CDU/CSU on equality and diversity

The CDU and the CSU say they support gender-fair language but reject what they see as an ideologically driven obligation to use gendered forms. Schools, universities, broadcasters and public administration should not use such gender language.

The CDU and the CSU do not want special gender wording in schools and public offices. This also applies to universities and broadcasters. The parties say forcing this wording shuts people out. Language should still be fair to women and men.

The platform argues that an obligation to use gendered forms creates barriers, excludes people and patronizes them. The parties want to work toward public institutions doing without it. At the same time, they stress that they support gender-fair language in principle.

The CDU and the CSU want to present a package of measures against discrimination toward older people. In addition, networks against loneliness are to receive continued support, which the program justifies with the aging society.

The CDU and the CSU want to protect older people from unfair treatment. They plan several measures for this. Older people should also be able to use digital services well. The parties also want to do something about loneliness.

The package includes awareness and education, work arrangements suited to older employees, and rules against discrimination at work. Digital services are to be usable for older people. Against loneliness, the parties rely on neighborhood help, volunteering, counseling centers and crisis hotlines. Health services, social institutions and educational providers are to coordinate their help better.

The CDU and the CSU reject that minors can change their gender entry and first name without an expert assessment under the Selbstbestimmungsgesetz (Self-Determination Act). They demand independent psychological assessments and do not want to allow what they see as a careless change for adults either.

Today people can change their gender entry easily at a government office. The CDU and the CSU do not want this for children and teenagers. A psychologist should write a report first. The parties reject surgery before age 18. Rules should also get stricter for adults.

The parties justify this with protecting children and teenagers during puberty, which they describe as an unstable phase of life. They reject surgery on minors in principle. For adults, the entry should not be changeable at will. Before gender-affirming surgery, a detailed second consultation by an independent body is to be mandatory.