The stupid thing about moves to eliminate gender differences on a shopping site, of all places, is…
The stupid thing about moves to eliminate gender differences on a shopping site, of all places, is that when I am shopping for a toy for a child, it does not matter why the child prefers certain toys over others -- whether it is due to nature or nurture -- because at that point, the child has preferences, and I want to provide toys that match those preferences, and if those preferences happen to be in line with what children in society of each gender generally want, then there's nothing wrong with that, and preventing me from being able to search by gender just limits how much I'll be willing to use the site.
The problem is worse with Amazon than most sites, because the breadth of available products is so great that gender filters can really make a huge difference in getting to what I might actually want to purchase.
Pushing gender equivalence on children and their families who have already established preferences is just stupid. There's nothing immoral about boys liking things "for boys", or girls things "for girls." If you have another label for it, fine, but the group of things with that label are generally what people who associate with that label want, and it's nonsense to say that it is wrong for them to want those things, or to make it harder for them to get to those things for the sake of your social agenda. 
A report that Amazon no longer sorts toys into “boy” and “girl” categories is currently sweeping the internet. It’s not exactly true, but it might be a sign that the change might be on the way.
"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."
Leave a comment