Pupils reject gendering - at least when the "Bayerischer Rundfunk" (BR) asks them about it in the limited context of a discussion event. This is currently causing a lot of amusement on the Internet, because the BR apparently brought out heavy artillery to convince the students of the importance of gender-fair language.
The reason for the amusement on the Internet is that now, several months after the event at the beginning of the summer, excerpts of the event are circulating on Twitter. Sitcom-like laughter was incorporated into the video, and some footage of the podium was edited in such a way that the discussants appear much more crippled than they really were. Nevertheless, many commentators interpret it as proof of the failure of a language agenda perceived in this way by left-liberal gender advocates in politics and the press.
But let's start at the beginning: In May, the working group of public broadcasters (ARD) organized a "Day of Diversity" for the second time. On this occasion, the BR invited schoolchildren and talk guests to a discussion about "gender-appropriate and gender-sensitive language". Students were able to vote on gender and their opinions on gender throughout the event, and the results were projected onto the podium stage in real time.
There sat five guests. Of these guests, three argued for gender language, one of whom identified as "non-binary"; a guest (the current BR press spokesman Markus Huber) was not a user, but also not a fundamental opponent of gender, only the hasty prescribed "imposing" of the way of speaking, for example by press offices. The moderation itself used all possible gender forms with reference to its neutrality; She used to sit for the Greens in the Bavarian state parliament, until she founded her own micro-party (“mut”), on whose website the *innen form predominates.
So while the majority on stage was more or less unequivocally in favor of gendering, the same was not true of the audience, who were able to vote via the Mentimeter voting tool. As is usual with school events, not the entire room was actively involved, but the first vote gave a clear picture.
When asked what they think of gender, eleven students answered “don't care”, nine “unnecessary” and eight “gender is great”. What do students understand by “gender”? Most say: Not the asterisk as in “teachers” or the version called “progressive form” (“teachers”), but the older form of double naming, such as in “teachers”.
The discussion began with this mood picture, in which a lonely discussant (the former Bavarian state school spokesman Moritz Meusel with a background in the Young Liberals) addressed fundamental issues: For example, that gender raises more questions than it answers, that it affects people with spelling and spelling problems Language weaknesses make life difficult, that there are gaps between those with the right morals and those without, and that decree from above, as some imagined it, is reminiscent of totalitarian systems.
Meusel's arguments obviously caught on. In a final survey, the BR wanted to know from the students how they thought about the questions asked at the end of the discussion. Most of them answer that gender “continues to be found unnecessary”. After that, “No opinion” and “I find gender stupid from now on” ranked second and third.
Fourth on the list came those who thought genderen was “still great” – at the bottom were those who were won over by the podium majority and found genderen “great from now on”.
