What do you think of this?
- Thread starter KenyiGirl
- Start date
That...is certainly interesting. Two comments got my attention:
One:
"'Child-rearing should not be about providing an opportunity to prove an ideological point, but about responding to each child’s needs as an individual,' Pinker tells The Local.
That I would agree with. You have to wonder about the parents' motives. Well..they says their motives are based in "feminist philosophy", which makes you wonder if they're trying to make a point or really trying to provide the best upbringing possible for their child.
Two:
"'Girls are told they are cute in their dresses, and boys are told they are cool with their car toys. But if you give them no gender they will be seen more as a human or not a stereotype as a boy or girl.'"
Of course, I guess that's the ideal. No one wants to be seen as male or female FIRST, and a human being second. It's a nice dream...but I don't think it's particularly realistic in society (though there are some cultures that are FAR less concerned with gender than "western" society).
A very interesting sociological experiment, but I think there's a point where you have to put your punk rock idealism to rest and accept that ANYTHING you do to make your child vastly different from her or his peers will have a very long-lasting and potentially negative affect on them. I think life is hard enough as it is... I'm not a conformist by any means, but I can only see difficulty in this kid's future. This family doesn't live in a bubble of gender-free equality. They live in the real world.
I don't think this will work.
One:
"'Child-rearing should not be about providing an opportunity to prove an ideological point, but about responding to each child’s needs as an individual,' Pinker tells The Local.
That I would agree with. You have to wonder about the parents' motives. Well..they says their motives are based in "feminist philosophy", which makes you wonder if they're trying to make a point or really trying to provide the best upbringing possible for their child.
Two:
"'Girls are told they are cute in their dresses, and boys are told they are cool with their car toys. But if you give them no gender they will be seen more as a human or not a stereotype as a boy or girl.'"
Of course, I guess that's the ideal. No one wants to be seen as male or female FIRST, and a human being second. It's a nice dream...but I don't think it's particularly realistic in society (though there are some cultures that are FAR less concerned with gender than "western" society).
A very interesting sociological experiment, but I think there's a point where you have to put your punk rock idealism to rest and accept that ANYTHING you do to make your child vastly different from her or his peers will have a very long-lasting and potentially negative affect on them. I think life is hard enough as it is... I'm not a conformist by any means, but I can only see difficulty in this kid's future. This family doesn't live in a bubble of gender-free equality. They live in the real world.
I don't think this will work.
I agree. The psychologist's quote about using their child as a social experiment really stood out for me, too.
I actually do understand the underlying desire, and I don't know that it is necessarily solely a feminist one, to allow your child to grow up free of the social constraints of gender (as opposed to sex). But I also agree that they're likely setting their child up to be ostracized later on.
Maybe the Swedes are open minded enough? Can't imagine how this would go over in the US! Poor "Pop."
I actually do understand the underlying desire, and I don't know that it is necessarily solely a feminist one, to allow your child to grow up free of the social constraints of gender (as opposed to sex). But I also agree that they're likely setting their child up to be ostracized later on.
Maybe the Swedes are open minded enough? Can't imagine how this would go over in the US! Poor "Pop."
I think that kids need to feel accepted, and kids use their gender to identify with other kids. When you take that away they could be left with a feeling of not really belonging.
I don't think it'll last long, when the kid gets into school I'm sure the teachers will want to know which bathroom to send it to...
I don't think it'll last long, when the kid gets into school I'm sure the teachers will want to know which bathroom to send it to...
No kidding.
I admire the parents' philosophical stance and their dedication and I am ALL for blurring the gender lines and so on. But dressing a boy in dresses (if it is a boy) is not going to help them achieve what they're after. If that continues beyond the age of like...4 people are going to start treating the kid differently, and not in the "gender neutral" way the parents are hoping. They're going to start looking at him/her as "different" and "strange" and who on earth wants to be seen like that?
Again, not saying that you have to conform to be a good person, well-liked, etc. I am all for cross-dressing, drag queens, transvestism and all that good stuff, once you know who you are. I think it's very dangerous to encourage that in a child who is trying to comprehend who they are and where they fit in. I think it would leave the child feeling unsure about who they are and what they're about and maybe down the road feel like she or he had no safety net, emotionally.
I admire the parents' philosophical stance and their dedication and I am ALL for blurring the gender lines and so on. But dressing a boy in dresses (if it is a boy) is not going to help them achieve what they're after. If that continues beyond the age of like...4 people are going to start treating the kid differently, and not in the "gender neutral" way the parents are hoping. They're going to start looking at him/her as "different" and "strange" and who on earth wants to be seen like that?
Again, not saying that you have to conform to be a good person, well-liked, etc. I am all for cross-dressing, drag queens, transvestism and all that good stuff, once you know who you are. I think it's very dangerous to encourage that in a child who is trying to comprehend who they are and where they fit in. I think it would leave the child feeling unsure about who they are and what they're about and maybe down the road feel like she or he had no safety net, emotionally.
It's been done before. It was an interesting experiment to read about. But I think it's pretty stupid. They aren't really defeating gender stereotypes this way. You're not normalizing a girl playing with a cool car toy by refusing to say "This is a girl playing with a cool car." It seems to me like it's still treating certain things as "girl things" and other things as "boy things," and that the only way it's acceptable to do both is to act as though your gender is... neither.
That's an excellent point.
Perhaps a smarter way of going about it would be to encourage all kinds of play, hobbies, friends...I think you're taking it to extremes when you purposely dress a child like the opposite gender to make a point.
I just stopped to think about whether or not I would dress a small boy in a dress since, hey, I'm pretty non-conformist...but no, I wouldn't dress ANY child in a dress. Dresses are pretty restrictive for rough and tumble play once you get to a certain age. And there's always the assumption that a dress has to be kept nice and spotlessly clean...which by default means that girls aren't supposed to play rough and get dirty like boys.
So no dresses at all, as far as I'm concerned! THAT will be my stance for gender equality!
Perhaps a smarter way of going about it would be to encourage all kinds of play, hobbies, friends...I think you're taking it to extremes when you purposely dress a child like the opposite gender to make a point.
I just stopped to think about whether or not I would dress a small boy in a dress since, hey, I'm pretty non-conformist...but no, I wouldn't dress ANY child in a dress. Dresses are pretty restrictive for rough and tumble play once you get to a certain age. And there's always the assumption that a dress has to be kept nice and spotlessly clean...which by default means that girls aren't supposed to play rough and get dirty like boys.
So no dresses at all, as far as I'm concerned! THAT will be my stance for gender equality!
I think that it goes beyond what the parents do, though, and to what grandparents and teachers and other adults, and children, do. I'd assume that their goal is to let their child develop outside of all of the societal constraints of what boys and girls generally or "should" do.
That being said, I agree that it's stupid.
That being said, I agree that it's stupid.
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2008
- Messages
- 261
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 0
I think that it will inevitably lead to alot of misunderstandings and confusion for the child. Just as far as wardrobe goes.. they say the choices vary but dresses were mentioned.. I just think that anyone not aware of the situation that sees the child in a dress is going to automatically assume "girl".
I'm confused as to how this is going to stay secret...kids are notoriously nosy...i can't imagine it will be much longer before a classmate asks little Pop what kind of "down there" parts he/she has...
Other than that, im not sure I have a huge issue with it...i really can't see it hurting the child in the long run, so eh, if thats how they wanna raise their kid, then whatever.
Other than that, im not sure I have a huge issue with it...i really can't see it hurting the child in the long run, so eh, if thats how they wanna raise their kid, then whatever.