Diageo Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Home/Hes-pretty-in-pink-to-make-you-think-20012012.htm Saw this recently on Google + with the person sharing it calling the woman a psycho. I gave my opinion but felt like it wasn't the right place to have a proper conversation about it. So what is your opinion? Is this a revolutionary new approach to raising children or is the boy going to be unable to adapt to the school environment?
EEVILMURRAY Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 Beck Laxton gave her baby son a neutral name and for months refused to tell anyone if he was a boy or a girl. Now she regularly dresses Sasha, 5, in girls’ clothes. Now I can't off the top of my head think of any blokes called Sasha (Except for Ali G, and that's spelt differently) but if you're going to smash the system you'd need a better neutral name. “A friend of mine said the other day: ‘Molly lost her hair clip again,’ and I thought, well, if she’s got some prissy thing she’s got to take care of, and she gets told off if she loses it, then she has to be picky about it – and then she becomes a person who’s slightly prissy and picky. But you’ve made her like that! “She can’t climb a tree because she’s wearing a skirt, so then she can’t climb very well. But you did that, because you shaped her environment. You shaped what she could do!†Sasha in Beck’s 2010 card He aint climbing shit in that get up. I don't have a problem with people rebelling against stereotypes, but going out of your way to dress your son like a daughter, for only seems to be reasons of spite, is just silly.
Cube Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 Beck won’t dress him in overtly masculine clothes: no skulls, camouflage or combats. Out of school, Beck thinks nothing of putting Sasha in flowery tops, Erm...that isn't exactly being "gender neutral".
Yvonne Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 I don't know how any upbringing where you could potentially choose from TWICE THE NUMBER OF TOYS could possibly be a bad thing.
Cube Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 I don't know how any upbringing where you could potentially choose from TWICE THE NUMBER OF TOYS could possibly be a bad thing. But the way this parent is speaking anything too "boyish" is essentially banned. So he won't have twice the number of toys.
heroicjanitor Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 I wouldn't risk him being bullied just to "make one person think". Kids shouldn't be used like that, now that she has him in the paper he could be known for it. It's fine if he is privately not being influenced by gender stereotypes but she is deciding that he will make a public stand before he is ready to make that decision himself, and using your child to make a political statement is just wrong anyway... Also there are several points where he is allowed to be either neutral or feminine, but not masculine, so it's not gender neutral, so the same number of toys :p Edit: Damn square blocks
Nolan Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 That kid is going to be all kinds of fucked up. It might work out if his mother knew what neutral was, and not trying to force the statement she is trying to make.
Hamishmash Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 It is a difficult one, I think. Their motives are very admirable but their execution isn't exactly perfect. For starters, while their house may be TV-proof, gender "stereotypes" exist so much around them (other school children and Sasha's parents) that the environment is hardly gender neutrality. Without knowing more, I can only imagine this would be a little more confusing. The parent's argument seems to be that clothes and toys shouldn't define their gender. But from what I can gather, transpeople are born with their gender, it isn't just because they were boys who played with dolls, for example. When I was a young boy, I had a few dolls. I had some my little ponies and like princess movies. I can't ever particularly remembering my parents refusing to give me any of that... and I lived in house with two brothers, no sisters to inherit anything from. I just think their little experiment, although clearly with the best intentions in mind, might not have been the best way to do this. I still think probably the best way to go about this is just raise them as their sex (which doesn't mean restricting their toys, it just means telling people "this is my son, this is my daughter" rather than "this is my infant") until they tell you what their gender is. Just make it very, very clear to them from an early age that that is ok, rather than assume that they will be transgendered to prove a point.
EEVILMURRAY Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 It's almost as if she's disappointed/ashamed of having a son so is trying to make him as feminine as possible to be the daughter she always wanted.
Ramar Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 Glad my parents let me watch Power Rangers, yo.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 In principle the idea is admirable, but in my opinion she's taking it way too far. She says she won't force a stereotype on him, but at the same time she's actually forcing neutrality* on him. To me it seems she's trying to create the illusion that there are no stereotypes, which in my opinion is not the way to go. The concept of stereotypes is very real, and since it's pretty human it's probably here to stay; closing your eyes to it and pretending it doesn't exist won't lead to anything good. You can't force neutrality, and you shouldn't force anything at all; just let the kid develop the way he wants, and teach him openness and tolerance like any good parent should. *Though her so-called neutrality seems heavily skewed towards stereotypically feminine things.
Jimbob Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 It's going to get confusing in the teenage years, i'm sure of it. It does sound a case of woman wanted a daugher and got a son instead.
Zechs Merquise Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 She's a total nutjob who is obviously using her child as a social experiment. The kid needs putting in care and she needs putting in a mental institution. Rather than letting the boy make up his own mind, she's dressing him like a girl and effectively banning him from anything masculine. What a crank!
chairdriver Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 She's a total nutjob who is obviously using her child as a social experiment. The kid needs putting in care and she needs putting in a mental institution. Rather than letting the boy make up his own mind, she's dressing him like a girl and effectively banning him from anything masculine. What a crank! I wish people had such vehement reaction to when trans people are forced to act as/be the gender they aren't.
Jonnas Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 It's entirely possible to teach your kids to not take stereotypes seriously, without banning them from their own stereotype. Just yet another case of someone thinking they have to go to extremes to "teach society a lesson", or something. What if the kid actually wants to fit into his own stereotype? Fuck that, that's what society wants! And society is evil! I could see this turning into some parody, with the parents reacting to the kid's wishes to be "boyish/manly" in the same way conservative parents would react to their son coming out of the closet.
Wesley Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 I'm going to raise my kid without using any "theories" and fucked up methods. Just plain love and caring. I'm pretty sure that's what makes a decent person.
Daft Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 She's an idiot. She's just forcing her own gender politics on her kid. It's the same as raising your child as a boy/girl, but she has the added advantage of making her child a social 'other' at the same time. We live in a world of socially constructed gender identities, and that's is not an evil so long as we understand the transient and fluid nature of these identities. She may be trying to destabilize this child's gender identity but it's wholly unfair to ask a child that won't understand these issues to stand out from the crowd. You aren't going to change gender politics from a grass roots level, either. These identities are tied in to capitalism. Billions of pounds are tied up in, for example, the fashion industry and/or advertising. They perpetuate the gender myth. I doubt we will be done with these identities until there has been a radical shift in capitalism. I'm off to shoot people in a violent videogame while my clay mask facial dries.
Cube Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 Speaking of how social the kid will be - the lack of a TV (I'm also guessing the kid has no access to the internet) will further make them an "outcast" in conversations.
Mr_Odwin Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) Am I doing it right? Edited January 24, 2012 by Mr_Odwin
Hamishmash Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 There's absolutely nothing neutral about banning skulls, camo clothes, masculine clothes, and allowing and purchasing pink fairy dresses. She's completely missed the idea. But as @chairdriver says, it would be nice to live in a world where people could dress in whatever clothes they want and parents should encourage this. I just don't believe Sasha is having as much "choice" as his mum seems to think.
chairdriver Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) You aren't going to change gender politics from a grass roots level, either. These identities are tied in to capitalism. Billions of pounds are tied up in, for example, the fashion industry and/or advertising. They perpetuate the gender myth. I doubt we will be done with these identities until there has been a radical shift in capitalism. This. It'd be extremely difficult to have any sort of meaningful social revolution without first dissolving capitalism. ~~~ I get the impression the reason it's more biased towards femininity is because the associated stereotypical characteristics are generally more compatible with a liberal politics than masculine ones are. For example, stereotypical boys toys often glorify guns and military and a more "survival of the fittest"-esque worldview. Also, the mother is perhaps conscious of the privileges associated with being a [cisgendered] man, and doesn't want her child growing up being able to take those privileges. Edited January 24, 2012 by chairdriver Automerged Doublepost
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 She's an idiot. She's just forcing her own gender politics on her kid. It's the same as raising your child as a boy/girl, but she has the added advantage of making her child a social 'other' at the same time. We live in a world of socially constructed gender identities, and that's is not an evil so long as we understand the transient and fluid nature of these identities. She may be trying to destabilize this child's gender identity but it's wholly unfair to ask a child that won't understand these issues to stand out from the crowd. You aren't going to change gender politics from a grass roots level, either. These identities are tied in to capitalism. Billions of pounds are tied up in, for example, the fashion industry and/or advertising. They perpetuate the gender myth. I doubt we will be done with these identities until there has been a radical shift in capitalism. I'm off to shoot people in a violent videogame while my clay mask facial dries. I could kiss you.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 I get the impression the reason it's more biased towards femininity is because the associated stereotypical characteristics are generally more compatible with a liberal politics than masculine ones are. For example, stereotypical boys toys often glorify guns and military and a more "survival of the fittest"-esque worldview. Also, the mother is perhaps conscious of the privileges associated with being a [cisgendered] man, and doesn't want her child growing up being able to take those privileges. But then she's not being neutral. She's forcing her child into a certain role.
Zechs Merquise Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 I get the impression the reason it's more biased towards femininity is because the associated stereotypical characteristics are generally more compatible with a liberal politics than masculine ones are. For example, stereotypical boys toys often glorify guns and military and a more "survival of the fittest"-esque worldview. Also, the mother is perhaps conscious of the privileges associated with being a [cisgendered] man, and doesn't want her child growing up being able to take those privileges. Survival of the fittest is how the real world works. It's how nature works and it is the natural order of things. Liberalism is foolish doctrine that flies in the face of nature and will ultimately lead to the death of Western civilisation, which may or may not be a good thing. But be assured, if there ever is a revolution, the following scramble for power will soon boil down to the iron law of nature - that might is right.
Recommended Posts