psychoswim Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 Past birth? Hmmm certainly special.. http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/05/25/toronto-parents-hide-childs-gender-in-bid-to-for-neutral-treatment/ I'm not convinced this won't cause more issues than what the parents are supposed to be avoiding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaronjw Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 I am not sure why but the judgementalist in me thinks they should be charged for child abuse. Boy wearing dresses? Are you kidding me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erk Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 Boy wearing dresses? Are you kidding me? That's not exactly what I'd pinpoint as potentially damaging and abusive. I think the problem here is that the parents are making such a big deal of maintaining gender neutrality, instead of acting like it's a natural thing. This will teach their existing sons that the baby's gender is, in fact, an important part of the baby's identity! I predict a backfire. It's not that hard to raise children in a nominally gender-neutral environment. Identifying their biological sex has nothing to do with it, though. Gender roles are only enforced when you treat children as though their sex is some important part of their identity (eg. she likes girl things, boy toys, et cetera). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cnussey Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 Aaron, that kind of statement is exactly why these parents are fighting so hard to produce children that are not restrained by their gender stereotypes. I don't believe this is a good idea, however. I think they will cause more harm than good. Gender shouldn't be limiting, but that doesn't mean it isn't part of who we are. We should be proud of our differences...and our differences are simply typical behaviours, not the "rule". My daughter is happy to watch Transformers with her brother and I (and I'm the parent who introduced them to my kids, because growing up all I watched was Transformers and Ninja Turtles...and I'm a WOMAN) and my son is happy to play "house", with dolls, and other "girly" things. I never point out the difference, and while there are definitely differences in the two of them, I let them foster those differences, but I simply teach them it's subjective and it's quite fine if my daughter simply wants to be a girly little princess, but it's just as fine if she wants to put on her spiderman costume and tackle her ironman brother to the ground. Genderless is not a fix...it's just compounding the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdDave Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 this kid should be taken away from these nuts. Watch him grow more gender confused then your average kid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaronjw Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 That's not exactly what I'd pinpoint as potentially damaging and abusive. I think the problem here is that the parents are making such a big deal of maintaining gender neutrality, instead of acting like it's a natural thing. This will teach their existing sons that the baby's gender is, in fact, an important part of the baby's identity! I predict a backfire. It's not that hard to raise children in a nominally gender-neutral environment. Identifying their biological sex has nothing to do with it, though. Gender roles are only enforced when you treat children as though their sex is some important part of their identity (eg. she likes girl things, boy toys, et cetera). I have no problems with girls playimg with tonka trucks and boys playing with dolls. Hell, i had cabage patch dolls growing up but i seemed to like them. ,y fiance is a civil engineer so i have no problem with the idea of the sex of an individual not being a barrier to what they like or want to pursue. That said, i think putting a dress on a boy goes a bit beyond the limits of reason. Its not my whole argument its just one thing i found wrong amd didmt have the time to elaborate on the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erk Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 I have no problems with girls playimg with tonka trucks and boys playing with dolls. Hell, i had cabage patch dolls growing up but i seemed to like them. ,y fiance is a civil engineer so i have no problem with the idea of the sex of an individual not being a barrier to what they like or want to pursue. That said, i think putting a dress on a boy goes a bit beyond the limits of reason. Its not my whole argument its just one thing i found wrong amd didmt have the time to elaborate on the rest. Why is a dress such a line crosser? It's just a piece of cloth. I think seeing it as a big deal isn't really any different from thinking it's unconscionable for women to wear pants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaronjw Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 Why is a dress such a line crosser? It's just a piece of cloth. I think seeing it as a big deal isn't really any different from thinking it's unconscionable for women to wear pants. Because like it or not we live in a cruel society where things outside the norm are frown upon yet there are limits to our tolerance it seems. I grew up where it you looked different or were seemingly difference than those around you then you were shuned by your peers. I know the toll that takes as ones mental capabilities as im sure many of us do. Im not a parent but if i were id want to do whatever i could to try amd protect my child from the endless torture (and it is torture) that would be thrust upon them from going out in public wearing a dress. I just think there are better ways to teach gender neutrality and to not let sex be a barrier to happiness than sticking a dress on a boy. And yes i know this viewpoint is predicated on what society finds socially acceptable. Im not suggesting this is rigjt, im simply saying that kid is gojng to get ridiculed and that makes me sad. Sorry for all the spelling issues, im on my ipad lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cnussey Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 Why is a dress such a line crosser? It's just a piece of cloth. I think seeing it as a big deal isn't really any different from thinking it's unconscionable for women to wear pants. I don't think Aaron is saying there is a problem with wearing a dress, he (correct me if I'm wrong) sees a problem with it because there is no crossover--the child could get hurt because of it. Not because we believe it should be wrong, but because others will. I paint my son's toenails and fingernails and let my ex squirm with disgust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astrogirl Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 Genderless is not a fix...it's just compounding the problem. Exactly. They're trying to make the point that biological sex isn't a big deal by making it a secret, thus making it seem like an even bigger deal than it was in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cnussey Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 Exactly. They're trying to make the point that biological sex isn't a big deal by making it a secret, thus making it seem like an even bigger deal than it was in the first place. Yup. Embrace the differences and don't let them define you! If you're a female and want to be a firefighter (and are physically capable of it, cuz I'm not!) then go for it! But there are those of us (me again!) who cannot...but guess what? There are men unable to do it as well. I know a number of men who are nurses, if I had the choice, I'd let them be my nurse anything (snicker)...but seriously, they're excellent at their jobs and they love it. There are things in this world that are obviously more feminine or masculine than others, but that does not make it wrong or taboo. That's what we need to teach our children...gender equity, balance, & tolerance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cnussey Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 Ummmmmm, I would say there are some pretty major physical differences and those include how our brains are wired and the doses and presence of various hormones. They are not "simple behaviours" that have been imposed by a male domineering society to oppress all the poor little women out there. They are real differences dictated by our physiology that have been entrenched and reinforced by societal norms. Pretending that these differences do not exist, or undermining their effect on us is what leads people to thinking this kind of crap is ok. Did I say any of the crap was okay? And actually, the behaviour differences are not that vast. I study the differences and they lead to tendencies, not predetermined behaviours. (Aggression, for example). And our environment feeds off of these differences making them a fair bit larger gaps than most people realize. These differences are not the problem, our environment is the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cnussey Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 1) No one said you did, I'm saying this is a slippery slope. 2) Not behaviour, physiology/anatomy, which yes dictates behaviour. I would humbly disagree that the differences are not that big but respect your POV. I am no expert and haven't studied this but am basing this on my life experience which has been mostly spent in male dominated environments. 3) I would say we minimalize these differences, in our society at least, and this leads to peoples attempts to erase them all together. I think we're misunderstanding each other a bit then, because I agree with you--we shouldn't minimize or attempt to erase our differences--my point is just that they shouldn't define us. I grew up in a tough environment where crying is seen as weak and so is any femininity--and I'm feminine :\ but I've seen this "environment" grow and accept how the world is growing (or attempting to). And then I married a pig. A man who dictated what I wore, who I was friends with, what I could and could not do...and after leaving that relationship, I am now called a "treacherous wife" by this man and his cohert because it was my duty to stay regardless. I know what sexism feels like, I do. I don't think we should erase who we are, but I don't think we are that different. I've studied the hormonal and structural differences, yes, there are differences, but no...not as extreme as you'd expect. Environment means a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cnussey Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 +1. Sorry about the pig. For the record I have worked with some extraordinary women who have destroyed gender boundaries. I went through basic training with one of the first women to ever get into our particular regiment. I went overseas with a woman who would be the first to die in combat. I agree that these boundaries should not limit what we (any gender) can do, they are more of a reflection of the established societal norm. That being said I think that most of us fall within the boundaries of these gender roles and that these people cannot just pretend they don't exist. It doesn't do justice to the kids or the people who transcend these boundaries. This story just pisses me off because I have 6 week old daughter and I cringe at the thought of socially crippling her. Oooooooo congrats...I just grinned at the words "6 week old daughter". You won't cripple her. If you don't go off the deep end like these parents are doing (and I agree with someone who claimed this might be considered a little neglectful), I'm sure you'll do fine. I find it difficult with having one of each, b/c I don't get a break. Lol. I have to combat how my son saw his father treat me, and I have to combat what my daughter learns from her father. She's a very pragmatic child (god I love that) and will figure things out on her own very quickly One step at a time. Love your baby and enjoy having a daughter. My first was the girl...if it had been the boy first, I'd probably only have one kid...he's.......evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayward son Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 I read the original story in the Toronto Star which was significantly longer and spent a lot of time talking to the parents and the other two kids. While I think that these parents are a little loopy and I expected to be outraged - in the end I was not. The first two children, so far, seem well adjusted despite being raised in an unconventional way (not genderless, but certainly unconventional). The parents appear to be very attentive and encouraging. They seem lke excellent parents and I don't think that they have done a thing wrong. And you know just earlier today I told this story to a friend and 3 times I referred to the child as he. Each time that made me conscious that I was placing a label on the child. A label that was entirely unneceassary to the telling of the story. It made me think that perhaps I should more conscious of the labels I choose to give people. Are these parents experimenting on this child? Yes, but all parents experiment on their children. Are these parents damaging their child? Maybe, but the child is 4 months old and it seems more or less to be opinion either way. And, in my career, I have seen a lot of real abuse of children and I won't diminish the hell that millions of children have actually gone through at the hands of their parents or other caretakers, by claiming that a new born without a gender label raised in a loving home is devastating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
createttea Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 And, in my career, I have seen a lot of real abuse of children and I won't diminish the hell that millions of children have actually gone through at the hands of their parents or other caretakers, by claiming that a new born without a gender label raised in a loving home is devastating. +1 I also see the lasting effects of child abuse in my work, and this doesn't look like abuse to me. Maybe the child will decide to be a typical boy in a year or two, maybe the child will enjoy the lack of a glass ceiling that comes with not having a gender label. As long as the parents support the child in whatever social decision is made, the kid's upbringing is definitely unconventional but not bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayward son Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 I should also say that the statement made in the NP that these parents are attempting to raise a genderless child is not actually accurate. They have said that when the child decides to make his/her gender a part of his/her identity that is when other people will know what the child's gender is. The child's preferences will inform others about what the child likes to do instead of the child's gender informing people of what the child "should" like. It is not like the gender is a secret to the parents or two brothers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebencer Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 It is not like the gender is a secret to the parents or two brothers. The sex is not a secret, the gender is unestablished at the moment. That's all I'm gonna contribute to this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdDave Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 The sex is not a secret, the gender is unestablished at the moment. That's all I'm gonna contribute to this one. Actually according to the article the sex is indeed kept secret by the parents. Is this practical or can this be indeed kept secret for long? No. Maybe the world has progressed past my limited way of thinking but I always thought gender could be male or female... Can ones gender be female while sex be male? Sexuality these days can be so confusing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayward son Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 The sex is not a secret, the gender is unestablished at the moment. Yes, I should have phrased that as sex. However, there is no evidence that the parents are looking to raise a child who identifies as the opposite gender of their biological sex (or that they would frown upon the child if he/she chose the opposite gender). Children are impressionable. I was told by my father and uncles the certain things were absolutely not for boys, but girls. Did that influence my preferences? Absolutely. Would I still be a "guy" if I did some of those girly things as a child? Discovered what i actually liked on my own? The scientific evidence says yes. Nature and hormones will do their thing. I am not worried about this kid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psychoswim Posted May 25, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 I should also say that the statement made in the NP that these parents are attempting to raise a genderless child is not actually accurate. They have said that when the child decides to make his/her gender a part of his/her identity that is when other people will know what the child's gender is. The child's preferences will inform others about what the child likes to do instead of the child's gender informing people of what the child "should" like. It is not like the gender is a secret to the parents or two brothers. I read the story in a French paper and didn't realize the TS had a longer story than the NP as I don't usually read those papers, sorry about that. I don't think it's neglectful, but I also find it strange to keep the secret because it seems to bring more attention to the subject? As for dresses, I know it's just a social norm, but it seems such a small price to pay (not wearing them) to prevent some unavoidable teasing? It is just clothing after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayward son Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 I read the story in a French paper and didn't realize the TS had a longer story than the NP as I don't usually read those papers, sorry about that. I don't think it's neglectful, but I also find it strange to keep the secret because it seems to bring more attention to the subject? As for dresses, I know it's just a social norm, but it seems such a small price to pay (not wearing them) to prevent some unavoidable teasing? It is just clothing after all. I am certainly not saying that you were wrong to link to the national post. The Toronto Star piece was back on Saturday and it has since been picked up by other media outlets (although possibly due to space restrictions they have cut down the original piece and seem to do that by keeping the original content that supports their views, and ditching the rest). Judging by the posts here it is certainly a story that touches emotions and it is worth people talking about. No one likes to be teased of course, and most people would do what they can to avoid having their children teased. However, I think that we are better off because of the tiny percentage of people who are willing to risk a lot to challenge social norms. I just watched the documentary called (part of it is available on youtube) and the crap this family waded through to have the constitution of the US upheld and not have religious education forced onto their children at public schools. I am certainly not saying that this case is similar in any way, but if children get tormented because other children don't like the clothes these ones choose to wear then it is the tormenters and their parents who I think should be condemned. These children are pleased with making their own clothing choices. I will feel sad the day that they stop wearing the clothes they want to and instead wear the clothes that are more agreeable to those who torment them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erk Posted May 25, 2011 Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 I would mercilessly make fun of any boy wearing a dress to school. Hopefully, other boys in his school feed him a steady diet of playground sand to knock some sense into him and his parents. This kind of child education is what brought Sir Gaga into the world, we must put a stop to this. But really, it's going to be hard to hide the penis. It's a shame you feel that way. However, there's two ways a kid could go from that kind of bullying, depending on the mettle of the kid. You either wind up with someone so cowed he never does anything for himself, or someone defiantly themselves in the face of any criticism. I'd be shocked if Lady Gaga wasn't bullied as a youth, unless her persona is entirely fictional (completely possible of course). Frankly, I think the only problem with these parents is the idea of pedestalising their child's sexual identity instead of ignoring it. As I said before, keeping it a secret makes the kid's sexual genotype more of a big deal, not less. If they want to accomplish what they aim to, they instead need to just not emphasise particular toys and practices as boyish or girlish. It's not hard. What they are doing is liable to confuse and mess up their current children and the new one, as it places so much emphasis on gender roles they claim to not care about. That's what horrendous about it. When I was little, I played dolls and dressup and makeup with my little sister. I even spent a decent amount of time in drag. I was little and I didn't see anything wrong with it. I also built tree forts and had a deep and persistent obsession with Lego that persists to this day. In the end, I'm entirely gender normal... I'm straight, I have no interest in cross-dressing, I like beer and red meat, and I find the world of cosmetics baffling. The only thing it possibly changed about me is that I don't have a knee-jerk fear of boys doing 'girl' things as is pervasive in this thread. Wearing nail polish at age five is not going to turn a boy into a confused sexual deviant. On an amusing aside, did anyone notice that the national post called the toronto star liberal? lolz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psychoswim Posted May 25, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 Erk, I agree with what you're saying. I am certainly not saying that you were wrong to link to the national post. The Toronto Star piece was back on Saturday and it has since been picked up by other media outlets (although possibly due to space restrictions they have cut down the original piece and seem to do that by keeping the original content that supports their views, and ditching the rest). Judging by the posts here it is certainly a story that touches emotions and it is worth people talking about. No one likes to be teased of course, and most people would do what they can to avoid having their children teased. However, I think that we are better off because of the tiny percentage of people who are willing to risk a lot to challenge social norms. I just watched the documentary called (part of it is available on youtube) and the crap this family waded through to have the constitution of the US upheld and not have religious education forced onto their children at public schools. I am certainly not saying that this case is similar in any way, but if children get tormented because other children don't like the clothes these ones choose to wear then it is the tormenters and their parents who I think should be condemned. These children are pleased with making their own clothing choices. I will feel sad the day that they stop wearing the clothes they want to and instead wear the clothes that are more agreeable to those who torment them. I found the original article, will be reading it later. Thanks for mentioning it btw I agree with you it takes people willing to take a risk to change social norms, I guess in this case I just feel like it's not really a big deal to suggest not wearing a dress? Nothing to do with turning boys gay or whatever, that's just irrelevant. Just that taking risks to stop forcing religious education seems on another level as boys wearing dresses. On the other hand I completely agree that the ones in the wrong are the kids that make fun of it, and of course there'll always be some bullies anywhere you go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MedDream Posted May 26, 2011 Report Share Posted May 26, 2011 I'm not sure I entirely agree with what the parents are doing... but again in other children do seem fine at the moment. Like others, I don't believe this is child abuse because the other 2 children seem to be happy, well-fed, loved, etc. The topic of gender neutrality is interesting though, because even on this forum it's often hard to tell who is male and who is female- something I find interesting because when looking at someone you can almost immediately tell (meaning it's more our looks than anything, and not our words). Just a thought Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.