What exactly is it about? For example, it is argued that "ideological language practice contradicts the neutrality requirement".

What is it? In its modified version of November 15, 1994. It is very questionable whether the initial theses are correct, namely that gendering is an "idelogical linguistic practice" and whether the state has a duty of neutrality. There are very good reasons to believe that exactly the opposite is the case. "Gender equality" is not an ideology, but a state objective formulated in our Basic Law. This means that no individual right against the state arises from the Basic Law, i.e. that a citizen could sue for gender equality, but the state must take measures to enforce the actual equality of women and men and to work towards the elimination of existing disadvantages. So it doesn't say how the state must implement gender equality, but the state is definitely not neutral here, it must ensure that it itself is gender-equitable.

However, there are indeed groups that are taking the discussion to an exaggerated and exaggerated level. And the debate also includes radical, sometimes extreme positions. 

Our conclusion: ...

Significance for marketing and communication:...

If you want to read more about it: