7 ms·

I've never understood the illiberal desire to treat boys and girls so differently. I'm glad I live in a country where sexism is illegal at a fundamental level -

I've never understood the illiberal desire to treat boys and girls so differently. I'm glad I live in a country where sexism is illegal at a fundamental level -- this kind of law would be quickly struck down.

HatchedLake721 5mo ago
Which country is that?
coldtea 5mo ago
Maybe it's based on millions of years of biological differences in their capacities and functions (starting from body strength and role in reproduction), plus differences in social roles, of which some of the latter might be arbitrary, but some are necessary adjustments every historical society understood.
- dude250711 5mo ago
  The big idea lately is to ignore all of that and just give everyone equal rights but unequal responsibilities.
- cpursley 5mo ago
  I always find it really amusing that the most pro trust the science people who are in total agreement with all the evolution theories are often also the ones who are the first to be in complete denial that us humans might actually share some characteristics with our closest genetic relatives (chimpanzees).
  - akimbostrawman 5mo ago
    >the most pro trust the science people who are in total agreement with all the evolution theories Like with most religions which "the science" very much qualities for at this point, there believers will just pick and choose what to believe and use to get there way.
  - TurdF3rguson 5mo ago
    Bonobos are just as close and they're matriarchal. They're a very different species.
    - cpursley 5mo ago
      Yes, and that’s a good point too. Pretty big difference between the sexes with them as well.
    - Quarrel 5mo ago
      They're chimps that are on the other side of the Congo river (and both types of genus Pan can't swim). They're super close to chimps (and definitely much closer than us), rather than "a very different species".
- almostjazz 5mo ago
  If strength is relevant, should particularly weak boys be "treated like girls"? Should particularly strong girls be "treated like boys"? Should girls and women without functioning reproductive systems be treated like boys? What differences in social roles have been proven "necessary"? Is the fact that chimpanzees do things a certain way remotely good evidence that we should do something that way too? Answer key: - no - no - no - which gamete you supply? - no
  - coldtea 5mo ago
    >What differences in social roles have been proven "necessary"? Given that we're in a huge democraphic crisis which will bring untold disaster and misery, a huge depression crisis, marriage crises, and a loneliness epidemic, perhaps we're not the best arbiters of whether they've been proven "necessary" or not. As for the questions, to some degree they indeed do, so partly yes, but also those differences in treatment are not on a case by case basis, but on average.
    - giraffe_lady 5mo ago
      None of that is given.
    - teiferer 5mo ago
      > huge democraphic crisis If the west would stop vilifying people of different skin color and continent of origin, we'd realize that humanity as a whole does not have that much of a demographic problem. "We are too many" as an argument to keep borders closed and "we are too few, get more kids" are incompatible arguments, unless people are honest about racism.
      - coldtea 5mo ago
        >we'd realize that humanity as a whole does not have that much of a demographic problem. Humanity as a whole has a demographic problem. A few countries are just outliers (being still quite above > 2.1), but nowhere enough to offset anything at a global scale, and besides, they're on the decline too, just earlier in the curve. Second, caring about your ethnic culture is not the same as "vilifying people of different skin color and continent of origin". It's just not treating nations as comprised of interchangable consumer/worker units whose shared culture and history (or lack thereof) doesn't matter. Most countries have a long history tied to a culture created from one or a handful of ethnicites, they're not just pieces of land for settling associated with a civic contract, like the us has been (and of course even that came at the erasure of the native cultures and populations). >"We are too many" as an argument to keep borders closed and "we are too few, get more kids" are incompatible arguments They're totally compatible if you don't treat people like interchangable units arbitrarily exchanged, but as humans with a past, a history, an ethnicity, a culture, and so on, they've build over time. Same way you wouldn't just exchange one of your kids with another kid, but that doesn't mean you think the other people's kids are inferior.
- mock-possum 5mo ago
  Or maybe it’s based on bigotry
  - AussieWog93 5mo ago
    Nah, I have girls and there's definitely a biological difference there even at a young age. They're much more sensitive to more subtle negative feedback in a way that boys just aren't.
    - simgt 5mo ago
      You have some data point at home so you extrapolate on the entire population?
      - antics9 5mo ago
        Well, having both girls and boys, I can concur.
        zamadatix 5mo ago
        While I hold the same conclusion as you, individuals chiming in to concur based on their own experience is nothing more than a way to validate what certain people of the time & place commonly believe to be true. E.g. if people were apt to believe girls preferred green peppers more often than boys, there will always be plenty who say "Well, having both girls and boys, I can concur". It could be true, it could be false, or the cause could be something else. E.g., because people think there are certain differences it shapes differences in development which lead to some of them actually being more common for nothing more than the sum of environmental factors - even if those biases only started as misconceptions. Whichever it actually is, there will usually be large segments of the populations who would observe it to be conflicting things from an individual at-home view and it takes a lot of work & really good data to be able to make a meaningful claim about what and why differences exist.
        kelipso 5mo ago
- teiferer 5mo ago
  How on earth is that an acceptable argument for physical abuse that is directed purely at boys? I'm not saying girls should be beaten too. But the ethical blindness here is striking. Besides, girls are just as much capable of bullying as boys are. Society might have taught them to use different methods, but that doesn't make it any more acceptable or any less vicious.
- Barrin92 5mo ago
  It's not even remotely clear to me what this has to do with the topic at hand because insofar as gender plays into bullying girls tend to be more impacted than boys, and secondly corporal punishment and 'disciplining' women by men was historically normalized. The Singaporean habit of caning is a very modern practice of industrial and military society that has no biological analog, an offshoot of mass discipline society of the 20th century and gender roles of Victorian Britain where groups of men needed to be 'whipped into shape' and women were feminine and pure, but it sure is convenient to randomly invoke biology when one runs out of arguments
- tzs 5mo ago
  Which of these biological differences in capacities and functions make it so that girls should not be punished by physical pain but it is OK to punish boys with a physical pain using a method that often leaves permanent scars and lasting psychological damage?
  - CGMthrowaway 5mo ago
    Men bear greater physical risk (war, dangerous labor etc) and boys/young men have always been subject to violent "rites of passage" that prepare them for this. Girls and women receive greater physical protection, as required to manage reproductive capacity and long‑term demographic stability.
- array_key_first 5mo ago
  Historical societies are... historical. We shouldn't be looking to them. They didn't have the technology we have today. Yes boys are strong. You know what's stronger than a boy? Gun. Girl with gun is stronger. It's not fucking 400 AD and this isn't Rome and we don't have slaves. Things are different today. Yes, there are biological differences, but they definitely matter the least now as opposed to ever. Think about jobs. Women can do basically every modern job a man can do, and definitely the high paying ones. Now think about ancient societies and why that wasn't the case.
xienze 5mo ago
This sounds crazy, I know, but perhaps boys and girls are different.
- imtringued 5mo ago
  This comment explains absolutely nothing and it feels utterly irrelevant in either direction and probably shouldn't have been posted. It can be read negatively against boys or negatively against girls so why post it?
  - xienze 5mo ago
    > This comment explains absolutely nothing Sure it does. Boys and girls are different. Hence, they receive different treatment, which the OP was originally befuddled by.
    - abc123abc123 5mo ago
      [flagged]
  - arkey 5mo ago
    > It can be read negatively against boys or negatively against girls so why post it? This part I really do not understand. The undeniable fact that boys and girls are different in several aspects does not make either superior or inferior in value or in dignity. On the other hand, anything can be read negatively if you put enough will and effort into it, as so many people around here demonstrate. How about being a bit more constructive in our criticism?
  - gwbas1c 5mo ago
    "but perhaps boys and girls are different" should be interpreted as a joke; specifically satire on people who actively push that there are no differences between the sexes. --- To bring some context: I have a friend who called up other friends in the group and repeats over and over that there's no difference between the sexes, that it's artificial, ect. He did this when he dated a trans woman, yet didn't seem to realize that his partner felt so strongly about their gender that they changed it.
deleted 5mo ago
[deleted]
roysting 5mo ago
It doesn’t really matter. Most likely your indigenous population that was targeted to believe such terminal things like males and females being the same, will not be in power for long, let alone possibly even be around at all in the future. This modest puppy have is just a tiny little blip on the timeline where your society and culture was poisoned with a mental viruses to self-exterminate. Your society will become an extinct group of people that probably will not even be remembered in another 200 years. If there is another advanced civilization yay attempts to understand the past like Europeans did, they will have an impossible time understanding what happened over the last 80 or so years when people lost the ability to tell the difference between males and females. Have you ever heard the term “functional extinction”? It’s when a population still exists and it may even be reproducing, but the surrounding conditions and characteristics make it effectively inevitable that the population will go extinct over time. Being unable to differentiate between males and females and treating them the same is clear evidence of a terminal mental virus in humans. This very idea that males and females are the same will invariably die because it is not a successful reproductive strategy by definition.
cultofmetatron 5mo ago
one of the many reasons america is so screwed up right now is because of our insistence on ignoring the very obvious statistically significant dimorphism between genders. that doesn't' mean trans people and nonbinary dont' exist. We need to make accommodations for them where appropriate. However, it doesn't do any one any favors trying to homogenize how we teach kids. you inevitably help one at the expense of the others. The fact that a small group of special interest groups have made "boys and girls are different" into some divisive political issue is absurd.
- techblueberry 5mo ago
  > one of the many reasons America is so screwed up right now Interesting, which metrics are a result of ignoring the very obvious statistically significant dimorphism between genders, and not say political corruption, or corporate consolidation? Which statistical significant dimorphism causes this “screw up”?
  - cultofmetatron 5mo ago
    well I could start with feminist marginalization of male role models from early education. The school to university pipeline is highly weighted in favor of giving women success. If we recognized that boys and girls are different, we could continue pushing women to success without pathologising male traits by giving each what they need to succeed. instead we have a one size all box that helps one at the expense of the other. The fact that teenager boys can't tell that Andrew Tate is a characture of failed masculinity or that looksmaxxing is straight up idiotic is a pretty glaring example of that.
    - techblueberry 5mo ago
      The problem is that we treat men and women differently because we don't respect that there's a difference between men and women? I'm not saying that something is not rotten in the state of Denmark, I just don't think you've managed to clearly articulate it at all, I think it's much more complicated than "we need to respect the differences between the genders" as your word salad reflects. In fact, as usual I think within group differences are much greater than between group differences, and "We need to respect the difference between the genders" is culture war nonsense that gets the prescription wrong. In fact, couldn't you argue that the problem is too much of a focus on the difference between men and women leading us to help women get to college and not men? Shouldn't we treat them more the same?
lII1lIlI11ll 5mo ago
> I've never understood the illiberal desire to treat boys and girls so differently. I'm glad I live in a country where sexism is illegal at a fundamental level -- this kind of law would be quickly struck down. Which country would that be? Unless you are from a select few Norther European countries your military enlistment/draft laws are likely quite sexist.
- qweiopqweiop 5mo ago
  I've always found that quite interesting. I agree women should have equal rights and never be discriminated against, but when push comes to shove I imagine men would be the ones called up to fight in wars for most countries around the world. Should we call up women and put them in equal roles? I don't even know how you'd solve this so keen to hear any suggeations/thoughts
  - lII1lIlI11ll 5mo ago
    > Should we call up women and put them in equal roles? I don't even know how you'd solve this so keen to hear any suggeations/thoughts Why the hypothetical? In Israel, for example, women often serve in equal roles during wars, although neither at the same rate as men, nor are laws there completely gender-neutral. I would imagine in Northern European countries with actual gender-neutral military regulations they will be called up similarly to men.
- Aerroon 5mo ago
  >Unless you are from a select few Norther European Even if you were, conscript training is not equally distributed: 24% of conscripts in 2023 were women in Sweden, 32% in 2024 in Norway. Maybe one day it will get there but it's been a decade and has not got there yet.
  - lII1lIlI11ll 5mo ago
    > Even if you were, conscript training is not equally distributed: 24% of conscripts in 2023 were women in Sweden, 32% in 2024 in Norway. I know but OP was talking about laws specifically, not their application.
VoodooJuJu 5mo ago
[dead]
trick-or-treat 5mo ago
Sexism is illegal in your country? Whoa, your prisons must be crowded!
theoeifjf 5mo ago
Does not US have like 70% infant circumference rate and conscription for single gender?
deleted 5mo ago
[deleted]
xdennis 5mo ago
> I've never understood the illiberal desire to treat boys and girls so differently. I'm glad I live in a country where sexism is illegal at a fundamental level -- this kind of law would be quickly struck down. It's kind of a weird take to say that the issue here is that girls aren't being whipped too.
electriclove 5mo ago
Simple, boys and girls ARE different. Yes, girls can be bullies too, etc..
odiroot 5mo ago
Well, how many reportedly liberal and democratic countries have obligatory draft for just one gender?

HatchedLake721 5mo ago

Which country is that?

coldtea 5mo ago

Maybe it's based on millions of years of biological differences in their capacities and functions (starting from body strength and role in reproduction), plus differences in social roles, of which some of the latter might be arbitrary, but some are necessary adjustments every historical society understood.

dude250711 5mo ago
The big idea lately is to ignore all of that and just give everyone equal rights but unequal responsibilities.
cpursley 5mo ago
I always find it really amusing that the most pro trust the science people who are in total agreement with all the evolution theories are often also the ones who are the first to be in complete denial that us humans might actually share some characteristics with our closest genetic relatives (chimpanzees).
- akimbostrawman 5mo ago
  >the most pro trust the science people who are in total agreement with all the evolution theories Like with most religions which "the science" very much qualities for at this point, there believers will just pick and choose what to believe and use to get there way.
- TurdF3rguson 5mo ago
  Bonobos are just as close and they're matriarchal. They're a very different species.
  - cpursley 5mo ago
    Yes, and that’s a good point too. Pretty big difference between the sexes with them as well.
  - Quarrel 5mo ago
    They're chimps that are on the other side of the Congo river (and both types of genus Pan can't swim). They're super close to chimps (and definitely much closer than us), rather than "a very different species".
almostjazz 5mo ago
If strength is relevant, should particularly weak boys be "treated like girls"? Should particularly strong girls be "treated like boys"? Should girls and women without functioning reproductive systems be treated like boys? What differences in social roles have been proven "necessary"? Is the fact that chimpanzees do things a certain way remotely good evidence that we should do something that way too? Answer key: - no - no - no - which gamete you supply? - no
- coldtea 5mo ago
  >What differences in social roles have been proven "necessary"? Given that we're in a huge democraphic crisis which will bring untold disaster and misery, a huge depression crisis, marriage crises, and a loneliness epidemic, perhaps we're not the best arbiters of whether they've been proven "necessary" or not. As for the questions, to some degree they indeed do, so partly yes, but also those differences in treatment are not on a case by case basis, but on average.
  - giraffe_lady 5mo ago
    None of that is given.
  - teiferer 5mo ago
    > huge democraphic crisis If the west would stop vilifying people of different skin color and continent of origin, we'd realize that humanity as a whole does not have that much of a demographic problem. "We are too many" as an argument to keep borders closed and "we are too few, get more kids" are incompatible arguments, unless people are honest about racism.
    - coldtea 5mo ago
      >we'd realize that humanity as a whole does not have that much of a demographic problem. Humanity as a whole has a demographic problem. A few countries are just outliers (being still quite above > 2.1), but nowhere enough to offset anything at a global scale, and besides, they're on the decline too, just earlier in the curve. Second, caring about your ethnic culture is not the same as "vilifying people of different skin color and continent of origin". It's just not treating nations as comprised of interchangable consumer/worker units whose shared culture and history (or lack thereof) doesn't matter. Most countries have a long history tied to a culture created from one or a handful of ethnicites, they're not just pieces of land for settling associated with a civic contract, like the us has been (and of course even that came at the erasure of the native cultures and populations). >"We are too many" as an argument to keep borders closed and "we are too few, get more kids" are incompatible arguments They're totally compatible if you don't treat people like interchangable units arbitrarily exchanged, but as humans with a past, a history, an ethnicity, a culture, and so on, they've build over time. Same way you wouldn't just exchange one of your kids with another kid, but that doesn't mean you think the other people's kids are inferior.
mock-possum 5mo ago
Or maybe it’s based on bigotry
- AussieWog93 5mo ago
  Nah, I have girls and there's definitely a biological difference there even at a young age. They're much more sensitive to more subtle negative feedback in a way that boys just aren't.
  - simgt 5mo ago
    You have some data point at home so you extrapolate on the entire population?
    - antics9 5mo ago
      Well, having both girls and boys, I can concur.
      - zamadatix 5mo ago
        While I hold the same conclusion as you, individuals chiming in to concur based on their own experience is nothing more than a way to validate what certain people of the time & place commonly believe to be true. E.g. if people were apt to believe girls preferred green peppers more often than boys, there will always be plenty who say "Well, having both girls and boys, I can concur". It could be true, it could be false, or the cause could be something else. E.g., because people think there are certain differences it shapes differences in development which lead to some of them actually being more common for nothing more than the sum of environmental factors - even if those biases only started as misconceptions. Whichever it actually is, there will usually be large segments of the populations who would observe it to be conflicting things from an individual at-home view and it takes a lot of work & really good data to be able to make a meaningful claim about what and why differences exist.
        kelipso 5mo ago
teiferer 5mo ago
How on earth is that an acceptable argument for physical abuse that is directed purely at boys? I'm not saying girls should be beaten too. But the ethical blindness here is striking. Besides, girls are just as much capable of bullying as boys are. Society might have taught them to use different methods, but that doesn't make it any more acceptable or any less vicious.
Barrin92 5mo ago
It's not even remotely clear to me what this has to do with the topic at hand because insofar as gender plays into bullying girls tend to be more impacted than boys, and secondly corporal punishment and 'disciplining' women by men was historically normalized. The Singaporean habit of caning is a very modern practice of industrial and military society that has no biological analog, an offshoot of mass discipline society of the 20th century and gender roles of Victorian Britain where groups of men needed to be 'whipped into shape' and women were feminine and pure, but it sure is convenient to randomly invoke biology when one runs out of arguments
tzs 5mo ago
Which of these biological differences in capacities and functions make it so that girls should not be punished by physical pain but it is OK to punish boys with a physical pain using a method that often leaves permanent scars and lasting psychological damage?
- CGMthrowaway 5mo ago
  Men bear greater physical risk (war, dangerous labor etc) and boys/young men have always been subject to violent "rites of passage" that prepare them for this. Girls and women receive greater physical protection, as required to manage reproductive capacity and long‑term demographic stability.
array_key_first 5mo ago
Historical societies are... historical. We shouldn't be looking to them. They didn't have the technology we have today. Yes boys are strong. You know what's stronger than a boy? Gun. Girl with gun is stronger. It's not fucking 400 AD and this isn't Rome and we don't have slaves. Things are different today. Yes, there are biological differences, but they definitely matter the least now as opposed to ever. Think about jobs. Women can do basically every modern job a man can do, and definitely the high paying ones. Now think about ancient societies and why that wasn't the case.

xienze 5mo ago

This sounds crazy, I know, but perhaps boys and girls are different.

imtringued 5mo ago
This comment explains absolutely nothing and it feels utterly irrelevant in either direction and probably shouldn't have been posted. It can be read negatively against boys or negatively against girls so why post it?
- xienze 5mo ago
  > This comment explains absolutely nothing Sure it does. Boys and girls are different. Hence, they receive different treatment, which the OP was originally befuddled by.
  - abc123abc123 5mo ago
    [flagged]
- arkey 5mo ago
  > It can be read negatively against boys or negatively against girls so why post it? This part I really do not understand. The undeniable fact that boys and girls are different in several aspects does not make either superior or inferior in value or in dignity. On the other hand, anything can be read negatively if you put enough will and effort into it, as so many people around here demonstrate. How about being a bit more constructive in our criticism?
- gwbas1c 5mo ago
  "but perhaps boys and girls are different" should be interpreted as a joke; specifically satire on people who actively push that there are no differences between the sexes. --- To bring some context: I have a friend who called up other friends in the group and repeats over and over that there's no difference between the sexes, that it's artificial, ect. He did this when he dated a trans woman, yet didn't seem to realize that his partner felt so strongly about their gender that they changed it.

deleted 5mo ago

[deleted]

roysting 5mo ago

It doesn’t really matter. Most likely your indigenous population that was targeted to believe such terminal things like males and females being the same, will not be in power for long, let alone possibly even be around at all in the future. This modest puppy have is just a tiny little blip on the timeline where your society and culture was poisoned with a mental viruses to self-exterminate. Your society will become an extinct group of people that probably will not even be remembered in another 200 years. If there is another advanced civilization yay attempts to understand the past like Europeans did, they will have an impossible time understanding what happened over the last 80 or so years when people lost the ability to tell the difference between males and females. Have you ever heard the term “functional extinction”? It’s when a population still exists and it may even be reproducing, but the surrounding conditions and characteristics make it effectively inevitable that the population will go extinct over time. Being unable to differentiate between males and females and treating them the same is clear evidence of a terminal mental virus in humans. This very idea that males and females are the same will invariably die because it is not a successful reproductive strategy by definition.

cultofmetatron 5mo ago

one of the many reasons america is so screwed up right now is because of our insistence on ignoring the very obvious statistically significant dimorphism between genders. that doesn't' mean trans people and nonbinary dont' exist. We need to make accommodations for them where appropriate. However, it doesn't do any one any favors trying to homogenize how we teach kids. you inevitably help one at the expense of the others. The fact that a small group of special interest groups have made "boys and girls are different" into some divisive political issue is absurd.

techblueberry 5mo ago
> one of the many reasons America is so screwed up right now Interesting, which metrics are a result of ignoring the very obvious statistically significant dimorphism between genders, and not say political corruption, or corporate consolidation? Which statistical significant dimorphism causes this “screw up”?
- cultofmetatron 5mo ago
  well I could start with feminist marginalization of male role models from early education. The school to university pipeline is highly weighted in favor of giving women success. If we recognized that boys and girls are different, we could continue pushing women to success without pathologising male traits by giving each what they need to succeed. instead we have a one size all box that helps one at the expense of the other. The fact that teenager boys can't tell that Andrew Tate is a characture of failed masculinity or that looksmaxxing is straight up idiotic is a pretty glaring example of that.
  - techblueberry 5mo ago
    The problem is that we treat men and women differently because we don't respect that there's a difference between men and women? I'm not saying that something is not rotten in the state of Denmark, I just don't think you've managed to clearly articulate it at all, I think it's much more complicated than "we need to respect the differences between the genders" as your word salad reflects. In fact, as usual I think within group differences are much greater than between group differences, and "We need to respect the difference between the genders" is culture war nonsense that gets the prescription wrong. In fact, couldn't you argue that the problem is too much of a focus on the difference between men and women leading us to help women get to college and not men? Shouldn't we treat them more the same?

lII1lIlI11ll 5mo ago

> I've never understood the illiberal desire to treat boys and girls so differently. I'm glad I live in a country where sexism is illegal at a fundamental level -- this kind of law would be quickly struck down. Which country would that be? Unless you are from a select few Norther European countries your military enlistment/draft laws are likely quite sexist.

qweiopqweiop 5mo ago
I've always found that quite interesting. I agree women should have equal rights and never be discriminated against, but when push comes to shove I imagine men would be the ones called up to fight in wars for most countries around the world. Should we call up women and put them in equal roles? I don't even know how you'd solve this so keen to hear any suggeations/thoughts
- lII1lIlI11ll 5mo ago
  > Should we call up women and put them in equal roles? I don't even know how you'd solve this so keen to hear any suggeations/thoughts Why the hypothetical? In Israel, for example, women often serve in equal roles during wars, although neither at the same rate as men, nor are laws there completely gender-neutral. I would imagine in Northern European countries with actual gender-neutral military regulations they will be called up similarly to men.
Aerroon 5mo ago
>Unless you are from a select few Norther European Even if you were, conscript training is not equally distributed: 24% of conscripts in 2023 were women in Sweden, 32% in 2024 in Norway. Maybe one day it will get there but it's been a decade and has not got there yet.
- lII1lIlI11ll 5mo ago
  > Even if you were, conscript training is not equally distributed: 24% of conscripts in 2023 were women in Sweden, 32% in 2024 in Norway. I know but OP was talking about laws specifically, not their application.

VoodooJuJu 5mo ago

[dead]

trick-or-treat 5mo ago

Sexism is illegal in your country? Whoa, your prisons must be crowded!

theoeifjf 5mo ago

Does not US have like 70% infant circumference rate and conscription for single gender?

deleted 5mo ago

[deleted]

xdennis 5mo ago

> I've never understood the illiberal desire to treat boys and girls so differently. I'm glad I live in a country where sexism is illegal at a fundamental level -- this kind of law would be quickly struck down. It's kind of a weird take to say that the issue here is that girls aren't being whipped too.

electriclove 5mo ago

Simple, boys and girls ARE different. Yes, girls can be bullies too, etc..

odiroot 5mo ago

Well, how many reportedly liberal and democratic countries have obligatory draft for just one gender?