Parents Keep Child’s Gender Under Wraps

SatansFuton · May 2011

Let's just look at this purely as an experiment and take out our own feelings on gender/society, or whatever. Is there really any way for these kids to truly make up their own mind? Aren't the older children just conforming to their parents ideals? And won't Storm be influenced not only by his/her parents wish to buck societal norms, but also by his/her older brothers in a household where doing the opposite of what society expects has become the norm? This whole family is being influenced by what the parents believe, and as good as their intentions may be, conforming to their influence is no better than conforming to society.

Children are easily influenced, and most (especially when very young) wish to please their parents. The fact that the parents are encouraging them to be different is resulting in the kids trying to do so to please them. They are doing what they think will please mom and dad, because they clearly think it is better to be different than be like everybody else.

I would like to see this family put to what we'll call "The Alex P. Keaton Test". If they had a child (for arguments sake we'll call Storm a boy in this scenario) that on his own decided he wanted to be a little Reaganite, wear a jacket and tie, and go out to eat at Hooters or something, would they support that? If their child wants to be like everybody else, or the opposite of what the parents stand for, will they still have this type of support for his/her wishes? I think that whether they realize it or not, they are steering their children into certain choices. And where they are taking pride in their children choosing to behave outside the norm, would they/do they show the same support if they pick out a hair style or outfit that is exactly what society would expect them to have?

This whole thing just reminds me of those Goth Kids in South Park. When in your little microcosm of society non-confomity becomes the norm (like when Stan was going to get F'd in the A on Saturday), isn't conforming to society the way to not conform with your group? When these kids get older and might feel the need to rebel against their parents, the parents might find themselves surrounded by a bunch of Alex Keatons.

One day these children will decide to be whatever they want, and I wish them the best. Like it or not, society will influence them. This whole experiment is making what can be a confusing time more confusing simply to prove a point, the parents point. And I don't mean confusion regarding their sexuality. I don't know what effect letting a boy dress like a girl would have on them, if any, in later life. And I don't mean what the result might be once they get out of the house and encounter other children, and the ridicule that can come from that. But let's face it, kids can be cruel, and the names Jazz, Kio and Storm alone are enough to get a kid picked on without anything else piled on top. I just mean the confusing message these kids are getting when it comes to being an individual. The message that being different for the sake of being different is the only way to be unique. And this whole idea that somebody who stands out from society is somehow more enlightened than one of the "sheep".

Personally I found their quote: "What we noticed is that parents make so many choices for their children. It's obnoxious." to be pretty obnoxious. It just reeks of a "we're more enlightened than most parents" mentality. And makes me think this is more of an exercise in their own individuality than that of their children. And where some parents are total dickheads and pressure little boys into sports, little girls into cheerleading or whatever, they are essentially doing the same thing, just in their own way. Individuality and progressive thinking is their sport, and they are living their lives through their children, just like the father who yells at his kids from the sidline of a soccer game.

Cinnamon Girl · May 2011

I get their point about not wanting to raise kids with gender stereotypes, but because the parents and siblings are the greatest influence on a child at that age, and the parents and siblings are the only ones who know the gender, I would think Storm would be raised in the kind of environment they want anyway. They seem to be doing a decent enough not encouraging stereotypes with their other kids, and their genders aren't hidden.

I just think it shouldn't be so much about people knowing or not knowing the kids gender. Whats really important is what the kid is exposed to as influences. It wont take long for the kid to realize it has parts like mom or dad so maybe the most important focus is to surround it with people who don't strictly follow gender stereotypes. Hiding the kids gender just seems like a unnecessary step.

It all feels very showy.

Blockhead · May 2011

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/scien ... 62390.html

There are major hormonal and neurological differences between males and females, and those play a MAJOR role in determining identity. Ignoring this reality is not good for the child.

_ · May 2011

Jeanwah wrote:

_ wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

The bolded part is garbage. You don't have kids, so how do you now, other than what you read, scb? I know that my child, as well as my nieces and nephews never felt pressured by society at the tender ages of 2 - 5. Kids want what they want. Many boys show feminine tendencies while many girls show masculine interests. You can't blame society for that, that's just what the child naturally gravitates to. Parents can encourage a specific way of life, but if they let the child bloom on their own, they find what they lean towards without any help. The media does push sociological norms, but its up to parents themselves to limit television exposure.

Dude, could you please quit the shit about me not having kids already?? I know, because THESE kids' parents - note, they're not YOUR kids any more than they're my kids - said so in the article. And it's naive to think that simply "limiting television exposure" will protect their kids from the MILLIONS of messages they receive from numerous sources. Also, quit calling me scb. See what I mean about people refusing to respect the decisions others make for themselves, like their gender roles... or their names? It's this kind of attitude from people that makes these parents feel like they have to be extreme.

I'm just saying, you can have your opinion, but those with experience ultimately are the experts here. Sorry for being rude, but it's the truth. And I must admit it's weird to call you a symbol. It's like calling Prince by his symbol; it just doesn't make any sense, so people had to go back and refer to him by his name, rather than "Formerly known as Prince". What does "_" sound like anyway? Would you rather me call you "Formerly known as "scb"? I am kidding.

I agree with the bolded part here. And the only people with experience in this situation are THESE parents & kids. You & everyone else here has no more experience raising these people's kids & are no more experts than the rest of us. The only difference is that you seem to think you are greater experts than the parents themselves, and therefore fit to judge, criticize, & condemn how they raise their own children. Some of us, on the other hand, are saying these parents should be left to raise their kids as they see fit. Just like they/we aren't criticizing YOU for NOT raising your kids that way, you have no more right to criticize them.

Popping out a baby or knocking someone up does not automatically make someone a greater expert on anything, by the way.

And, since credentials & expertise are so important to you, I think my degree in gender studies makes me much more of an expert than you on the effect of gender roles on individuals & society.

Regarding my name... I see no reason for it to be problematic since we are communicating in writing. You can correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be deliberately getting it wrong so as to be disrespectful.

_ · May 2011

Blockhead wrote:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/boys-like-blue-girls-like-pink--its-in-our-genes-462390.html

There are major hormonal and neurological differences between males and females, and those play a MAJOR role in determining identity. Ignoring this reality is not good for the child.

I don't think they've removed the kid's hormones or neurons.

Blockhead · May 2011

_ wrote:

I agree with the bolded part here. And the only people with experience in this situation are THESE parents & kids. You & everyone else here has no more experience raising these people's kids & are no more experts than the rest of us. The only difference is that you seem to think you are greater experts than the parents themselves, and therefore fit to judge, criticize, & condemn how they raise their own children. Some of us, on the other hand, are saying these parents should be left to raise their kids as they see fit. Just like they/we aren't criticizing YOU for NOT raising your kids that way, you have no more right to criticize them.

Popping out a baby or knocking someone up does not automatically make someone a greater expert on anything, by the way.

And, since credentials & expertise are so important to you, I think my degree in gender studies makes me much more of an expert than you on the effect of gender roles on individuals & society.

Regarding my name... I see no reason for it to be problematic since we are communicating in writing. You can correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be deliberately getting it wrong so as to be disrespectful.

Let me get this straight, your education and expertise is in gender studies and you support this???
Please explaine to me, as I think you are just looking through your liberal glasses on this one...
from my very limited education on this, I understand the goal, but there is no end goal to this and it's silly. The kid is still going to be exposed to all of the cultural conditioning eventually and so what will the parents have achieved?
I said "liberal" because this line of thought seems to come mainly from (probably your)left-wing academia. But the whole gay/coming out stuff just further exposes hypocrisy in the "conditioning" argument. According to these people:

- Gays were conditioned to be either a "man" or a "woman," but the fact that they choose not to join either of those groups represents their break from, and protest against societal conditioning. But:

- A man who acts manly acts so because society has told him to do so, not because of things like testosterone, etc. A girl who acts feminine because of conditioning, etc.

Their argument basically boils down to "If you are of a non-conventional gender, then you have stood up to conditioning. If you consider yourself a man or a woman, then you are the victim of societal conditioning." By this line of logic, no one naturally feels compelled to act masculine or feminine; they're just following societal directives. The only way to "break free" from societal constraints on gender is to defy all traditional sets of masculine or feminine values. Stupid, huh?

At least that's how it's shoved down our at the very liberal university's people (you probably) attend.

Godfather. · May 2011

B F D ! who cares ? boy girl or otherwise, this is just what those parents wanted from this and we just can't wait to feed the monster.

Godfather.

JonnyPistachio · May 2011

Blockhead wrote:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/boys-like-blue-girls-like-pink--its-in-our-genes-462390.html

There are major hormonal and neurological differences between males and females, and those play a MAJOR role in determining identity. Ignoring this reality is not good for the child.

Cool article. But all that reinforces is that men like blue and women like pink in age group of 20-26, which doesnt likely reflect what their preferences were at a young age despite their environmental surroundings.

This started out really interesting, but goes on to say that a wider human preference for blue might have come from blue skies (did the women prefer ripe fruit over blue skies, or did they just like rainy days?:

"Human vision is trichromatic, meaning that we have three colour-sensitive pigments in our eyes - like chimps, gorillas and other apes. Biologists believe trichromatic vision in primates came about as a result of the need to distinguish ripened fruit, as well as young, nutritious leaves, in a forest canopy.

However, early human societies almost certainly engaged in a division of labour between the sexes, with men travelling long distances to hunt wild game. Women, meanwhile, foraged locally for fruit and berries.

Dr Hurlbert suggests that this division of labour may be at the root of why girls now prefer pink.

"Evolution may have driven females to prefer reddish colours - reddish fruits, healthy, reddish faces. Culture may exploit and compound this natural female preference," she said.

As for the wider human preference for blue, Dr Hurlbert said this may have something to do with our love for the grassy plains of our place of origin, in Africa, where the sky is an important feature of the landscape.

"I would favour evolutionary arguments here," she said. "Going back to our 'savannah' days, we would have a natural preference for a blue sky, because it signalled good weather."

pandora · May 2011

People can have all kind of degrees in whatever but it comes down to living it and putting yourself in your child's place. Feeling what they feel and learning from them.... with them... for them and hopefully passing on all that is good about yourself.

This is a messed up thing to do to a child and someday this kid will tell them so.

Way to much thinking about stupid stuff and not enough feeling the real stuff.

_ · May 2011

:roll:

I'm so glad all you "experts" know what's best for everyone else's kids. Sounds like you don't actually think parenthood makes people experts; the criteria for being an expert - even on one's own kids - is to agree with you.

We live in a sad world full of sad, judgmental, self-important people who need to get their own lives & keep their noses out of everyone else's.

SatansFuton · May 2011

_ wrote:

:roll:

I'm so glad all you "experts" know what's best for everyone else's kids. Sounds like you don't actually think parenthood makes people experts; the criteria for being an expert - even on one's own kids - is to agree with you.

We live in a sad world full of sad, judgmental, self-important people who need to get their own lives & keep their noses out of everyone else's.

Wasn't that comment judgmental in itself?

And it was in the news, so nobody here went looking to put their nose into that family's business, they put their own business out there. It's a current event, hence the discussion on the Moving Train.

Hugh Freaking Dillon · May 2011

Go Beavers wrote:

Dave Eh wrote:

idiots. what is this going to prove? by the time the child is able to set aside gender biases to the point of making any sort of impact on its life, it will:

a) have long disclosed its gender
b) been so fucked up from identity crises that it will need extensive therapy

Why will he/she have an identity crisis?

because the kid is being raised as an "it" rather than who it is. the grandparents don't even know the sex? that's fucking ridiculous.

look, I'm a guy. always have been, always will be. I played with fucking barbies as a kid. my parents didn't give a shit. probably saved them money from buying me GI Joes, I just played with my sister's dolls. I knew my sex, the point was so did other people, and I STILL acted how I wanted, based on my the fact that my parents reacted to my wants and needs and interests. it had nothing to do with people giving me a blue blanket for christmas instead of a pink one.

gimme a break.

_ · May 2011

SatansFuton wrote:

Wasn't that comment judgmental in itself?

And it was in the news, so nobody here went looking to put their nose into that family's business, they put their own business out there. It's a current event, hence the discussion on the Moving Train.

Here's a summary of many - not all - of the posts in this thread:

These parents are retarded, stupid, dumbass idiots who are going to ruin their child's life because they are just attention whores who don't care to stand in the child's shoes, don't have the child's best interest in mind, are obviously unsatisfied with the kid's sex, & probably have some domestic issues. The kid is probably a hermaphrodite. Everyone's opinions & knowledge is completely invalid if: (a) they don't have kids, or (b) they have kids - or are even the parents of these kids - but don't agree with me. I am an expert & only I & those who agree with me understand the role of gender stereotypes in our society, know anything about child development, or know what's best for everyone else's kids.

I find this form of "discussion" to be problematic - in this thread & in the rest of this forum - and my comment was meant to describe the problem. I considered that it might be taken wrong & went back to delete it, but you had already quoted it. That's fine, though, because I think it needs to be said.

SatansFuton · May 2011

I see what you're saying, but if it helps any, the parents in question here did make judgmental comments about people who raise their kids in the "traditional" manner. I think if the parents weren't so smug about it people might not be as upset.

pandora · May 2011

What it comes down to for me is the child not the parents.
My focus has always been on the good of the child.

This is not good for the child.

I guess there are those who feel a parent has a right to experiment on one child in the family...
to set them apart... draw attention... deny grandparents love and acceptance for real bonding.

I have felt this is child abuse and any judgement I have made on the parents is driven from that.
They are being selfish and doing what they want, this child is at their mercy.

"Give a child all that they need and some of what they want."

This child needs and deserves to be known as a little girl or little boy,
most especially to those who love them.
Sexuality/ gender is a part of our identity and there is nothing wrong with that.

Gender roles can be addressed in a healthy way within the home...
this is not it.

These parents have not yet been challenged, some of the real things to worry about

life threatening illness, debilitating injury, learning disabilities, bully's, drug addiction,
rebellion, runaway syndrome, teenage pregnancy, mental illness, depression, failure,
broken hearts
and their own damn guilt for not being able to keep their children from these things.

Lets check back in 20 years and see what they think is important at that point.
Society gender issues most likely will not be at the top.

I speak from experience and from the heart of an old Mom who has not always done it right.

Making a statement, at the expense of a child, I am glad though I have never done.

Jeanwah · May 2011

_ wrote:

SatansFuton wrote:

Wasn't that comment judgmental in itself?

And it was in the news, so nobody here went looking to put their nose into that family's business, they put their own business out there. It's a current event, hence the discussion on the Moving Train.

Here's a summary of many - not all - of the posts in this thread:

These parents are retarded, stupid, dumbass idiots who are going to ruin their child's life because they are just attention whores who don't care to stand in the child's shoes, don't have the child's best interest in mind, are obviously unsatisfied with the kid's sex, & probably have some domestic issues. The kid is probably a hermaphrodite. Everyone's opinions & knowledge is completely invalid if: (a) they don't have kids, or (b) they have kids - or are even the parents of these kids - but don't agree with me. I am an expert & only I & those who agree with me understand the role of gender stereotypes in our society, know anything about child development, or know what's best for everyone else's kids.

I find this form of "discussion" to be problematic - in this thread & in the rest of this forum - and my comment was meant to describe the problem. I considered that it might be taken wrong & went back to delete it, but you had already quoted it. That's fine, though, because I think it needs to be said.

So, it needs to be said that you're being as judgemental as the rest of us? GOOD.
And you're "summary" isn't accurate.

I agree with Pandora, this whole 'experiment' is about the parents and their need to prove a point. A selfish motive, which also hurts the grandparents.

cincybearcat · May 2011

Go Beavers wrote:

Does it matter if the baby is a boy or a girl? Why?

Yes, because as was already stated, how the hell do you ask how "it's" doing if you don't know what pronoun to use?

Go Beavers · May 2011

cincybearcat wrote:

Go Beavers wrote:

Does it matter if the baby is a boy or a girl? Why?

Yes, because as was already stated, how the hell do you ask how "it's" doing if you don't know what pronoun to use?

I usually say "how's your baby doing?". I always have the hardest time remembering babies names because I don't have an image or personality to associate to the name to help my recall.

Go Beavers · May 2011

pandora wrote:

What it comes down to for me is the child not the parents.
My focus has always been on the good of the child.

This is not good for the child.

I guess there are those who feel a parent has a right to experiment on one child in the family...
to set them apart... draw attention... deny grandparents love and acceptance for real bonding.

I have felt this is child abuse and any judgement I have made on the parents is driven from that.
They are being selfish and doing what they want, this child is at their mercy.

"Give a child all that they need and some of what they want."

This child needs and deserves to be known as a little girl or little boy,
most especially to those who love them.
Sexuality/ gender is a part of our identity and there is nothing wrong with that.

Gender roles can be addressed in a healthy way within the home...
this is not it.

These parents have not yet been challenged, some of the real things to worry about

life threatening illness, debilitating injury, learning disabilities, bully's, drug addiction,
rebellion, runaway syndrome, teenage pregnancy, mental illness, depression, failure,
broken hearts
and their own damn guilt for not being able to keep their children from these things.

Lets check back in 20 years and see what they think is important at that point.
Society gender issues most likely will not be at the top.

I speak from experience and from the heart of an old Mom who has not always done it right.

Making a statement, at the expense of a child, I am glad though I have never done.

I think calling it child abuse is a little harsh. It's kind of hard to narrow down what people in this thread have a problem with. I don't think not telling the grandparents the sex of the child harms the child in any way. That shouldn't inhibit the grandparents from bonding with the baby, and if it does, there's something going on with the grandparents. Pop-pop is just struggling with not knowing whether to get the kid a football or a doll so much so he can't be around the kid? I agree that the parents are being selfish and grandstanding. Chances are good the kid will turn out fine. A baby doesn't need to know if it's a boy or a girl because he/she doesn't know the difference. The kid's going to find out she/he's different from the opposite sex in the same time other kids do and learn society's rules that go with it.

I'm surprised no one has commented on their approach to education yet. I have a bigger issue with that than anything else.

Blockhead · May 2011

Go Beavers wrote:

I think calling it child abuse is a little harsh. It's kind of hard to narrow down what people in this thread have a problem with. I don't think not telling the grandparents the sex of the child harms the child in any way. That shouldn't inhibit the grandparents from bonding with the baby, and if it does, there's something going on with the grandparents. Pop-pop is just struggling with not knowing whether to get the kid a football or a doll so much so he can't be around the kid? I agree that the parents are being selfish and grandstanding. Chances are good the kid will turn out fine. A baby doesn't need to know if it's a boy or a girl because he/she doesn't know the difference. The kid's going to find out she/he's different from the opposite sex in the same time other kids do and learn society's rules that go with it.

I'm surprised no one has commented on their approach to education yet. I have a bigger issue with that than anything else.

I will ask again since "-" didn't address my post "I understand the goal, but there is no end goal to this and it's silly. The kid is still going to be exposed to all of the cultural conditioning eventually and so what will the parents have achieved?
Also what sense does it make to have "grandpa" and "grandma", Mom and Dad, if they are trying to exclude that from their child's idenity...

Parents Keep Child’s Gender Under Wraps

Comments

Categories