Raising a child without gender

[kenny]

These parents won't tell anyone if their new baby is a boy or a girl.

The baby is not intersexed, aka a hermaphrodite; the baby is unambiguously an innie OR an outie.

Fascinating.

http://www.parentcentral.ca/parent/babiespregnancy/babies/article/995112--parents-keep-child-s-gender-secret

 

[mayerling]

wow.just.wow!

 

[kelpie]

Interesting. I believe there were some people in the 60's who tried that but the girl's "girliness" shined through and she demanded pink and frills as soon as she was old enough. One of my closest friends is transgendered and even he and his wife are raising their baby boy with the traditional gender norms.

 

[ForteKitty]

I think it's fine to raise their child w/o gender, but i do wish they wouldn't be teased so they can attend school.

 

[AGBF]

This isn't allowing a child to decide what color he wears or what toys he plays with. It's not saying he can have long hair or short, dress in lace or leather. It's secrecy and shame. It's madness.

AGBF

 

[kenny]

These parents are trailblazers.
They are causing zillions of people to reconsider their notion of gender.

I do however ache for what that poor child will be subjected to because of society's absurd notion that there are only two separate genders and nothing in between, and we are going to torment anyone who dares to not get with the program.

 

[kenny]

This isn't allowing a child to decide what color he wears or what toys he plays with. It's not saying he can have long hair or short, dress in lace or leather. It's secrecy and shame. It's madness.

AGBF

I didn't get any notion of shame of, for, or about the child when I read the article, except that the parents feel that society should be ashamed.
Is that what you meant?

 

[MonkeyPie]

This isn't allowing a child to decide what color he wears or what toys he plays with. It's not saying he can have long hair or short, dress in lace or leather. It's secrecy and shame. It's madness.

AGBF

I didn't get any notion of shame of, for, or about the child when I read the article, except that the parents feel that society should be ashamed.
Is that what you meant?

I read it as, she meant the child will feel shame later. When he's made fun of! How are they going to explain to him when he's older that his siblings got to be boys and HE had to "special?"

 

[pwendyp]

This feels wrong on so many levels - and I'm not sure they are 'trailblazers' at all. It's fine to raise your child with some freedoms, with the idea that men and women can be equals in some areas, and for the childs' peers and elders to treat that child the same if it were a boy or girl.

But...children are born with genetics in place already. Even with the nurture/nature argument, girls and boys are wired differently, and to mess with that, is to mess with the child.

Looking at the picture of the child, I'd bet a bunch 'it's' a boy. Notice the use of inverted commas...'it's' - how awful to denigrate a childs' description to 'it'??

I have a boy and a girl...my daughter was a tomboy...my son was a quiet child when he was little - I treated them equally in some things, and not in others. Was that fair? Yes it was. I don't believe it is healthy to deliberately give a boy pink fluffy dolls to play with...they are not wired for that on the whole. Some maybe, and then they need to be nurtured to get the best out of whatever sexuality might suit them best for their lives.

These parents are playing with fire, and when you play with fire some degree of burning usually results.

 

[davi_el_mejor]

Why can't Storm be... Storm? What if Storm likes to play with trucks and bull-dozers and green army men while wearing a pink tutu, a my little pony shirt and tap shoes? What "gender" would that be? Tom Boy? Girly-Boy?

Sex has nothing to do with gender. Sex is nature given and gender is prescribed by society.

 

[iugurl]

I am not sure why gender must be hidden. I don't understand what freedom has to do with secrecy. If Storm is a girl, there is no reason why she can't play with GI Joes or trucks or whatever if that is what she wants. If Storm is a boy, and he wants to play with dolls, let him. She/he can have freedom without being an "it." I am just really confused as WHY they are doing this. Is this really beneficial for Storm or any child?

 

[y2kitty]

Maybe I just don't get it but the parents certainly seem self important to do this and get publicity. If you want to do something, do it. Not everything needs a Yahoo article.

 

[partgypsy]

Way to ignore reality.

 

[violet3]

that is one of the stupidest things i've ever read. I get the idea of it, but really if they want to not tell people their own sex...fine. But "trailblazing" a new attitude and concept at the expense of your child's social inclusion or exclusion is pretty crappy. Children of all ages, genders, and whatever other demographic you can think of have a tough time fitting in socially - growing up is difficult and many kids can be really, really mean. No matter what way you break it down, gender does play a role in where you fit in socially growing up and who you is in your social circle.

If this family really wanted to let the child decide for himself/herself who or what he/she wants to be, then they wouldn't allow newspaper articles and other media to highlight and issue that will distinctly stigmatize this child later in life, male or female.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

This is pretty messed up on many levels. But, one specifically is they've decided to only conduct this experiement on their youngest. What about their other two kids? Those two are praised for being who they are, yet, the youngest is basically being assummed as being a child who cannot think for his/her self and will be controlled by peers/family/media for being whatever gender the child is.

Kids have enough issues to grow up with as it is...why make create some complicate situation that could potentially mess the kid up for life?

 

[somethingshiny]

I "get" that a person is not their gender. But I do believe that gender is an important part of who we are. By ignoring gender, I'm afraid what the child will get from it is, "we're embarrassed or unhappy with you being a girl/boy so we can't even tell people you're a girl/boy." I don't think it's freeing or liberating at all. I think it's a horrible thing to do as a parent.

 

[Tacori E-ring]

I don't think using my child for a social experiment is responsible. My daughter has cars and dolls. She plays with all toys (both considered male and female) but she identifies most with feminine things. She loves princess dresses, pink, anything with sparkle. It has NOTHING TO DO WITH ME. She has her own opinions and her own preferences. What's wrong with gender identity anyways? Even if a person doesn't identify with their biological gender (transgender) they identify with something. I think that's really important for a sense of belonging. I think racial identity is also important for healthy development. Doesn't mean a child can't be open-minded to other views but they need to feel secure on who THEY are. Don't see how secrets help this.

 

[somethingshiny]

It's the "secret" that bothers me so much. Don't we all tell our children not to keep secrets about Big things?

 

[Autumnovember]

The older brother Jazz LOOKS like a girl..........

 

[elrohwen]

I firmly believe that gender is not a "choice" that we make - it is something within us, within our genetics. Someone can be born with male parts, but know that they were meant to be a female, no matter how they were raised, and to me this is the clearest indication that gender is something ingrained. Obviously there is something more going on than just the "nurture" side of the argument. In the same way, I think a baby boy, raised ambiguously, will have a perception of his gender sooner or later, no matter how many dresses he wears or trucks he plays with.

I think the parents are setting him up for a hard struggle for their experiment. It's a shame.

eta: I should've just dittoed Tacori.

 

[VapidLapid]

I was born blond. Now I shave it off. Still blond.

 

[MonkeyPie]

I was born blond. Now I shave it off. Still blond.

ROFL. Excellent point!

And what's going to happen once this kid has to choose which bathroom to go into?

 

[OUpearlgirl]

Along with the other issues that everyone else has pointed out, it also really bothers me that they are "unschooling" their children. Some routine is actually a GREAT thing. If I hadn't gone to school, learned a schedule, made to understand math (which I hated) I wouldn't be able to get a job or be a responsible adult. It's hard for me to actually believe parent's just let their child learn when and how they want to. Are ya kidding me?

 

[partgypsy]

The thing is, this experiment will last only "so" long. The youngest will see their other siblings taking baths, going to the bathroom, ask questions etc and soon figure out whether they are a boy or a girl. And don't count on the kid keeping a secret. Both my kids went through a period of strong differentiation of "I'm a girl" "I don't like boys" I don't like boy stuff etc. Most kids do. They are trying to figure out the world and classify things and where they belong. So I think their experiment is doomed to failure. BTW my nephew's favorite color when he was a kid was pink too (he turned out to be straight).

I would love my child to get attention for their thoughts or their accomplishments.
(from the article)
Jazz was old enough for school last September, but chose to stay home. “When we would go and visit programs, people — children and adults — would immediately react with Jazz over his gender,” says Witterick, adding the conversation would gravitate to his choice of pink or his hairstyle.

That’s mostly why he doesn’t want to go to school. When asked if it upsets him, he nods, but doesn’t say more

 

[AGBF]

This isn't allowing a child to decide what color he wears or what toys he plays with. It's not saying he can have long hair or short, dress in lace or leather. It's secrecy and shame. It's madness.

I didn't get any notion of shame of, for, or about the child when I read the article, except that the parents feel that society should be ashamed. Is that what you meant?

No. What those psychopaths feel is irrelevant to me except as a study of people with narcissistic personality disorders. They may think society should be ashamed, but they may also think that they wrote The Book of Love. Or that the moon is made out of green cheese. I am saying that it is madness to think that that you can raise a psychologically healthy child while teaching a child that his sex is a dirty secret! He is being taught that his sexuality and his genitalia is bad, and must be kept hidden. Some trailbrazing parents!!!

Deb/AGBF

 

[Brown.Eyed.Girl]

This really disturbs me. I feel like this "experiment" isn't really about teaching one to embrace who he/she is regardless of societal conceptions of gender. Instead, as others have said, this is more about teaching the child from an early age that there is something FUNDAMENTAL about him/her that should be keep hidden and something he/she should be ashamed of. IMO, this is horrible.

I certainly agree that it's important that the next generations should be taught that gender doesn't have to constrain one from living/acting as they truly are, but this isn't the way to go about it.

 

[amc80]

The parents want to make sure that their child doesn't have to fit into a certain pre-designed "box." Well, guess what...now their kid isn't going to fit in to any box at all. The kid isn't going to fit in anywhere. I'm sorry, but I think this is wrong.

 

[Circe]

I'm about as genderqueer positive as it is humanly positive to be, and I still think these parents should reconsider their approach. It's cool that they're raising their older two to express their preferences, society be damned, and follow their hearts, but unless a child shows clear and specific signs of being Orientation: Neuter very early on, what they're doing with their youngest is just another way for them to inflict their preferences onto their offspring. They want their kids to be social rebels? That's cute, and all, but seriously, people: EGO BOUNDARIES. Your children are not extensions of yourselves. Sheesh ....

 

[TravelingGal]

I'm about as genderqueer positive as it is humanly positive to be, and I still think these parents should reconsider their approach. It's cool that they're raising their older two to express their preferences, society be damned, and follow their hearts, but unless a child shows clear and specific signs of being Orientation: Neuter very early on, what they're doing with their youngest is just another way for them to inflict their preferences onto their offspring. They want their kids to be social rebels? That's cute, and all, but seriously, people: EGO BOUNDARIES. Your children are not extensions of yourselves. Sheesh ....

Not to mention that I think it's actually genetically encoded into children to simply want to fit IN. Boy, girl, or otherwise.

 

[bee*]

I am not sure why gender must be hidden. I don't understand what freedom has to do with secrecy. If Storm is a girl, there is no reason why she can't play with GI Joes or trucks or whatever if that is what she wants. If Storm is a boy, and he wants to play with dolls, let him. She/he can have freedom without being an "it." I am just really confused as WHY they are doing this. Is this really beneficial for Storm or any child?

I agree. I don't see how they're trailblazers-if they really wanted to do it for their child, then why involve the media.