This follows startling research suggesting "children [as young as two years old] learn 'gender-role' behaviour that could lead to domestic violence".
Discriminatory examples cited as potentially dangerous include propagating the belief that boys don't cry and labelling assertive girls as "bossy". This campaign has my support.
2. Women's only movie viewing
A theatre in Austin, Texas, created controversy when it held women-only screenings of the new Wonder Woman movie.
Some men were furious about that. To be fair, it was both sexist and discriminatory so there's no surprise there was opposition.
A women-only screening doesn't appeal to me but, if it's within the law, I don't have a problem with theatres offering such sessions.
I'd struggled to find a compelling argument for women-only viewings, then this comment appeared on Twitter: "There was a guy in the audience cat calling Wonder Woman, in case anyone still had questions about why women-only screenings are a cool idea."
Oh, I see now. Maybe it's not such a strange idea after all. Does that mean discrimination is okay if there's a reasonable excuse for it?
3. Gender-specific McDonald's toys
Last month, a Tokoroa woman, after being asked if her child was a girl or a boy, questioned McDonald's policy of dishing out gendered toys with its Happy Meals.
It's a fair enough question. I'm surprised that McDonald's is still doing this. Firstly, in this gender-fluid, non-binary environment, asking children what gender they identify with is no longer as simple a question as it once seemed to be.
Secondly, the dolls-are-for-girls-and-trucks-are-for-boys stereotype has been frowned upon for what must be decades now. McDonald's could have skirted both potentially contentious issues by simply dishing out toys without an implied gender bias. Problem solved.
4. Gender-neutral uniforms
Having released new guidelines for gender-neutral uniforms, the Post Primary Teachers' Association says that all children (regardless of gender) should be able to "choose from a range of shorts, trousers, skirts of different lengths and styles ..."
There is something a bit old-fashioned about the fact that girls' school uniforms typically include skirts or dresses while boys' uniforms include shorts and trousers.
It's unnecessarily pigeon-holing children and, of course, it can be a veritable minefield for transgender people. Additionally, the impracticality of wearing skirts all day is said to restrict the ability of girls to move and exercise.
Yet, I'm not sure how removing the gender prescriptions would work in practice. Won't it just mean that girls get the opportunity to wear shorts and trousers if they choose to?
That could end up being an even more discriminatory situation with girls having further options while boys stay with the tried and true.
Bill English's "I don't know if that is gender-neutral or just girls wearing shorts" comment may have appeared tone-deaf to the nuances of the issue but, actually, I think he just might have nailed the essence of the debate.
Until there are boys rocking up to school in uniform skirts, this recommendation represents no more than a clumsy attempt at political-correctness.
5. Findings that women are more "robust"
An article in The Guardian entitled "The weaker sex? Science that shows women are stronger than men" revealed that women prevail "[w]hen it comes to longevity, surviving illness and coping with trauma".
According to one expert: "Pretty much at every age, women seem to survive better than men." Furthermore, "[i]n extremely old age, the gap between the sexes becomes a glaring one". This discrepancy in robustness is evident from birth: "For reasons unknown, girls may be getting an extra dose of survivability in the womb".
Science may be unable to explain this phenomenon but, fortunately, reader responses provided some enlightenment: "The real reason us men usually die before our wives, is because we want to", "Men die earlier just to get away from the lecturing" and "My grandmother once told me that women live longer than men because they deserve a bit of peace after a lifetime of looking after others."
One thought-provoking comment said: "Imagine if it was women who lived on average 5 or 6 years less than men. We would be told that misogyny was literally killing women and that it was because women did the bulk of domestic labour. There would be a demand to spend proportionally more on women's medicine until a balance was achieved."
You know what? Just quietly, that is a really good point. I would definitely have labelled that hypothetical example as misogyny. (In my defence, it is one of my favourite words.)
Gender issues sure are complicated.
