1840. By the late 20th century, many institutions of higher learning that had been exclusively for men or women had become coeducational.

History

In early civilizations, people were educated informally: primarily within the household. As time progressed, education became more structured and formal. Women often had very few rights when education started to become a more important aspect of civilization. Efforts of the ancient Greek and Chinese societies focused primarily on the education of males. In ancient Rome, the availability of education was gradually extended to women, but they were taught separately from men. The early Christians and medieval Europeans continued this trend, and single-sex schools for the privileged classes prevailed through the Reformation period.

In the 16th century, at the Council of Trent, the Roman Catholic church reinforced the establishment of free elementary schools for children of all classes. The concept of universal elementary education, regardless of sex, had been created. After the Reformation, coeducation was introduced in western Europe, when certain Protestant groups urged that boys and girls should be taught to read the Bible. The practice became very popular in northern England, Scotland, and colonial New England, where young children, both male and female, attended dame schools. In the late 18th century, girls gradually were admitted to town schools. The Society of Friends in England, as well as in the United States, pioneered coeducation as they did universal education, and in Quaker settlements in the British colonies, boys and girls commonly attended school together. The new free public elementary, or common schools, which after the American Revolution supplanted church institutions, were almost always coeducational, and by 1900 most public high schools were coeducational as well. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, coeducation grew much more widely accepted. In Great Britain, Germany, and the Soviet Union, the education of girls and boys in the same classes became an approved practice.

Australia

In Australia, there is a trend towards increased coeducational schooling with new coeducational schools opening, few new single-sex schools opening and existing single-sex schools combining or opening their doors to the opposite gender.

China

The first mixed-sex institution of higher learning in China was the Nanjing Higher Normal Institute, which was renamed National Central University and Nanjing University. For millennia in China, public schools, especially public higher learning schools, were for men. Generally, only schools established by zōng zú (宗族, gens) were for both male and female students. Some schools, such as Li Zhi's school during the Ming dynasty and Yuan Mei's school during the Qing Dynasty, enrolled both male and female students. In the 1910s, women's universities were established, such as Ginling Women's University and Peking Girls' Higher Normal School, but there was no coeducation in higher learning schools.

Tao Xingzhi, the Chinese advocator of mixed-sex education, proposed The Audit Law for Women Students (規定女子旁聽法案, Guī Dìng Nǚ Zi Páng Tīng Fǎ Àn) at the meeting of Nanjing Higher Normal School held on December seventh, 1919. He also proposed that the university recruit female students. The idea was supported by the president Kuo Ping-Wen, academic director Liu Boming, and such famous professors as Lu Zhiwei and Yang Xingfo, but opposed by many famous men of the time. The meeting passed the law and decided to recruit women students next year. Nanjing Higher Normal School enrolled eight Chinese female students in 1920. In the same year Peking University also began to allow women students to audit classes. One of the most notable female students of that time was Chien-Shiung Wu.

In 1949, the People's Republic of China was founded. The Chinese government pursued a policy of moving towards co-education and nearly all schools and universities have become mixed-sex. In recent years, some female or single-sex schools have again emerged for special vocational training needs, but equal rights for education still applies to all citizens.

Indigenous Muslim populations in China, the Hui and Salars, find coeducation to be controversial, owing to Islamic ideas on gender roles. On the other hand, the Muslim Uyghurs have not historically objected to coeducation.

France

Admission to the Sorbonne was opened to girls in 1860. The baccalauréat became gender-blind in 1924, giving equal chances to all girls in applying to any universities. Mixed-sex education became mandatory for primary schools in 1957 and for all universities in 1975.

Hong Kong

St. Paul's Co-educational College was the first mixed-sex secondary school in Hong Kong. It was founded in 1915 as St. Paul's Girls' College. At the end of World War II, it was temporarily merged with St. Paul's College, which is a boys' school. When classes at the campus of St. Paul's College were resumed, it continued to be mixed and changed to its present name. Some other renowned mixed-sex secondary schools in town include Hong Kong Pui Ching Middle School, Queen Elizabeth School, and Tsuen Wan Government Secondary School. Most Hong Kong primary and secondary schools are mixed-sex, including government public schools, charter schools, and private schools.

Mongolia

Mongolia's first co-educational school, named Third School, opened in Ulaanbaatar on November 2, 1921. Subsequent schools have been co-educational and there are now no single-sex schools in Mongolia.

Pakistan

Further information: Education in Pakistan, List of colleges in Pakistan, and List of universities in Pakistan

Pakistan is one of the many Muslim countries where most schools and colleges are single-gender although some schools and colleges, and most universities are coeducational. In schools that offer O levels and A levels, co-education is quite prevalent. After the independence of Pakistan in 1947, most universities were coeducational but the proportion of women was less than 5%. After the Islamization policies in the early 1980s, the government established Women's colleges and Women's universities to promote education among women who were hesitant to study in mixed-sex environment. Today, however, most universities and a large number of schools in urban areas are co-educational.

United Kingdom

Further information: Education in the United Kingdom

Schools

In the United Kingdom the official term is mixed, and today most schools are mixed. A number of Quaker co-educational boarding schools were established before the 19th century.

The world's oldest co-educational school is thought to be Archbishop Tenison's Church of England High School, Croydon, established in 1714 in the United Kingdom, which admitted 10 boys and 10 girls from its opening, and remained co-educational thereafter. This is a day school only and still in existence.

The Scottish Dollar Academy was the first mixed-sex both day and boarding school in the UK. Founded in 1818, it is the oldest both boarding and day mixed-sex educational institution in the world still in existence. In England, the first non-Quaker mixed-sex public boarding school was Bedales School, founded in 1893 by John Haden Badley and becoming mixed in 1898. Ruckleigh School in Solihull was founded by Cathleen Cartland in 1909 as a non-denominational co-educational preparatory school many decades before others followed. Many previously single-sex schools have begun to accept both sexes in the past few decades: for example, Clifton College began to accept girls in 1987.

Higher-education institutions

Further information: University of Oxford § Women's education, and University of Cambridge § Women's education

The first higher-education institution in the United Kingdom to allow women and men to enter on equal terms, and hence be admitted to academic degrees, was the University of Bristol (then established as University College, Bristol) in 1876.

Given their dual role as both boarding house and educational establishment, individual colleges at Oxford and Cambridge remained segregated for much longer. The first Oxford college to house both men and women was the graduate-only Nuffield College in 1937; the first five undergraduate colleges (Brasenose, Hertford, Jesus, St Catherine's, and Wadham) became mixed in 1974. The first mixed Cambridge college was the graduate-only Darwin from its foundation in 1964. Churchill, Clare, and King's Colleges were the first previously all-male colleges of the University of Cambridge to admit female undergraduates in 1972. Magdalene was the last all-male college to become mixed in 1988.

The last women's college in Oxford, St Hilda's, became mixed as of Michaelmas term 2008. Two colleges remain single-sex (women-only) at Cambridge: Murray Edwards (New Hall) and Newnham.

United States

Further information: List of earliest coeducational colleges and universities in the United States and Women's colleges in the United States

 

Oberlin College, the oldest extant mixed-sex institute of higher education in the United States

The oldest extant mixed-sex institute of higher education in the United States is Oberlin College in Oberlin, Ohio, which was established in 1833. Mixed-sex classes were admitted to the preparatory department at Oberlin in 1833 and the college department in 1837. The first four women to receive bachelor's degrees in the United States earned them at Oberlin in 1841. Later, in 1862, the first black woman to receive a bachelor's degree (Mary Jane Patterson) also earned it from Oberlin College. Beginning in 1844, Hillsdale College became the next college to admit mixed-sex classes to four-year degree programs.

The University of Iowa became the first coeducational public or state university in the United States in 1855, and for much of the next century, public universities, and land grant universities in particular, would lead the way in mixed-sex higher education. There were also many private coeducational universities founded in the 19th century, especially west of the Mississippi River. East of the Mississippi, Wheaton College (Illinois) graduated its first female student in 1862. Bates College in Maine was open to women from its founding in 1855, and graduated its first female student in 1869. Cornell University and the University of Michigan each admitted their first female students in 1870.

Around the same time, single-sex women's colleges were also appearing. According to Irene Harwarth, Mindi Maline, and Elizabeth DeBra: "women's colleges were founded during the mid- and late-19th century in response to a need for advanced education for women at a time when they were not admitted to most institutions of higher education." Notable examples include the Seven Sisters colleges, of which Vassar College is now coeducational and Radcliffe College has merged with Harvard University. Other notable women's colleges that have become coeducational include Wheaton College in Massachusetts, Ohio Wesleyan Female College in Ohio, Skidmore College, Wells College, and Sarah Lawrence College in New York state, Pitzer College in California, Goucher College in Maryland and Connecticut College.

By 1900 the Briton Frederic Harrison said after visiting the United States that "The whole educational machinery of America ... open to women must be at least twentyfold greater than with us, and it is rapidly advancing to meet that of men both in numbers and quality". Where most of the history of coeducation in this period is a list of those moving toward the accommodation of both men and women at one campus, the state of Florida was an exception. In 1905, the Buckman Act was one of consolidation in governance and funding but separation in race and gender, with Florida State College for Women (since 1947, Florida State University) established to serve white females during this era, the campus that became what is now the University of Florida serving white males, and coeducation stipulated only for the campus serving black students at the site of what is now Florida A&M University. Florida did not return to coeducation at UF and FSU until after World War II, prompted by the drastically increased demands placed on the higher education system by veterans studying via GI Bill programs following World War II. The Buckman arrangements officially ended with new legislation guidelines passed in 1947.

Primary and secondary schools

Several early primary and secondary schools in the United States were single-sex. Examples include Collegiate School, a boys' school operating in New York by 1638 (which remains a single-sex institution); and Boston Latin School, founded in 1635 (which did not become coeducational until 1972).

Nonetheless, mixed-sex education existed at the lower levels in the U.S. long before it extended to colleges. For example, in 1787, the predecessor to Franklin & Marshall College in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, opened as a mixed-sex secondary school. Its first enrollment class consisted of 78 male and 36 female students. Among the latter was Rebecca Gratz who would become an educator and philanthropist. However, the school soon began having financial problems and it reopened as an all-male institution. Westford Academy in Westford, Massachusetts has operated as mixed-sex secondary school since its founding in 1792, making it the oldest continuously operating coed school in America. The oldest continuously operating coed boarding school in the United States is Westtown School, founded in 1799.

Colleges

See also: Oberlin College § History

A minister and a missionary founded Oberlin in 1833. Rev. John Jay Shipherd (minister) and Philo P. Stewart (missionary) became friends while spending the summer of 1832 together in nearby Elyria. They discovered a mutual disenchantment with what they saw as the lack of strong Christian principles among the settlers of the American West. They decided to establish a college and a colony based on their religious beliefs, "where they would train teachers and other Christian leaders for the boundless most desolate fields in the West".

Oberlin College and the surrounding community were dedicated to progressive causes and social justice. Though it did reluctantly what every other college refused to do at all, it was the first college to admit both women and African Americans as students. Women were not admitted to the baccalaureate program, which granted bachelor's degrees, until 1837; prior to that, they received diplomas from what was called the Ladies' Course. The initial 1837 students were Caroline Mary Rudd, Elizabeth Prall, Mary Hosford, and Mary Fletcher Kellogg.

The early success and achievement of women at Oberlin College persuaded many early women's rights leaders that coeducation would soon be accepted throughout the country. However, for quite a while, women sometimes were treated rudely by their male classmates. The prejudice of some male professors proved more unsettling. Many professors disapproved of the admission of women into their classes, citing studies that claimed that women were mentally unsuited for higher education, and because most would "just get married", they were using resources that, they believed, male students would use better. Some professors simply ignored the women students.

By the end of the 19th century 70% of American colleges were coeducational, although the state of Florida was a notable exception; the Buckman Act of 1905 imposed gender-separated white higher education at the University of Florida (men) and Florida State College for Women. (As there was only one state college for blacks, the future Florida A&M University, it admitted both men and women.) The white Florida campuses returned to coeducation in 1947, when the women's college became Florida State University and the University of Florida became coeducational. In the late 20th century, many institutions of higher learning that had been exclusively for people of one sex became coeducational.

Co-education fraternities

Main article: List of social fraternities and sororities § Coeducational fraternities

A number of Greek-letter student societies have either been established (locally or nationally) or expanded as co-ed fraternities.

"Coed" as slang

In American colloquial language, "coed" or "co-ed" is used to refer to a mixed school. The word is also often used to describe a situation in which both sexes are integrated in any form (e.g., "The team is coed"). As a noun, the word "coed" is used to refer to a female student in a mixed gender school. The noun use is considered sexist and unprofessional by those who argue that it implies that including women somehow transforms what is "normal" (male-only "education") into something different ("coeducation"): technically both male and female students at a coeducational institution should be considered "coeds". Numerous professional organizations require that the gender-neutral term "student" be used instead of "coed" or, when gender is relevant to the context, that the term "female student" be substituted. Usage guides make no exception for any use of the noun to distinguish a female student at a coeducational institution from a student at a women-only institution: they do not even mention such use, possibly because such uses are comparatively rare and because the term cannot be distanced from its unacceptable uses.

Effects

If the sexes were educated together, we should have the healthy, moral and intellectual stimulus of sex ever quickening and refining all the faculties, without the undue excitement of senses that results from novelty in the present system of isolation.

— Elizabeth Cady Stanton

For years, a question many educators, parents, and researchers have been asking is whether it is academically beneficial to teach boys and girls together or separately at school. Some argue that coeducation has primarily social benefits by allowing males and females of all ages to become more prepared for real-world situations and that students familiar with a single-sex setting could be less prepared, nervous, or uneasy.

However, some argue that at certain ages, students may be more distracted by the opposite sex in a coeducational setting, but others point to this being based on an assumption that all students are heterosexual. There is evidence that girls may perform less well in traditionally male-dominated subjects such as the sciences when in a class with boys, but other research suggests that when the previous attainment is taken into account, that difference falls away. According to advocates of coeducation, without classmates of the opposite sex, students have social issues that may impact adolescent development. They argue that the absence of the opposite sex creates an unrealistic environment not duplicated in the real world. Some studies show that in classes that are separated by gender, male and female students work and learn on the same level as their peers, the stereotypical mentality of the teacher is removed, and girls are likely to have more confidence in the classroom than they would in a coeducational class.

Gender neutrality

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gender neutrality (adjective form: gender-neutral), also known as gender-neutralism or the gender neutrality movement, is the idea that policies, language, and other social institutions (social structures or gender roles) should avoid distinguishing roles according to people's sex or gender. This is in order to avoid discrimination arising from the impression that there are social roles for which one gender is more suited than another. The disparity in gender equality throughout history has had a significant impact on many aspects of society, including marketing, toys, education and parenting techniques. In order to increase gender neutrality in recent years, there has been a societal emphasis on utilizing inclusive language and advocating for equality.

In policy

Proponents of gender neutrality may support public policies designed to eliminate gender distinctions. Gender neutrality in the law has changed the nature of custody disputes, making it more likely that men will be awarded custody of their children in the event of a divorce.

The legal definition of gender has been a controversial topic to transgender people; in some countries, in order to be legally defined as a new gender, people must first undergo sex reassignment surgery resulting in sterilization.

California joined Oregon in its effort to recognize gender neutrality. On 15 October 2017, California governor Jerry Brown signed new legislation into law that allows persons the option to select gender-neutral on state identification cards. On 9 October 2021, governor Gavin Newsom signed California Assembly Bill 1084 requiring many department stores in California to maintain a gender neutral children's section.

Gender blindness

Main article: Gender-blind

Gender blindness is the practice of not distinguishing people by gender.

Someone who is gender blind does not necessarily side with ideas of movements found within gender-related biases, though these accounts are debatable.

Gender-neutral language

Main article: Gender-neutral language

Gender-neutral language, gender-inclusive language, inclusive language or gender neutrality is a form of linguistic prescriptivism that aims to eliminate (or neutralize) reference to gender in terms that describe people. This can involve discouragement of the use of gender-specific job titles, such as policeman/policewoman, fireman, stewardess, chairman, and, arguably, in favor of corresponding gender-neutral terms such as police officer, firefighter, flight attendant and chairperson (or chair). Other gender-specific terms, such as actor and actress, may be replaced by the originally male term (actor used for either gender).

The practice of gender-neutral language is highly encouraged among law students and the Supreme Court of the United States. However, research has shown that, as of 2010, only one judge on the Supreme Court consistently uses gender-neutral language.

The pronouns he or she may be replaced with they when the gender of the person referred to is unknown. In addition, those who do not identify as either female or male may use a gender-neutral pronoun to refer to themselves or have others refer to them.

A traditional view encouraged the pronoun he to be considered neutral up until the 60s-70s, when feminist objections occurred, so people began to use "he or she" pronouns. Today, using "he or she" can be considered making assumptions about someone's gender. The pronoun they wouldn't necessarily refer to a male or female.

In 2012 a gender-neutral pronoun hen was proposed in Sweden, and in 2014 it was announced that this word would be included in the following edition of the Swedish Academy Glossary. Swedish thus became the first language to have a gender-neutral pronoun added by an authoritative institution. Hen can be used to describe anyone regardless of their sex or gender identification. Gender-neutral pronouns that have been proposed in the United States have not had widespread use outside of LGBTQ communities.

LGBTQ activists have suggested that the pronouns "he/she and his/her linguistically enforce a normative two sex system" where one must fall into the gender binary of either male or female. There is a growing variety of several different gender-neutral pronouns. These may include sie, hir, hirs, and hirself, and also include z or p. LGBTQ activists argue that only changing pronouns to be gender-neutral for people who are "sex/gender" ambiguous creates someone "other" than the norm. A proposed solution to this issue is to move towards the use of inclusive language and gender-neutral pronouns for everyone, even when the sex of a person is known, in an effort to remove the alleged subconscious effects of language in reinforcing gender and gender stereotypes.

"Gender-neutral language" should not be confused with "genderless language", which refers to a language that does not have grammatical gender.

Relationship to feminism and masculism

Gender neutrality emphasizes the equal treatment of men and women and people of any other gender legally with no discrimination whatsoever. This goal is, in principle, shared with both feminists and masculists. However, in gender neutralism, the emphasis is on transcending the perspective of gender altogether rather than focusing on the rights of specific genders.

Relationship to transhumanism

Main article: Postgenderism

Gender neutrality or "gender transcendence" is part of the transhumanist concept of postgenderism, which is defined as the movement to erode the cultural, biological, psychological, and social role of gender within society.

Advocates of postgenderism argue that the presence of gender roles, social stratification, and cogno-physical disparities and differences are generally to the detriment of individuals and society. Given the radical potential for advanced assistive reproductive options, postgenderists believe that sex for reproductive purposes will either become obsolete, or that all post-gendered humans will have the ability, if they so choose, to both carry a pregnancy to term and father a child, which, postgenderists believe, would have the effect of eliminating the need for definite genders in such a society.

From a transhumanist perspective, a shift in gender neutrality is seen as a direct result of the movement of postgenderism. Along with gender fluidity and postgenderism, gender neutrality would be a contributor if a movement of transhumanism were to occur. Given that an individual's phenotype serves as the primary basis for gender classification, transhumanism would erode the binary division of gender, allowing for gender neutrality within future societies.

Impact

In marketing

Marketing is often focused on targeting specific demographics and creating products focused on specific genders. Public views on gender-specific marketing have gained media attention in recent years. For example, a protest against a Bic pen "Bic for her" that was targeted towards women by the posting of thousands of fake reviews of the pen mocking its female-specific advertising.

Children's toys

Further information: Gendered associations of pink and blue

 

¡Libertad para jugar! (Freedom to play!). Gender neutrality in children's toys campaign, by the Madrid City Council

In the marketing of children's toys, gender-specific marketing has been very prevalent. According to a study conducted in 2012, "children learn about the toys seen as appropriate for their gender not only from adults and children but also through the media, which serves as an important source of socialization and gender socialization." Color palettes and types of toys are gendered characteristics of the toys marketed to either boys or girls. The results of the study mentioned above, showed that "toys that were pastel colored were much more likely to be marketed as toys for 'only girls', while bold colored toys were much more likely to be marketed as toys for 'boys only'" and also found that blue was a more gender-neutral color. Action toys, like cars, weapons, and building toys are marketed toward boys, while toys that have to do with beauty and domestic work are marketed towards girls.

An additional study done in 2014 focuses on labeling of toys, "for girls" and "for boys", paired with explicit colors, pink and blue, and gender stereotypes in children. In one study, novel items were presented to children, painted different colors and labeled differently. A nutcracker was presented to the children as blue and labeled "for boys" in once instance, but to other children it was pink and labeled "for girls". The results of the studies found labeling profoundly affected the children's liking towards toys, and the other study showed that girls are more affected than boys in terms of labeling.

The "color pink did seem to give girls permission to explore masculine toys. This indicates that pink may signify that it is allowable for girls to show interest in counter-stereotypic toys and activities". This gender specific marketing/labeling exposes children to gender roles and that color can be an indicator of gender. Children "show less involvement with toys stereotypically associated with the opposite sex, and they reject such toys more than ones stereotypically associated with their own sex or neutral ones". Toys are a medium for children to form gender stereotypes. Some toys, like stuffed animals, have proven to be gender-neutral and are usually marketed to both boys and girls.

Parents also play a large role in building their children's gender socialization, as they are the ones buying the toys for their children. The popularity of making toy advertising gender neutral has been increasing through media such as ads showing boys playing with baby dolls (a toy that has commonly been marketed only towards girls in the past). At a young age for both boys and girls start to identify themselves by their gender role and are limited to what they can or can't do. Not just that, but the environment around young boys and girls also influences their behavior.

In 2019, Mattel, a company with a long brand history within gender typing (e.g. Barbie), introduced its Creatable World doll line, a new toy that is the "world's first gender neutral doll".

Fashion

In the marketing of fashion lines, some designers are beginning to design gender-neutral clothing, that is not labeled as either "men's" or "women's". In today's society gender neutrality is becoming more widely accepted. "Both males and females are now 'allowed' to wear certain clothing items once thought inappropriate for their sex". Women have more freedom because them wearing more masculine clothing, like suits, is generally accepted, but men wearing feminine clothing, like dresses, is less approved. This aspect of gender neutral clothing says "that the world according to (ruling-class) men [is] the only viable one" because most gender neutral clothing looks like typical male clothing.

In education

At Nicolaigarden and Egalia, two preschools in Sweden, have replaced the terms "girl" and "boy" with the gender neutral pronoun "hen", granting students the ability to challenge or cross gender boundaries. In a study done in 2016 that measured teachers' facilitation of gender-typed and gender-neutral activities during free play, it was concluded that teachers facilitated masculine activities at higher rates than feminine. It is suggested by the study that, "Informing teachers about this trend may prompt teachers to reflect on their own teaching practices and serve as a catalyst for the promotion of teaching practices that create classroom environments in which boys and girls receive support for engagement with a variety of classroom activities." Other suggestions and pursuits to broaden the mentality behind gender neutrality in schools include

• allowing for gender-neutral prom and homecoming attendance and courts to accommodate same-sex-coupled and transgender participants
• designating gender-neutral bathrooms and on-campus housing
• establishing gender-neutral and co-ed fraternal student organizations
• not separating toys in gender-specific areas
• not having gender-specific sports in physical education lessons

Dress code

The abolishment of certain dress codes has been conserved among institutions depending on the limitations imposed on students and their comfort in such attire. For transgender students, strict dress codes may complicate their path towards confirming their gender identity, a cost which can affect these individuals well throughout their life. Ways in which compliance with attire in institutions can cause reverberations in other areas of life are factors such as lowered academic performance, higher dropout rates, and increased disciplinary action. As of 2017, 150 primary schools in the United Kingdom have introduced gender neutral uniforms and students feel more in control of their identity as a result of this policy change.

College

In 2005, University of California, Riverside became the first public university campus in the US to offer a gender-neutral housing option. A February 2014 Washington Post article noted that nearly 150 US schools now have gender-neutral housing programs. Other institutions such as University of Southern California and Princeton, acknowledge some of the dangers that come as a result to housing options as a member of the LGBTQ community and have also developed separate housing to accommodate such students.

In 2016, La Salle University students voted to have a gender-neutral housing option in their dormitories, which would make La Salle the first Catholic university in the United States to offer gender-neutral living. This student-led vote caused controversy in Catholic circles across the United States, since it is traditional for Catholic school residence halls to be completely separated by gender. La Salle University has since incorporated accommodating housing options for students and has urged other Catholic universities to make changes in housing policies as well.

A growing number of American colleges are adopting chosen name and identity policies. As of June 2022, at least 788 American colleges allow students to use a chosen first name, and at least 242 colleges allow students to designate their personal pronouns.

In parenting

Jennifer Hockenbery Dragseth describes gender as "the classification of male or female that includes social, psychological, and intellectual characteristics. The theory of gender neutrality claims that biological sex does not inevitably determine social, psychological, and intellectual characteristics." Parental control strategies can be defined as any strategy that a parent uses to alter, change, or influence their child's behavior, thoughts, or feelings. Meta-analysis reveals from Endendijk, "the basis of gender-neutral parenting also known as GNP, does not project a gender onto a child. It allows parents and children to break away from gender binary."

Gender-neutral parenting is allowing children to be exposed to a variety of gender types so children can explore their gender without restriction from society or the gender they were born with. Autonomy-supportive strategies provide the child with an appropriate amount of control, a desired amount of choice, acknowledge the child's perspectives and provide the child with meaningful rationales when the choice is constrained. Even if a child does not display gender-bending behaviors, gender neutral parenting allows them to explore and not be constrained in the gender they were born with. This can be through letting them play with non-stereotypical toys for their gender, allowing them to pick their own clothing, allowing them to act more "feminine" or "masculine", and allowing children to question their gender. In the sociology book Sex Differences In Social Behavior: A Social Role Interpretation, Alice Eagly theorizes that sex differences have been proposed, based on biological factors, early childhood socialization, and other perspectives. This allows children to express themselves without feeling pressure from being extremely masculine or feminine.

Attitudes and judgement towards gender-roles and toys

Parent attitudes towards the child can influence child behaviors such as in toy selection. For example, parent, offer children toys and other objects that are gender-specific, such as trucks for boys and dolls for girls. A study done in Austria, where 324 parents participated showed that by parents' judgments about the desirability of different types of toys for their children and how the parents' judgment based on gender-typing of toys, gender role attitudes shows that parents rated same-gender-typed and gender-neutral toys as more desirable for their children than cross-gender-typed toys. This indicates that most traditional parents limit their child interests and behaviors than egalitarian parents.

In terms of education, parents' attitudes towards their child gender reflects on their expectation for the child. Because parents are still unwilling to send their daughters to the schools, there is a low participation rate of female education compared to male. Parents tend to treat their sons and daughters differently, preferring their sons over their daughters due to the gender roles society has placed, considering children as helping hands for their parents. For example, sons should provide economic support while daughters are expected to conform to the house. Although sons are still preferred, the attitudes towards neutrality have steadily increased in the past two decades. Feminist economics such as Julie A. Nelson argues that for a nonsexist society, the differences are revalued positively while others such as Patricia Elliot believes gender‐specific categories need to be eliminated to enable a positive society.

Although gender-neutral parenting allows their children to be able to decide how they experience their gender, non-gender neutral parents believe the children are programmed in from birth to play with gender directed toys, and parents had no influence towards their children selecting a gender-stereotyped toy.

Children at a young age start to develop a sense of how everyone starts to dress depending the gender of each individual. For instance, when a girl dresses in a way that contradicts societal norms, she might suffer bullying. According to Kent, Canterbury, states that among children between 3 and 7 years old, "younger girls were more motivated to dress in gender-typed ways than older girls were, and understanding of gender stability (i.e. knowledge that gender remains stable over time) predicted appearance rigidity in both boys and girls".

In children's literature

Gender neutrality in children's literature refers to the idea that publishers, writers and illustrators should avoid marketing towards children through the basis of their sex or gender, and should instead focus on expanding content rather than reinforcing social and gender roles. Gender roles and stereotypes permeate our culture and are established through a variety of means such as visual culture or daily interactions with family and peers. Gender neutrality in children's marketing is a growing movement among parents, children and publishers. Although there are many homes to gender stereotypes, the books that children are encountering have both psychological and social uses during a time when children are constantly constructing ideas from information around them and assimilating new knowledge with previous knowledge. Organizations such as Let Toys Be Toys, Let Books Be Books and Pinkstinks have been gaining publicity for their work in favour of gender neutrality within children's literature and toys.

Representations of gender within picture books

Studies at Provider-Parent Partnerships have shown that children begin forming their sense of gender identity at 2–3 years old and begin 'Gender typing' at ages 3–4. In a study surrounding Gender Perception in Adults, Dr. Kyle Pruett reported: "A defining moment came in gender difference research when a group of male babies were dressed in pink, and then handed to adults who were told they were girls. The adults responded with language and handling styles shown to be classically female-stereotypic: 'adorable, cuddly, sweet, cute,' etc. Female babies in blue were called 'slugger, tough, strong, stubborn,' etc. This is how we simply wind up reinforcing gender-stereotypic behaviors, rather than fostering individual growth and development."

The concept of a child developing their sense of self in formative years has been a topic of discussion among cultural theorists as well as in children's literature criticism. In The Pleasures of Children's Literature, Shulamith Shahar states, "Child raising practices and educational methods as well as parent-child relation are determined not solely by biological laws but are also culturally constructed".

Theorists such as Jacques Lacan and Judith Butler have contributed to this notion of the formation of an individual's subjectivity and sense of self. Lacan's concept of the mirror stage has contributed to modern understanding of subjectivity and has since been applied to Children's Literature Criticism and child development. The Mirror Stage refers to the process in which an infant recognizes itself in the mirror for the first time and, "the transformation that takes place in the subject when he assumes an image". As Hamida Bosmajian has stated in Understanding Children's Literature, "The literary text, then, is an image of the unconscious structured like a language." Bosmajian proceeds to write, "When the [Mirror Stage] is given utterance in the reader-interpreter's language, [the meaning] is deferred."

Judith Butler's notion of gender performativity also forms correlations to gender-specific children's literature through analyzing the ways characters perform their gender and has been taken up in Children's literature criticism. Butler has defined gender performativity stating: "the production actually happens through a certain kind of repetition and recitation". Butler also relays that, "Performativity is the discursive mode by which ontological effects are installed." Although Butler's subject is the adult subject the concept of repetition transcends to themes of childhood as well. Both Butler and Lacan consider repetition as being an underlying factor in forming one's identity which can then be applied to children's literature through the act of children rereading books multiple times.

Studies in representation in children's literature

Gender imbalances have continued to appear in children's literature through the lack of diverse representations. In the 2011 issue of Gender & Society, the study "Gender in Twentieth-Century Children's Books" discovered large disparities. Through looking at almost 6,000 children's books published between 1900 and 2000, the study, led by Janice McCabe, a professor of sociology at Florida State University, found that males are central characters in 57% of children's books published each year, with just 31% having female central characters. Male animals are central characters in 23% of books per year, the study found, while female animals star in only 7.5%. In putting forth these narrow representations of characters, it becomes difficult for a child to identify themselves within gender binaries and roles. In an earlier study in 1971, out of fifty-eight books, twenty-five had a picture of a woman somewhere in them, yet only four did not having a woman (or animal representing a woman) wearing an apron. Many parents read their own childhood favourites to their children, through an endearing plot, or through beautiful illustrations. Although the adult may recognize that the stereotypes may be outdated, the children may lack that criticality in reading these stories. Furthering this portrayal of gender in children's books the ways in which each gender is portrayed is very different. Female characters are much more likely to take on passive and supportive roles whereas male characters fulfill a self-sufficient, strong and active role. This discriminatory portrayal takes place in many children's books and runs the risk of leading children toward a misrepresented and misguided realization of their true potential in their expanding world.

Not only are these inequalities present within the books, but gender disparities also exist among those creating children's books. In the 2013 Vida: Women in Literary Arts count, male authors and illustrators drastically outnumbered those who were female (64:21).

In children's literature in the media

In March 2014, the British organization, Let Toys Be Toys, expanded to include a children's book specific category, Let Books Be Books. This expansion specifically addressed gender specific titles on books such as The Beautiful Girl's Colouring Book and The Brilliant Boys Colouring Book and the limitations in which these titles impose upon children. As Katy Guest stated in an article for the Independent in March 2014, after Let Books Be Books launched, "What we are doing by pigeon-holing children is badly letting them down. And books, above all things, should be available to any child who is interested in them." As the organization Let Toys Be Toys states, "Just like labeling toys 'for girls' or 'for boys' these books send out very limiting messages to children about what kinds of things are appropriate for girls or for boys."

The organization quickly gained momentum and almost immediately acquired over 3000 signatures for their petition causing publishers Parragon and Usborne to lend their support and stop publishing gender specific children's books. In November 2014, publishers of Peter and Jane Books, Ladybird Books agreed to make titles gender neutral stating: "At Ladybird, we certainly don't want to be seen to be limiting children in any way."

Controversy

Publishers such as Igloo Books and Buster Books continue to publish gender-specific children's books. In an interview in March 2014 Buster Editor Michael O'Mara stated: "The proof is in the pudding. Our two best children books ever are The Boys' Book and The Girls' Book. The boys' one included things like how to make a bow and arrow and how to play certain sports and you'd get things about style and how to look cool in the girls' book. 2,000 people signed this petition [in the first day], but we sold 500,000 copies of The Girls' Book. These statistics tell me I'm going in the right direction."

In a letter in response to this interview Let Books Be Books expressed the following concerns to Michael O'Mara: "We have been contacted by many parents, teachers and supporters who have serious concerns about several of the titles currently on your website and being marketed in shops across the UK. They believe, as we do, that labeling books by gender narrows children's choices and imaginations by telling them what they 'should' be reading, instead of letting them choose books that interest them."

List of gender-neutral children's literature

Although there are many examples of gender-neutral children's literature, the following list contains a few notable examples.

• John Dough and the Cherub – L. Frank Baum
• Black Dog – Levi Pinfold
• How To – Julie Morstad
• How to Heal a Broken Wing – Bob Graham
• Little You – Richard Van Camp & ill. Julie Flett
• One Night, Far From Here – Julia Wauters
• Once Upon a Northern Night – Jean E. Pendziwol & ill. Isabelle Arsenault
• Ruby's School Walk – Kathryn White & ill. Miriam Latimer
• Samuel's Baby – Mark Elkin & ill. Amy Wummer
• Spork – Kyo Maclear & ill. Isabelle Arsenault
• Super Daisy – Kes Gray & ill. Nick Sharratt
• The Big Brother – Stephanie Dagg & ill. Alan Clarke
• The King & the Seed – Eric Maddern & ill. Paul Hess
• The Sunflower Sword – Mark Sperring & ill. Mirian Latimer
• We Go Together!: A Curious Selection of Affectionate Verse – Calef Brown
• Wild – Emily Hughes
• Call Me Tree – Maya Christina González

Activism

In 2006 the National Student Genderblind Campaign was created as a collaborative grassroots organization intended to educate college students, administrators, and others throughout the United States. The NSGC advocates for the implementation of gender-inclusive dorm room and bathroom options.

Twin siblings Emma Moore and Abi Moore founded a campaign, Pinkstinks, in London in May 2008 to raise awareness of the damage caused by gender stereotyping of children. Pinkstinks claims that the marketing of gender-specific products to young children encourages girls to limit their ambitions later in life.

In a 2014 campaign, the United States-based grassroots group Play Unlimited announced the month-long observance of No Gender December.

In 2016, Canada came out with the "No Big Deal" campaign which is a "positive affirming response to the recent conflict around transgender peoples' pronouns." This campaign encourages people to ask what pronouns people identify as, instead of just assuming based on people's looks. It also tries to make different pronouns easier for people to understand and grasp.

Gender-neutral lawsuits

Jones v. Bon Appetit Management Company et al

In February 2014, former catering worker Valeria Jones sued employer Bon Appetit Management Co. in Oregon for US$518,000 after co-workers repeatedly referred to Jones as female. Jones did not identify as either male or female and when applying to work at Bon Appetit, purposely never filled out the male or female identification question. They repeatedly informed co-workers that they did not want to be identified using male or female gender pronouns and asked managers to address the employees as a group and educate the others about gender identity. Jones's suit states that the complaint to human resources was never resolved and the managers did not follow through per their requests, prompting their resignation.

Zzyym v. Tillerson

In September 2014, Dana Zzyym, an American U.S. Naval veteran, tried to apply for a passport. Instead of labeling their gender as male or female on the application form, they "wrote 'intersex' below the 'sex' category" and "requested 'X' as an acceptable marker." They presented a birth certificate which labels Zzyym as neither male nor female. Zzyym was born with ambiguous genitalia and identifies as intersex. The State Department declined Zzyym's application. Zzyym sued the State Department, "saying the federal government violated the Constitution's guarantees of due process rights and discriminated against Zzyym based on gender." In November 2016, the court issued the ruling in favor of Zzyym. But as of October 2017, the case has been reopened due to the State Department's continued refusal of a gender marker that is neither male nor female on its passport applications.

Elisa Rae Shupe

On 27 April 2016, Elisa Rae Shupe filed a petition in Multnomah County, Oregon, to no longer be designated male or female. Shupe, a retired United States Army sergeant, was born with male anatomy and lived for a time as a transgender woman. She later began to self-identify as non-binary. The Oregon state statutes had been changed in 2013 to no longer require proof of medical transition before a change in legal gender status. The statutes did not specify whether the new status had to be a binary one. Two of Shupe's doctors wrote letters for her stating that she was neither male nor female. On 10 June, Judge Amy Holmes Hehn granted Shupe's petition. The ruling was a significant advance toward government recognition of non-binary individuals. In 2019, Shupe issued a statement explaining that she now disagreed with the concept of gender identity and was returning to living as a man. However, in 2022 she published a declaration that she was a trans woman, cutting ties with gender-critical feminists and conversion therapists. Shupe also changed her name to Elisa Rae Shupe.

Criticism

Much as with similar approaches to dealing with racism and ethnicity, not recognising and taking account of participants' sex can be harmful. It posits that it functions in a post-sexism society where women are no longer treated differently than men on the basis of their sex. Meanwhile, gendered treatment prevails all over the world. Of a study of organisations which offered women-only services, 23% said that their reason was based on women's inequality and the desire to address that imbalance; 20% that women-only spaces promote female development and empowerment; 18% that they were providing a service not being met by unisex services and which focused on the specific needs of women.

Solely using "he" and "his" as gender-neutral language can lead to a lack of representation or acknowledgment of certain identities. When pronouns such as "he" or "his" are used to refer to gender-neutral persons, there is a subconscious "sex bias" towards males over females, despite the subject being gender neutral. In sports, a 1993 study concluded that more gender references are made to women's versus men's sports, distinguishing female sports as "other". However, the same study pointed out that having a gender-neutral sports environment could lead to a near complete lack of acknowledgement of women's sports/teams.

The legal test of the "reasonable person" has been criticized for being genderblind in some areas of the law, particularly sexual harassment. In the American case of Ellison v. Brady, 924 F.2d 872 (1991), the court held that "a sex-blind reasonable person standard tends to be male-based and tends to systematically ignore the experiences of women". In The Hidden Gender of Law, Regina Graycar and Jenny Morgan argued that gender-neutral rape statutes can imply that men and women are perpetrators and victims of sexual violence at similar rates, which is not accurate.

Gender neutral bathroom signage, United States, 2017

Studies indicate a broad support for single-sex service options to remain available. Of 1000 women polled by the Women's Resource Centre, 97% stated that women should have the option of accessing female-only services if they were victims of sexual assault. 57% indicated that they would choose a women-only gym over a mixed gym. Single-sex services can have a benefit in providing greater comfort and engaging participants who would otherwise not get involved. The ridding of all sex-separated restrooms could forfeit the feelings of having a safe bathroom space for some people by replacing them with restrooms for all genders/identities.

Gender-neutral laws have had unintended consequences. The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) of 1993 entitles certain employees a 12-week unpaid leave from work without a risk of job loss and applies to all genders. The employees must qualify for this leave by having been employed for over 12 months and be applying for leave due to a "serious health condition", pregnancy, or adoption. Despite FMLA's gender-neutral language, there are concerns about the law reinforcing gender disparity involving childcare between males and females; since FMLA remains gender neutral, it does not recognize the burden of females during pregnancy that males do not experience. Women with children in the workplace are not given as much attention or resources as is needed for their female-specific, personal/at-home issues, reinforcing the gender disparity despite the law's need to be gender neutral.

According to Lauren Spinner, "Portrayals of boys tend to emphasize masculine gender roles and stereotypically masculine play and toys, whereas portrayals of girls tend to emphasize feminine gender roles and stereotypically feminine play and toys".