MoogleViper Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 We're talking about a child - his biggest worry should be which is his favourite Pokemon, not being pressured into deciding whether he's a boy or a girl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 But the fact is she is banning certain things that she deems overly-masculine, yet appears to be pushing dresses and tutus, which are overly-feminine. That's not gender neutrality. If anything she's pushing femininity on him. I also can't help but feel that by denying him access to television he's going to be totally at a loss to what other kids are talking about. She's almost setting him up to fail socially, sadly. I'd go as far to say that any parent who makes a conscious, unnecessary choice to put their child in a situation that will make them less able to make friends (or worse, be bullied) then they're a bad parent. The best examples of this are not letting them watch TV and giving them a really, really unusual name. If you give your little boy a feminine name, they will at some point be bullied for it, and as it's naive at best to think that other kids will be understanding and nice, it's entirely your fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grazza Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 I just think "gender neutrality" is a load of balls, if you'll pardon the pun. Gender is determined by chromosomes, which determine whether you have ovaries or testes, which in turn determine your hormones. Then look at clothing, which is designed differently for a reason: women wear bras because they have breasts, men's underwear has extra room for the testicles, and many other subtle things like women being hourglass-shaped and men being more V-shaped. This is practicality, nothing more. As for toys, personally, I've never liked war, cars or football. I liked the slightly geekier boys' toys like Masters of the Universe, ZOIDS and Transformers. Kids gravitate towards what they like anyway. I'm all for love, understanding and sympathy towards those who feel differently, I truly am. There's no need for anyone to conform to stereotypes, adult or child. I just don't think gender itself is neutral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diageo Posted January 24, 2012 Author Share Posted January 24, 2012 You're assuming gender is the same as sex. Which is isn't. Sex is the biological differences, while gender is solely society and culture based. So gender neutral is very easily achieved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 You're assuming gender is the same as sex. Which is isn't. Sex is the biological differences, while gender is solely society and culture based. So gender neutral is very easily achieved. Yet these physical and hormonal differences have an impact on our personality and behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diageo Posted January 24, 2012 Author Share Posted January 24, 2012 Yes they do. But males can have very feminine innate behaviours even though their hormones are the same. Also, I thought he was referring mostly to clothes. And really this article deals with gender neutral behaviour and treatment from the parent, which would make what you said irrelevant, as it refers to the child. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Yes they do. But males can have very feminine innate behaviours even though their hormones are the same. Yes but you can't discount sex as a huge influence in "gender". There's a reason these stereotypes exist, they're based in truth. Yes people can go against them, but generally they are correct. And if anyone says that stereotypes or generalisation are "bad" or "wrong" then they're an idiot who needs to be shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aneres11 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Sounds to me like this woman is just trying to get herself recognised and is using 'the infant' to do just that. Perhaps she's wanting a daily slot on Loose Women or something. Agree with what the majority are saying - the gender neutrality is certainly interesting, but she isn't going about it in the right way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 And if anyone says that stereotypes or generalisation are "bad" or "wrong" then they're an idiot who needs to be shot. Not at all, but unfortunately they're often used in horrible ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cube Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 You're assuming gender is the same as sex. Which is isn't. Sex is the biological differences, while gender is solely society and culture based. So gender neutral is very easily achieved. While I fully understand your point, gender does also include the biological aspect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EEVILMURRAY Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 There's only one way this can be resolved to her satisfaction. First we need the op to give him a vag, turning him into the delightful shemale. Now the dress sense. Something like this would be perfect. It all fits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bard Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Like Nietzsche says, there's nothing a man fears more than another who can't be predicted. Why start or end with gender roles? All they are is one particular element of culture at large: a common system of referentiality for one to be able to mediate ones relationship with the rest of society. Everyone fits into a box and their expected attitudes and behaviours are extrapolated from this. I suppose in a sense, to combat the negative elements of gender types, one has to break them down to their basics, but to be honest, they will always exist so long as Humans do. Essentialism is the way we think. We build a great deal of our impression of the world based on the most ostensible, superficial things we percieve, which is why I often find people who rile so militantly against typification a little...embarrassing /delirious early morning ramble... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zechs Merquise Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 He's hardly pressure into choosing his sex, he knows he's a boy. He's just not forced into gender roles. Does he know he's a boy? He's being forced by a complete crank to dress as a girl and ignore any urges he might have toward behaving like a boy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diageo Posted January 25, 2012 Author Share Posted January 25, 2012 There's no evidence in the article that he doesn't know he is a boy, or that he is forced to dress like a girl and ignore urges. In fact, the woman is quoted saying that he could be a butch rugby player if he wanted to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent Gibbs Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 There's no evidence in the article that he doesn't know he is a boy, or that he is forced to dress like a girl and ignore urges. In fact, the woman is quoted saying that he could be a butch rugby player if he wanted to. he could be, but then the article states Beck thinks nothing of putting Sasha in flowery tops, and is adamant that he doesn’t mind so she thinks nothing of putting him in stereotypical girly tops but then in the same breath won't allow stereotypically masculine tops... Hmm theres no push towards one gender there at all as for not knowing if he is a boy or a girl... she says they didn't find out the sex until 30 min after the birth, they didn't immediately tell the family and when people ask she says she isn't telling.... now what happens when he asks? if she is so adamantly trying to stop a gender role on him, would she actually tell him in a straight answer? wouldn't it be more on the lines of "your what every you want to be? a little person" if he asked why he had a penis would she say its because you are a boy? he has no outside stimulus like TV only what she vets for him, so he could quite easily have very little understanding of his gender. Its not a great leap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesley Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 I think all of this is bringing back memories for Zechs Merquise that he'd rather keep buried. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EEVILMURRAY Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 It's as if Lego have heard about the problem and made a nice compromise for the infant: http://uk.lifestyle.yahoo.com/new-pink-lego---sexist--or-a-fuss-over-nothing-.html Also ReZ's bank account is about to get a serious raping because of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 I don't really think it's good what the woman is doing. Raise the kid as a boy and if he feels he's a woman, then that's what he feels, but by reading that and seeing how she dresses him and stuff, it's like she wants him to be a girl. She don't mind him being in flowery, girly tops and is adament that he doesn't mind so why not put him in stereotypical boys tops as well? She doesn't like skulls? That's fine, I'm pretty sure you can buy Ben 10 t-shirts and Lego t-shirts somewhere or heck, even a blank t-shirt. I think that if she's honestly worried about this, all she'd have to do is buy him neutral tops and things like that like buying him blank t-shirts and stuff. THAT'D be equal. Putting him in flowery tops isn't being equal. When he's older and he understands about this and he feels like he's a woman or something, then the mother could say "You can be whoever you want to be", that'd be more equal. Just let the kid like what he wants to like, let him hate what he wants to hate and let him decide who he wants to be when he's older. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieColeslaw Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Good point, Dazz. Girly tops aren't gender neutral - they're feminine. Why doesn't she dress him in blank/unisex clothing instead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diageo Posted January 27, 2012 Author Share Posted January 27, 2012 She said that she gets clothes handed down and most of them are girly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 She said that she gets clothes handed down and most of them are girly. But isn't that defeating the purpose? Surely if she wanted to remain neutral, she'd just get plain clothes with no skulls or flowers or anything like that. To put it simple, it's very easy to get neutral clothes but she chooses to dress him in tops that are girly, which is not neutral. Being neutral would be to put him in plain clothes such as white t-shirts, blue t-shirts, etc. Putting him in flowery tops isn't neutral whatsoever, whether they're handed down or not, which is why I said I think she wanted a girl, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EEVILMURRAY Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 She said that she gets clothes handed down and most of them are girly. Basically she's trying to find an excuse for being a cheap bitch. :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daft Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 Just let the kid like what he wants to like, let him hate what he wants to hate and let him decide who he wants to be when he's older. Her point is that gender is instilled and naturalised through various forms of structural violence and that just letting him/her just be will leave the child exposed to these external forces whereas she is attempting to shield the child from all that. She is attempting to destabilise the notion of gender and, to be fair to her, that's probably what is going to happen (and isn't actually that hard to do). She's just doing it to a pointless extreme. It's a shame that this incident doesn't seem to be educating people at all; most people on this thread are still tug-o-warring between two genders. That's the real tragedy, that with this extreme case most people inadvertently reveal their naturalised identity constructs. And that's a big reason why I hate academia, it's elitist as fuck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goafer Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 This problem, as well as all mankind's problems, can be solved with the Bill and Ted method: The way I see it, there are men and women. They're the natural sexes. What someone does with their sex and how they want to be perceived, that's up to them. It's not hurting anyone, so what's the problem? They want to make sexy time with someone of the same sex? So be it, it's none of my business. They want to dress like someone of the opposite gender, fine by me. A man wants to become a woman, are they really a woman or just a mutilated, hormonal mess of a man? Who cares? They're still human, that's all that matters. I think people over analyse these things, when it can just be solved with "be excellent to each other". It's not exactly rocket science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 Her point is that gender is instilled and naturalised through various forms of structural violence and that just letting him/her just be will leave the child exposed to these external forces whereas she is attempting to shield the child from all that. She is attempting to destabilise the notion of gender and, to be fair to her, that's probably what is going to happen (and isn't actually that hard to do). She's just doing it to a pointless extreme. It's a shame that this incident doesn't seem to be educating people at all; most people on this thread are still tug-o-warring between two genders. That's the real tragedy, that with this extreme case most people inadvertently reveal their naturalised identity constructs. And that's a big reason why I hate academia, it's elitist as fuck. But how on Earth is she going to successfully do that? He's bound to be confronted by society's prejudices sooner or later, and then what? How will he handle that? I also think it's very difficult to be objective in such cases; how do we accurately determine what's nature and what's nurture? And even if we could, what do we deem proper/healthy amounts of nurture? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts