Reply to comment

I was intrigued during our class discussion about how almost all of the groups decided to keep the often polarized categories about biology and sexuality even though almost everybody agreed that these categories were flawed.  Despite their flaws, I dont think a utopian society where these categories will be eliminated would be a good thing.  Overall, it raises the question: what is the best way to accept diversity?  Do we ignore it or do we embrace and celebrate it.  

Our discussion reminded me of a Newsweek article, "Is Your Baby Racist."  

www.newsweek.com/2009/09/04/see-baby-discriminate.html

The article basically argued that humans are naturally categorizing creatures.  We group things and we notice which things are similar and which things are different than us.  It also argued that humans, especially children, instinctually form in group preferences.  That is to say that children are more likely to believe that their group is better than other groups.  To combat this, the article cited a study which showed that children who have been talked to about race and diversity issues are less likely to children of another race as radically different then them and therefore have a more positive interactions with such children than compared to children who never discussed race issues.  The article argues that we should not ignore diversity but rather embrace it which will make children more accepting of people who are different than them.  This article therefore seems to be citing the "education as change" theory about how to embrace diversity.  I agree and I feel that we need to be educated (and expand on) the binaries that Roughgarden mentions but eliminating these categories could potentially do more harm than good.