Frank Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 I think blaming the Mother is wrong. From the article given to us it appears she genuinely has her child's best intentions at heart. I don't think it works, though. Of course, the clothes are hand-me-downs so on one hand it feels wrong to criticize the 'why does she dress him in these girly clothes!' but the fact she's banning a certain group of masculine clothes is a bit '...' It's good this is being discussed publicly. It will help people become more aware of the complications of gender. This should have a ball effect & hopefully we'll see more and more parents telling us their story of parenting "non-gendered" kids. [is 'gendered' a word?]. We need to make people who don't recognise themselves as not their given gender less underground. I'd also like to mention that I don't think she's a bad parent, from what we're given. She seems to really be parenting her child. She isn't ignoring him / only paying attention when he does bad. I just hope the child can understand what is happening & this sort of lifestyle doesn't leave him open to tramatic, possibly homophobic bullying in the future.
Beast Posted January 29, 2012 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. 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? Basically echoing what I wanted to say. Raise the child to respect other sexes and cultures and stuff whilst keeping it neutral. It's not really hard; many people in the world are raised to respect one another whatever they want to be. If you, as a parent, do that, then your job is done.
Daft Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 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? Oh yeah, it's absolutely a practice in futility.
Ten10 Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 So yeah I'm the one who posted this on G+ and said she was a bit of psycho. Hey NE it's been a while how are you all doing? Now I did post a very long reply on that stream post with some of my thoughts but it got lost along the way. Now depending on where you read this news story certain different things were reported and the couple were painted in a different light. That being said when I read the article the reason that I felt off about what they were doing was not necessarily because it was what was best for the child. But because and I quote: "I wanted to make people think a little." I found it interesting how it's fine for him to dress in what is considered girlie things, but anything considered masculine is banned. he's able to dabble in things like duplo and I guess er... tellytubbies (not good on my kids shows) everything girlie apart from barbie because she's not an independent woman but Bratz are ok. However nothing that is considered to be boyish is allowed, so no action man, transformers, big rigs cars etc. How is that the best of both worlds. Is it not the world a typical girl would be in? It seems like their is a heavy bias to one side of the spectrum. Also perhaps because of her strong feminist beliefs (not saying that is a good or bad thing, I'm just someone who'll say why can't we all just get along?) I felt that the mother was pushing a way of nurturing on him for the sake of trying to make a point that I didn't quite agree with or didn't feel was fully representational of what she was trying to do. And I'm not so sure she perhaps would have carried out this experiment had she had a girl. I suppose my concern / apprehension is ok, she's done this experiment how does she propose to help her son deal with issues that may arise as environmental factors come into play. Like oh there's no difference between boys and girls, but there is a big reason why you need to go into that bathroom and your friend over there goes into that one. Hopefully next time I'll provide a better argument that just a one liner. But then again I like finding odd news and posting it up for the sake of discussion.
chairdriver Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 Also perhaps because of her strong feminist beliefs (not saying that is a good or bad thing, I'm just someone who'll say why can't we all just get along? Because in order to all get along we have to sort out the bullshit which is still rife? You can't necessarily expect someone to be amicable when there's a whole heap of shit that they have to deal with that you're privileged not to ever experience.
Yvonne Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 Yeah, fair treatment is a prerequisite of all getting along. Some might say it actually is the same thing!
Aimless Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 I find gender neutrality a bit... artificial. Not wanting to push your child into a stereotype is all well and good, but neutrality is setting yourself apart, picking neither one side or the other. In a sense it's the stance with the least options, as your only choice is to not make one. Enforcing neutrality on a child is no better than pushing them towards one gender stereotype or the other. In this case it also seems more about contrarianism than neutrality: it's fine for her boy to wear a ballerina outfit but combats are a no-no. I suspect that if she'd had a girl the opposite would be the case, as she appears to be letting stereotypes inversely affect her parenting choices in order to make a statement. I feel that having the core of identity that gender allows is very useful and comforting. Being able to say, "I am male" or "I am female" gives an invaluable foundation when it comes to defining who you are. Even if your conclusion is, "I am a female trapped in a male body" or "I am a man attracted to other men", that sense of identity allows you to function, not flounder. People want equality, not neutrality. For me the latter draws attention to differences by denying them, whereas egalitarianism is more about accepting diversity; it isn't wrong to think "that person is black" or "he's gay" so long as you treat them with the same respect as you would anyone else.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 I find gender neutrality a bit... artificial. Not wanting to push your child into a stereotype is all well and good, but neutrality is setting yourself apart, picking neither one side or the other. In a sense it's the stance with the least options, as your only choice is to not make one. Enforcing neutrality on a child is no better than pushing them towards one gender stereotype or the other. In this case it also seems more about contrarianism than neutrality: it's fine for her boy to wear a ballerina outfit but combats are a no-no. I suspect that if she'd had a girl the opposite would be the case, as she appears to be letting stereotypes inversely affect her parenting choices in order to make a statement. I feel that having the core of identity that gender allows is very useful and comforting. Being able to say, "I am male" or "I am female" gives an invaluable foundation when it comes to defining who you are. Even if your conclusion is, "I am a female trapped in a male body" or "I am a man attracted to other men", that sense of identity allows you to function, not flounder. People want equality, not neutrality. For me the latter draws attention to differences by denying them, whereas egalitarianism is more about accepting diversity; it isn't wrong to think "that person is black" or "he's gay" so long as you treat them with the same respect as you would anyone else. The best post in this thread by far. You nailed it, Aimless.
chairdriver Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 I feel that having the core of identity that gender allows is very useful and comforting. Being able to say, "I am male" or "I am female" gives an invaluable foundation when it comes to defining who you are. Even if your conclusion is, "I am a female trapped in a male body" or "I am a man attracted to other men", that sense of identity allows you to function, not flounder. It can be useful/comforting for some people. You have to recognise that you are cis-privileged, for many people the gender binary is not enough to describe and understand their state/identity. The world drills it into us what these two categories 'man' and 'woman' are, and for people who are entirely outside of those categories, gender can be anything but comforting.
Aimless Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 It can be useful/comforting for some people. You have to recognise that you are cis-privileged, for many people the gender binary is not enough to describe and understand their state/identity. The world drills it into us what these two categories 'man' and 'woman' are, and for people who are entirely outside of those categories, gender can be anything but comforting. Well, in a roundabout way aren't you agreeing with me? If people who feel they can't define their gender find the situation uncomfortable, by extension having a defined sense of gender would be comforting to them.
chairdriver Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 Well, in a roundabout way aren't you agreeing with me? If people who feel they can't define their gender find the situation uncomfortable, by extension having a defined sense of gender would be comforting to them. Yeah, but in order to define their gender you'd have to dissolve the gender binary, which you're enforcing when you strictly categorise male/female.
Beast Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 Aimless is completely right. It's all about equality! Treat others how you'd like to be treated and all that.
Aimless Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 Yeah, but in order to define their gender you'd have to dissolve the gender binary, which you're enforcing when you strictly categorise male/female. I don't feel like I was strictly categorising anything. Regardless, in your ideal society what role would gender play?
Raining_again Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 if a boy wants to play with a barbie, let him, and the same if a girl wants to play with a truck...(or do anything that isn't in their stereotype).... doesn't mean that they've somehow magically lost their gender or personality. Kids are kids.... they mostly don't care about things like gender stereotypes and things like that...they just want to play and have fun.... seems like some people want kids to be something they aren't yet able to understand..
heroicjanitor Posted January 30, 2012 Posted January 30, 2012 http://io9.com/5879647/do-girls-naturally-prefer-dolls-to-trucks-evidence-from-2-primate-studies I think this article is relevant. researchers compared how 34 rhesus monkeys living in a single troop interacted with human toys categorized as either masculine or feminine. The "masculine" set consisted of wheeled toys preferred by human boys (e.g., a wagon, a truck, a car, and a construction vehicle); the "feminine" set was comprised of plush toys comparable to stuffed animals and dolls (e.g., a Raggedy-Annâ„¢ doll, a koala bear hand puppet, an armadillo, a teddy bear, and a turtle). Individual monkeys were released into an outdoor area containing one wheeled toy and one plush toy, with the researchers taping all interactions using separate cameras for each toy, identifying all specific behaviors, and statistically analyzing the results. The results closely paralleled those found in human children. As with human boys, male rhesus monkeys clearly preferred wheeled toys over plush toys, interacting significantly more frequently and for long durations with the wheeled toys. Also mirroring human behavior, female rhesus monkeys were less specialized, playing with both plush and wheeled toys and not exhibiting significant preferences for one type over the other. Human behaviour vs monkey behaviour: Shows that it is more likely to be nature than nurture.
Agent Gibbs Posted January 30, 2012 Posted January 30, 2012 http://io9.com/5879647/do-girls-naturally-prefer-dolls-to-trucks-evidence-from-2-primate-studies I think this article is relevant. Human behaviour vs monkey behaviour: Shows that it is more likely to be nature than nurture. She won't be happy to learn that
Eenuh Posted January 31, 2012 Posted January 31, 2012 Completely ignoring the discussion at the moment, but I thought this site kinda fitted in with the theme of dressing the boy up in girl's clothes. =D Switcheroo!
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted January 31, 2012 Posted January 31, 2012 That's amazing. It's interesting to see how some outfits work equally well on both while others don't.
Recommended Posts