Raising a child without gender

[zoebartlett]

I saw this story on Dr. Drew last night. To me, these parents are making it a much bigger deal/issue by not sharing their child's gender. I'm all for encouraging girls to play with toys typically thought of for boys and vice versa, but this seems to take the whole gender-neutral issue a bit far.

 

[kenny]

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.

It gets zillions of people to talk about it instead of perhaps 50.

 

[ksinger]

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 ....

Amen. Words fail at the monumental stupidity and selfishness of doing that to a child. They have NO thought for that kid, just themselves. It's revolting.

 

[Circe]

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.

It gets zillions of people to talk about it instead of perhaps 50.

But ... that's not a good thing if the consensus is that it's a selfish, stupid choice. If anything, it makes me nervous that it will encourage gender essentialism from parents who overcorrect ....

 

[HollyS]

Ridiculous. Done for notoriety. "Look at us!"

Setting the child up for a quagmire of psychological problems in the future.

Obviously, having their moment in the spotlight is worth damaging their child.

Lovely people.

Perhaps their child needs to be taken away from them. Oops, did I say that out loud??

 

[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.

It gets zillions of people to talk about it instead of perhaps 50.

But ... that's not a good thing if the consensus is that it's a selfish, stupid choice. If anything, it makes me nervous that it will encourage gender essentialism from parents who overcorrect ....

Totally agree Circe. It's just the parents wanting their moment of fame.

 

[kenny]

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.

It gets zillions of people to talk about it instead of perhaps 50.

But ... that's not a good thing if the consensus is that it's a selfish, stupid choice. If anything, it makes me nervous that it will encourage gender essentialism from parents who overcorrect ....

Totally agree Circe. It's just the parents wanting their moment of fame.

Let me go on record as NOT supporting these parents.

The child will be harmed.

They have a point, but harming your own kid to prove it is inexcusable.

 

[Haven]

This seems unnecessary to me. Parents can teach their children that gender can be a fluid, undefined line without HIDING a child's gender from the world and the child.

My aunt and uncle were pretty die-hard gender-neutral parents. When their oldest daughter was very young we were instructed not to buy gender specific toys. Well, that child is now 8 and is happiest prancing around in pink and purple, plastic high heels, the whole girlie-girl shebang. That's fine, they didn't want a gender neutral child, just a child who had the opportunity to choose her preferences.

Now, and this is where it gets interesting--they sort of gave up on the gender neutral thing by the time their twin girls were born. By that time their house looked like a princess-themed plastic wonderland. The twins are now 5, and one is as girlie-girl as her big sister, and the other? She refuses to wear girl underpants and only wears boy underpants. The kids are all standing up in my sister's wedding in two weeks and she refuses to wear a dress so we rented a little tux for her. Her name is Ehren, which she seems to think is masculine enough and doesn't want to change. But even at 3 she was obviously identifying as a boy, and that is what is so interesting to me. She cries if her sisters say she's a girl, and who knows? Maybe it's just a phase, or maybe she has an innate understanding that she is in the wrong gendered body. Either way, my aunt and uncle didn't have to rid her world of gender bias in order for her to feel this way, she did so despite being surrounded with all the pink a fluff a little princess could desire.

 

[elrohwen]

Haven, excellent post! That's exactly what I was trying to get at - a child's "true" gender will show itself no matter what toys the parents buy or what colors they're dressed in.

 

[iheartscience]

A Swedish couple already did this and they called the kid Pop. I think there was even a PS thread about that at the time. I think it's pretty ridiculous but I don't know that it's going to harm the kid. S/he will figure out what s/he identifies as whether the parents tell anyone or not.

I also think they're clearly making gender/being genderless the focal point of their children's lives and it's kind of strange. That one boy (Jazz?) writes stories about being a Gender Superhero or something like that. Really? He came up with that all on his own?

The "unschooling" thing is truly ridiculous. That's just as bad, if not worse, than homeschoolers like the Duggars who use the bible to teach all subjects. Way to prepare your children for their futures! (Also, the father works as a teacher at a school. Guess they don't believe too strongly in the "unschooling" philosophy.)

 

[Italiahaircolor]

Storm is not a science experiment, he or she is a child...just a baby. When these parents sent off down this "liberating" path where the child would be the only responsible for making the decisions and gave the child no gender identity, they DID make a decision that will forever impact him/her and not for the better, IMHO. The irony of that cannot be understated. What if the child looks at his* parents one day and says they chose wrong, they failed him*...then what?

They have, more or less, created outcasts. Between the genderless being and the unschooling, these children will grow up in a world that does not exist. They will be entirely unprepared for what lays ahead. School is more than just books and facts...it teaches accountability, responsibility, time management and social structure. Sure, kids will naturally be drawn to things that interest them, but they need to know *everything* to really understand and grasp what interests them.

Boys can like pink and girls can like blue without snatching away their gender in process. It's absolutely not an everything or nothing situation.

These parents are "trailblazers"...they are trying to be, that's pretty obvious, but they aren't. They are reckless and thoughtless and playing with their children like rats in a lab. A parent is suppose to prepare their baby for the world so that the baby can succeed, not polarize the child and make a mockery of them.

 

[jstarfireb]

This seems unnecessary to me. Parents can teach their children that gender can be a fluid, undefined line without HIDING a child's gender from the world and the child.

This!

Making a statement on gender politics isn't an excuse for screwing up your kid psychologically. The kid is likely to be a social outcast.

 

[partgypsy]

It's like some parents having an issue with people eating meat. Maybe one set of parents will serve vegetarian meals, explain to their children that meat is from animals and you have to take the life of the animal to eat it, and ethically they will serve only vegetarian meals until the child is of age to make that decision themselves.

These parents would instead refer to all food from now on as "marshmellows" you can ask for the brown marshmellows or the green marshmellows, but older brothers DON'T tell your younger sibling what those marshmellows are!!!

 

[charbie]

The thing that gets me is obviously at some point the kid will have a gender that everyone will recognize.
And what if this kid one day despises the fact that his/her parents made such a production about him/her being "genderless"? Means their little experiment backfired anyways. In fact, im pretty sure I would be more pissed one day that my parents put so much effort into ensuring im "genderfree"- it has to get exhausting.

You can still raise a very well adjusted child who is identified as male or female. And once this kid realizes s/he is male or female, I have to believe s/he will still be drawn towards societal norms of one sex or the other (be it that Storm is a female who is drawn towards masucline traits or a male drawn towards feminine traits...however it may work out).

I, for one, appreciate my femininity, embrace it, and have no problems admitting I have bought a number of girly girl clothing for my unborn daughter, and she has already received no less than a dozen sports related onesies gender neutral which makes me ecstatic!

 

[megumic]

I just think it's silly to ignore one of your child's characteristics. Obviously this child is a girl or a boy (I didn't read the whole article, but Kenny said it in the OP, so I'm going on that...) The child has a sex and I don't see the purpose in pretending it doesn't exist. Every person identifies with one gender or the other, and accordingly chooses to live their life. I know several transgender people who feel their gender identity is misaligned with their sex. I'm just not understanding how ignoring that this child's sex exists will foster a different gender than the child will actually identify with in any event...

PS - FWIW gender refers to whether you identify as feminine or masculine and the associated socially constructed roles, behaviors, etc. and it tends to flow on a spectrum, while sex refers to your biological anatomy, chromosomes, etc. and physiological characteristics

 

[suchende]

I don't think they are hiding their child's gender so much as waiting for the child to reveal that when he or she wants to, in his or her own time.

 

[monarch64]

Eh...I've read about this same topic several times...this is not the first case/article I've come across. I remember discussing a similar case in a women's studies course in college back in 1999 or so, and that wasn't the first I'd heard of it. To antagonize my parents sometimes, I used to tell them I was going to birth a child and name it "x" and dress it in black and white. They just rolled their eyes, and I thought it was funny at the time.

Shenanigans like this have been going on for quite some time. I guess someone else had to re-do it to gain themselves some publicity for some sort of gain. Too bad for the kid(s).

 

[Jennifer W]

I try not to have an opinion on other people's parenting, because it's none of my business, but the unschooling thing - is that even legal? Aren't you required to have your child educated? Either at school or by homeschooling? I don't understand how they can be allowed to opt out of education. That goes beyond parental choice and into breaking the law, no? If that's the case, they'd have to be pretty dim witted to publicise it, too...

As for the gender thing, I suspect it's a big internet fuss about something that's much less in reality. They've declined to tell a neighbour what their child's gender is - they won't be able to keep the child genderless beyond the early years and frankly, I think it's being much exaggerated as an attention seeking ploy (not a fan of that either, but again, not really my business).

 

[April20]

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?

The unschooling actually bothers me more than the whole "keep the gender secret" idea, though that bothers me as well. Parents are responsible for guiding their children and making sure that they learn the skills- moral, ethical, practical,etc, that they will need to guide their lives as they grow older. Allowing children to only learn by their curiosity and do whatever the heck pleases them at the moment is a recipe for disaster IMO. That's not to say that a childhood should be so structured that every moment is planned and there's not opportunity for them to make increasingly larger decisions and explore things that interest them, but there needs to be some guardrails. Sometimes they need to be forced to do things they don't want to do or learn things that don't interest them. Knowing about things that interest us as well as what doesn't interest us makes us more well rounded and better equipped for life. And better at Jeopardy or Trivial Pursuit.

 

[janinegirly]

Haven, excellent post! That's exactly what I was trying to get at - a child's "true" gender will show itself no matter what toys the parents buy or what colors they're dressed in.

Agree and with everyone else! Of course gender exists. Poor kid...and self absorbed parents.

 

[anchor31]

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?

The unschooling actually bothers me more than the whole "keep the gender secret" idea, though that bothers me as well. Parents are responsible for guiding their children and making sure that they learn the skills- moral, ethical, practical,etc, that they will need to guide their lives as they grow older. Allowing children to only learn by their curiosity and do whatever the heck pleases them at the moment is a recipe for disaster IMO. That's not to say that a childhood should be so structured that every moment is planned and there's not opportunity for them to make increasingly larger decisions and explore things that interest them, but there needs to be some guardrails. Sometimes they need to be forced to do things they don't want to do or learn things that don't interest them. Knowing about things that interest us as well as what doesn't interest us makes us more well rounded and better equipped for life. And better at Jeopardy or Trivial Pursuit.

I agree. If my own education had been up to me when I was younger, I wouldn't have learned maths beyong grade 7. Now that would have been disastrous for me as an adult... And I was someone who was very interested in school and learning, compared to so many kids I would meet who would tell me how much they hated school! These people who used to hate school and now have diplomas and careers, where would they be if they'd been "unschooled"?

 

[janinegirly]

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.

It gets zillions of people to talk about it instead of perhaps 50.

But ... that's not a good thing if the consensus is that it's a selfish, stupid choice. If anything, it makes me nervous that it will encourage gender essentialism from parents who overcorrect ....

Totally agree Circe. It's just the parents wanting their moment of fame.

Let me go on record as NOT supporting these parents.

The child will be harmed.

They have a point, but harming your own kid to prove it is inexcusable.

But did you not say they are "trailblazers" and this will get zillions of people talking?

 

[Black Jade]

The sun rises in the east and sets in the west.
The sea is salt.
If you stick your naked hand in a flame, you will get burned.
Some things just are the way they are.
The parents can do whatever they like (and so can surgeons, by the way, with so-called 'sex-change surgery')--the child has been born with either XX or XY chromosomes. This is what makes you one sex or another. This is not a matter of an 'innie' or 'outie'. In many societies formerly they used to castrate men for various reasons (in Italy, up until the 18th century, so that they could sing soprano in opera). They were still men They still had XY chromosomes.
A woman had 'sex-change' surgery a couple of years ago--and still got pregnant. She not only still had her XX chromosomes, but still had a uterus. Oprah was calling her a 'pregnant man' but that didn't make her a man.
People should be kind and decent to every other human being. We are all God's children. He loves all of us. I am mostly strongly against any kind of bullying or cruelty to ANYONE for any reason. Kindness, however, does not involve lying to people or pretending to believe lies. At certain times in various societies (the 1950's was one of them in ours) sex roles get ridiculously restrictive. There is no reason why girls should not do math or play with train sets. If a boy wants to play with a doll, fine. I actually tried to get my sons to play with dolls, I could see no reason why they should not as boys grow up to be fathers. They would not cooperate--and no, they weren't being influenced by anyone else, no one around me saw a problem. All three insisted on using the dolls to shoot at people--and ripped out their hair, etc. before getting the forks and knives to also pretend they were guns or trucks. But some boys would like dolls and I don't see a problem with that. I was not raised with rigid sex roles. My father did a lot of so-called 'feminine' things--he was more interested in coordinating my outfits than my mother was, sewed all the curtains for our house, was good at cooking and was very nurturing (he actually was the one who was always reminding my mother to feed us). He was a great father--a person and not a stereotype. He was very athletic and muscular and did a lot of guy things, too--and so did my mother do a lot of guy thing and still does. She was at least five inches taller than he was. He was the man, anyway. She was the woman. Height and interests and these things don't make a difference to that. She still had the XX chromosomes and she was the one who got pregnant and went through labor and nursed all of us. My father might be nurturing but he was never going to be able to do those things. The sun rises in the east and sets in the west. The sea is salt.
The parents are probably well-meaning and idealistic but hopefully it will be a KIND experiment and if their child starts showing the so-called 'stereotypical behaviors' for whatever sex the child is, they will not force the child to behave differently than it's inclinations (so long as they lead to no harm) in order to prove their point.
However, any parent that sees their child about to stick their hand in the fire would be being a bad parents, an abusive parent, if they lied and told their child that the fire would not harm them--because they wish it was so. And because there are fire-eaters in India. And because it is known that some other species, such as salamanders, can live in fire. (Actually, I think they can't, this is a medieval notion, but I think you all get my point). It's not society that made sticking your hand in fire a bad thing to do--society only warns you that it's unlikely to have long term happy results.
That is, if society cares about you enough to not want to see you suffering from burns.
The fact that you wish that fire wouldn't burn and that you are very attracted to fire (such a pretty thing, so bright, such lovely colors) does not change the fact that it is not good to stick your hand into it.

 

[that_someone_special]

This is really disturbing to me.

In the same way that would freak me out if I saw a parent yelling at a boy saying something like "No son of mine is going to do (enter girly activity here)"

 

[AGBF]

I actually tried to get my sons to play with dolls, I could see no reason why they should not as boys grow up to be fathers. They would not cooperate--and no, they weren't being influenced by anyone else, no one around me saw a problem. All three insisted on using the dolls to shoot at people--and ripped out their hair, etc. before getting the forks and knives to also pretend they were guns or trucks. But some boys would like dolls and I don't see a problem with that.

I love your writing, Black Jade, and I did even before I "knew" you as I feel I now do! Although you are younger than I am, you are a wise woman and remind me, in this little essay of yours, very much of another wise woman, my late mother. She had been a primary school teacher (trained at Columbia Teachers' College when it was the very radical, "New Colllege" in the 1940's) before she had children, and she had the ability to learn from her mistakes. So she learned from teaching and she learned from parenting. (Some people teach and parent without learning much as they go through the routines they were taught.) I remember her saying that if you kept toy guns from little boys that they would only use their fingers or anything else they could find to make guns with. (This was during one of those discussions I had with her when one of my women friends was refusing her to allow her son to have a toy gun. My mother was no big gun proponent; she merely made a dry observation based on long experience with boys!)

Although my father had served in World War II, my parents were-and my father at age 90 still is-very gentle people. They became Quakers because they were pacifists. But my brother had a lot of plastic toy figures and all he did with them was have them play war. He would shout, "Picoo! Picoo!" all day as these figures shot each other! I dont know where it came from. Unless we blame television. (Cowboys and Indians, I would assume. We wouldn't have been watching war films in those days.) There were no video games back then!

Deb/AGBF


Diamonds Are A Girl's Best Friend

 

[HollyS]

"The sun rises in the east and sets in the west.
The sea is salt.
If you stick your naked hand in a flame, you will get burned.
Some things just are the way they are."


A very sane answer, as are most of your posts, BJ. I am in total agreement.

 

[Pandora II]

The unschooling is what worries me the most.

I also think it's sad that society will judge and children will tease anyone who isn't 'normal' and that is the reason why this couples experiment will be potentially damaging...

My parents were pretty into gender-neutral and we all had toys and clothes that could go either way. My brother got a barbie doll for his 12th birthday - admittedly it was as Action Man's girlfriend but even so. I wanted a pen-knife for my 11th birthday more than anything in the world. My sister wanted cosmetics...

I remember my mother going shopping with all of us when my brother was 4 - he was dressed in pyjamas with a green rubber swimming hat on topped by a plastic Roman Centurian helmet, flippers on his feet, a green furry boa wrapped the whole way round him from feet to neck and sitting in a stroller. She couldn't be bothered to argue and so we went out like that.

A woman who lives near them turned up at my father's surgery with her 4 kids all of whom were under 10. Two were wearing fairy costumes, one was in pyjamas and the other had no clothes on at all having taken them all off en-route. At least one of the fairies was a boy...

I let my daughter like what she wants to like - she appears to like dollies and shoes and bags. I hated dolls, own 8 pairs of shoes and buy a new bag when the current one falls apart so she has not acquired these interests from me (and she spends nearly all her time just with me so it's not from anyone else either).

I find it a little odd trawling the pink aisle in Toys R Us and would prefer to be buying PlayMobile but if she likes dollies best...

 

[yssie]

The sun rises in the east and sets in the west.
The sea is salt.
If you stick your naked hand in a flame, you will get burned.
Some things just are the way they are.
The parents can do whatever they like (and so can surgeons, by the way, with so-called 'sex-change surgery')--the child has been born with either XX or XY chromosomes. This is what makes you one sex or another. This is not a matter of an 'innie' or 'outie'. In many societies formerly they used to castrate men for various reasons (in Italy, up until the 18th century, so that they could sing soprano in opera). They were still men They still had XY chromosomes.
A woman had 'sex-change' surgery a couple of years ago--and still got pregnant. She not only still had her XX chromosomes, but still had a uterus. Oprah was calling her a 'pregnant man' but that didn't make her a man.
People should be kind and decent to every other human being. We are all God's children. He loves all of us. I am mostly strongly against any kind of bullying or cruelty to ANYONE for any reason. Kindness, however, does not involve lying to people or pretending to believe lies. At certain times in various societies (the 1950's was one of them in ours) sex roles get ridiculously restrictive. There is no reason why girls should not do math or play with train sets. If a boy wants to play with a doll, fine. I actually tried to get my sons to play with dolls, I could see no reason why they should not as boys grow up to be fathers. They would not cooperate--and no, they weren't being influenced by anyone else, no one around me saw a problem. All three insisted on using the dolls to shoot at people--and ripped out their hair, etc. before getting the forks and knives to also pretend they were guns or trucks. But some boys would like dolls and I don't see a problem with that. I was not raised with rigid sex roles. My father did a lot of so-called 'feminine' things--he was more interested in coordinating my outfits than my mother was, sewed all the curtains for our house, was good at cooking and was very nurturing (he actually was the one who was always reminding my mother to feed us). He was a great father--a person and not a stereotype. He was very athletic and muscular and did a lot of guy things, too--and so did my mother do a lot of guy thing and still does. She was at least five inches taller than he was. He was the man, anyway. She was the woman. Height and interests and these things don't make a difference to that. She still had the XX chromosomes and she was the one who got pregnant and went through labor and nursed all of us. My father might be nurturing but he was never going to be able to do those things. The sun rises in the east and sets in the west. The sea is salt.
The parents are probably well-meaning and idealistic but hopefully it will be a KIND experiment and if their child starts showing the so-called 'stereotypical behaviors' for whatever sex the child is, they will not force the child to behave differently than it's inclinations (so long as they lead to no harm) in order to prove their point.
However, any parent that sees their child about to stick their hand in the fire would be being a bad parents, an abusive parent, if they lied and told their child that the fire would not harm them--because they wish it was so. And because there are fire-eaters in India. And because it is known that some other species, such as salamanders, can live in fire. (Actually, I think they can't, this is a medieval notion, but I think you all get my point). It's not society that made sticking your hand in fire a bad thing to do--society only warns you that it's unlikely to have long term happy results.
That is, if society cares about you enough to not want to see you suffering from burns.
The fact that you wish that fire wouldn't burn and that you are very attracted to fire (such a pretty thing, so bright, such lovely colors) does not change the fact that it is not good to stick your hand into it.

Black Jade this is a fantastic post - and I share your feelings on this, though my wording would not have been so eloquent.

 

[hawaiianorangetree]

Maybe they really wanted a girl and have had 2 boys and couldn't possibly bring themselves around to the idea of another one so they are trying to create a gender neutral child? They should move to Samoa and raise him as a Fa Fa.

(I'm joking of course).

I can't understand why anyone would want to play around with something that can't be changed. It's genetically encoded into him. He is going to be who he is going to be and hiding his sex isn't going to change that.

Yes I think it's a boy.

 

[Cehrabehra]

In a world where we should embrace our differences, individuality, and authenticity - I think these parents are harming their child. This is akin to enshrouding a person so that no race can be determined - as though one particular race is inferior to another. They are IMPLYING that one gender is inferior even if they "believe" it is wrong.

There are just so many things wrong with this. It's ridiculous to comment further.