The genderless baby

[Starkess]

The androgynous prefer "they".

And the grammarians weep...

[RWHamel]

And the grammarians weep...

And the lurkers laugh... :laugh:

[Shael]

Start here: Baron–Cohen, The Essential Difference

I've actually read (most) of that book. As I recall, nothing was proven. I guess I should finish it.

Anyone who names a child, boy or girl, "Jazz" has problems. I suppose it's still better than Jayden.

[Ormond]

I think the grief these parents are getting is ridiculous.

After reading the mother's own statement about this, I don't find her to be abusive in any way. And there is no indication that the child's gender is going to be any secret for very long.

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/canada/Baby+Storm+gender+parenting+media/4856804/story.html

I personally have no problem with believing that the average difference between boys playing with trucks and girls playing with dolls, or the average gender difference in spatial perception, has a large biological component and has been affected by evolution through natural selection. But I cringe whenever this is phrased as "boys play with trucks and girls play with dolls" because I think the majority of people will read that as "ALL boys prefer to play with trucks and ALL girls prefer to play with dolls" instead of "MOST boys" and "MOST girls". I think it's very important to continually modify statements about gender differences in behavior with words like "most", "generally". "on the average", etc., so that we are not perpetuating the idea that there is something wrong, bad, evil, or defective about those children who are NOT "average" on these issues.

There are some boys who prefer to play with dolls over trucks and some girls who prefer to play with trucks over dolls. This should be acknowledged, and society should say that bullying, teasing, or rejecting these children because their behavior does not conform to the average for their gender is unacceptable. I don't see why that is incompatible with also acknowledging that the average gender differences found on that and many other issues have a very big biological component.

[sologdin]

far be it from me to criticize someone else's parenting technique, but won't the gender politics BS get transmitted to the little rotter anyway, i.e., because it's everywhere, and because some persons do in fact know what the brat is packing?

[Ser_not_appearing_yet]

far be it from me to criticize someone else's parenting technique, but won't the gender politics BS get transmitted to the little rotter anyway, i.e., because it's everywhere, and because some persons do in fact know what the brat is packing?

Yes, its like waging your own cultural war (like Cnut and the sea) using your own child as the ammo. Its certainly not intentional abuse (their argument is obviously that everyone else inflicts cultural factors onto their children and they are doing in essence the same thing) but its still stupid, pointless, and will be unlikely to end well for the kid. Which is more important than the parents' latent curiosities.

[Eponine]

I think that the mistake is in trying to make the baby "genderless" instead of recognizing that the baby has a gender and working hard to help their child transcend gender limitations and stereotypes.

But I don't think what they're doing is any worse than trying to stuff a child into gender norms that don't fit.

I was with a couple whose toddler son likes to dress up in his sister's princess play clothes, and they tried to stop him and kept asking him to take the dress off (his sisters were fine with it). I had to bite my tongue.

That they unschool was the least surprising thing about that whole article. I think ultimately it's doing the kid a disservice in most cases, and is really no different in the long run than religious homeschoolers who don't want their kids to be too much around other people who will fuck up their precious ideology. but that's another subject altogether.

[Matrim Fox Cauthon]

And the grammarians weep...

:crying:

I've actually read (most) of that book. As I recall, nothing was proven. I guess I should finish it.

Anyone who names a child, boy or girl, "Jazz" has problems. I suppose it's still better than Jayden.

Yeah. That child is not going to bother wondering if they are a boy or a girl, but if they're a Transformer!

[Ser_not_appearing_yet]

That they unschool was the least surprising thing about that whole article. I think ultimately it's doing the kid a disservice in most cases, and is really no different in the long run than religious homeschoolers who don't want their kids to be too much around other people who will fuck up their precious ideology. but that's another subject altogether.

Its similar to this, but unfortunately worse since at least in the religious homeschooled case the child will have (some) people they can relate to.

As far as I know, this is the only kid to have ever been brought up 'genderless'. Its taking isolation to an even greater extreme.

[Ormond]

Its similar to this, but unfortunately worse since at least in the religious homeschooled case the child will have (some) people they can relate to.

As far as I know, this is the only kid to have ever been brought up 'genderless'. Its taking isolation to an even greater extreme.

Their oldest child is five years old, folks. The only "grade" he could reasonably be in outside of the home is kindergarten. I'd wait a while to see how long these kids are really going to be instructed purely at home.

[slim da reaper]

I actually have nothing to say about the article, it's a story where I don't have all the facts. Speculation on a media article where to defend or castigate is at the level of gossip.

I will share my story, it's abit cnadid so if you're a prude don't read any further.

In my gender I am both male and female to a very high degree, but my fundamental sexuality is female. I was born a perfect physical appearance male, at age 8 I knew I was transgendered from reading an article in a newspaper. At 13 I knew something was wrong down below, as puberty progressed this was confirmed as my genitals did not develop (haha remember I'm not male), I was confirmed intersexed at 20 through a karyotype test that came back XXXY. I've lived for near 37 years and been treated very well and have a great career as a musician.

But I have that problem of how I function sexually, that is a biological characteristic that is not open to societal influence, or any past wishes on my behalf. Though surgery as a juvenile would have been very beneficial to me, for intersexed individuals noticed at birth it has firmly fallen out of favour because of biological factors being identified in sex, gender and personality formation. Sex and gender are seperate though they are intertwined. So you can have someone with one type of genital and all these other biological factors that say otherwise.

So if I want to have a fully fufilled life I'll have to have surgery, I do have a great sex life with my girlfriend she knows exactly who I am and it was the thing that attracted her to me in the first place. Gender is an expression not a prison to limit you by notions of what you can and cannot do.

I hope some of this will help others.

[Ser_not_appearing_yet]

If I'm honest I'm not totally certain what raising your child as 'genderless' really involves, since we don't really have that as a concept in our society, so I can't say whatever they are planning will permanently damage the kid. I am fairly sure that at least 15 years from now that family will have some hefty issues.

[Ormond]

If I'm honest I'm not totally certain what raising your child as 'genderless' really involves, since we don't really have that as a concept in our society, so I can't say whatever they are planning will permanently damage the kid. I am fairly sure that at least 15 years from now that family will have some hefty issues.

You have no basis on which to have such certainty, because there is really very little indication from what the mother says that they are planning that the child's biological sex will still be a secret outside of the family when he/she is 15.

[Ser_not_appearing_yet]

You have no basis on which to have such certainty, because there is really very little indication from what the mother says that they are planning that the child's biological sex will still be a secret outside of the family when he/she is 15.

My basis is on the concept of the teenager discovering that he/she's parents decided to use him/her for a sociological experiment during their early years.

[sologdin]

to use him/her for a sociological experiment

not impressed by this line of argument, to be honest. it's not like the way gender's always been done is so great, after all.

[Ser_not_appearing_yet]

They are deliberately attempting to deviate significantly from the norm, without any real idea of what the ultimate results will be. That in my mind is an experiment. Whether its morally justified is up to others to speculate on, I'm not interested in going down there. I'm not really concerned, I simply believe that it will likely damage the kid's standard of life long-term.

There's plenty of worse shit going on in the world (parenting-wise), but that doesn't mean I'll condone these people.

[Eponine]

Their oldest child is five years old, folks. The only "grade" he could reasonably be in outside of the home is kindergarten. I'd wait a while to see how long these kids are really going to be instructed purely at home.

It's as much that they choose to identify their children as unschooled instead of simply being like all the other children the same age who aren't in school yet, aren't ready for school, etc. There's nothing particularly interesting about a five year old who hasn't started school, but their rhetoric makes sure it's evident they consider his "education" different than what other parents are doing.

[Warg Arry]

Quote from the zero to three website.

Neuroscientists have documented that our earliest days, weeks and months of life are a period of unparalleled growth when trillions of brain cell connections are made. Research and clinical experience also demonstrate that health and development are directly influenced by the quality of care and experiences a child has with his parents and other adults

It also makes the point that I was also taught in the seminars on early childhood education and development.

We know that as babies, the way we are held, talked to and cared for teaches us about who we are and how we are valued. This profoundly shapes who we will become.

Early experiences set a course for a lifelong process of discovery about ourselves and the world around us. Simply put, early experiences matter.

It's hard to say if this will have a life long and profound effect on Storm's life and growth. Or even emotional well being.

It may even be a non issue, in so far as, who Storm becomes as a self identified individual.

It is just my opinion. But I think it is far more responsible to teach a child to be happy and content with who they are. That just because they are Male doesn't mean they can't be happy in a female dominated profession; such as nursing. Or just because they are female doesn't mean they can't be successful in a male dominated profession. Such as fire fighter.

Also that there is no shame in choosing a life that could be considered "stereotypical" of gender. For example. A stay at home mum. Or a brickies labourer. If that's what they want.

Storm will be aware of his/her gender fairly quickly. Babies explore the second their diaper comes off. just like they do every other part of themselves. So really all the parents are saying. Is they don't trust the people close to them not to pigeon hole Storm.

it would be almost impossible for storm not to self identify with the same gender of their immediate family.

it occurs to me that Storm's siblings are publicly gender identified. In my opinion the backlash could be that Storm may conclude that there is a reason to be ashamed of her/his gender.

I know it's probably petty to say. But I'm betting Storm is female.

Only based on my own assumptions. That as I said. the siblings are male and identified as such. And also being born female has higher societal cost than being born male. in the last century it's been the perception of what it is to be female that has undergone dramatic change. but the fight for equality still continues.

So I think that might have factored into this "experiment". And the reason I made this otherwise unfounded leap of a conclusion..I got a 50/50 chance of being right :D

[mcbigski]

Daedalus,

There isn't a genderless pronoun for humans in English. "It" qualifies but it gives the impression you don't consider what you are talking about human. I'd simply say "the child".

Scot, stop being such a touchy feely revolutionary. 'It' for an infant is standard English usage, even more so when the gender isn't apparent. If I say "The baby is lying on its back' how am I implying it isn't human?

Kind of surprised there's push back against the parents here. Sure, they seem like dopey folks, but in the long run, they're trying to push water uphill. It is what it is. (couldn't resist!) Mostly I think they're doing it for their own noteriety rather than for Storm's best interest (assuming we're not talking about a hermaphrodite). Give the kid three or four years and it'll know what sex it is, unless they kept it in a total media vacuum perhaps. Kids are resilient, their brains are relatively plastic, it won't have a lasting effect, it's probably just short term attention whoring on the part of the parents.

[Xanrn]

Well lets start with the "fucking hippies" bit and continue from there.

Jazz and Storm, huh...

They are fuckin pet names, not something you give to a bloody kid.

Yeah and I will bet Storm is a girl.

If it was another boy they wouldn't be bothering with this idiotic hippy crap.