The myth of the genderless baby

by Albert Mohler
Wed May 25, 2011 11:52 EST

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/the-myth-of-the-genderless-baby

Well, the neighbors might take these parents at their word, but the very idea of a genderless baby is nonsense. This is not a baby with ambiguous genitalia, a defect that occurs in a very small percentage of births. The parents admit that this baby has a clear biological sex, but they do not want that to become the child's identity. They want the child to make that determination at a later date.

To no real surprise, these parents classify themselves on the political and ideological left. Their two older children are both boys, but the parents encourage the boys to act and dress in unconventional ways. So much so, that as the reporter informs us, many who see them assume they are girls.

Quote from: Zythyra on May 28, 2011, 09:14:35 AM
Their two older children are both boys, but the parents encourage the boys to act and dress in unconventional ways. So much so, that as the reporter informs us, many who see them assume they are girls.

I think that points out the real sociological question here. People don't really care of the children are boys or girls. They only want to know it they're boys or not. Anything that's not a boy is probably a girl (or an "it.") Girls are just boys that didn't make it to perfection. How do you spell patriarchy?

I don't read the parents actions as trying to raise a "genderless" child.  I think they are trying to reduce the amount of imposition of gender norms by (usually well meaning) people who act differently toward a child if it is a boy  vs a girl (e.g. give girls dolls and boy trucks).  The child will be whatever gender it is.  The parents just want to allow the child to enjoy what he/she is attracted to without gender prejudice.

Julie

... the comments...
ugh...

Quote from: Miniar on May 28, 2011, 04:36:01 PM
... the comments...
ugh...

hey Miniar, you should see the comments on the facebook group. HEADACHE! when i joined 2 or 3 days ago there was a little over 40 people. there's over a hundred members now. and i bet at least half a dozen are people bashing the family this article is talking about and anyone who supports them or the very idea to let kids like whatever they want clothes/toys/hair no matter what gender they were born as and if they're interests are stereotypically for "boys" or "girls" it makes no sense and i don't ever want to understand it. why people are either angry about it, pity the kids, or say they're going to be bullied and they pretty much have it coming, some that were saying these stupid stupid things were starting they're vitriolic hate with "I'm a parent of (insert number of kids) or I'm a teacher." and that's the crap they believe, makes me sick that they're in charge of small impressionable human beings.

but but ALL babies are born genderless! Gender qualities are imposed upon a child by parents and later society and gender self-perception comes with time.. usually 2-5 years. Stupid parents, take the baby away from them! urrg.

I have problems with these people. Children need boundaries and guidance that help them develop as normal humans. To be able to socialise and find their way in society. The boundaries are not empirical but guides to be a healthy person.

OK as people who got the raw end of the sex identity versus gender identity we may feel there is some validity in these people concepts. I totally disagree. What we needed was parental support etc when we came out to our parents saying we are female or male in contradiction to our secondary sexual characteristics.  But to not provide guidance is, to me, child abuse. I'll let my baby smoke cigarettes because I do. I like a shot of whiskey so I'll put some in the feed. This is abuse. I have a boy child I'll dress him up in girl clothes so he can make a choice later. Wrong. I have a girl child I'll bring her up as a boy so she can make a choice. Wrong. Your boy child comes to you when he is thirteen and says, I'm not a boy I'm a girl, what do I do? You then intervene and help. Get the therapists, provide the love, provide the support and hope to Hell and back that your child will have a happy life.

Cindy

Except Cindy, that's not what they're doing.
They aren't letting their kids run loose but they aren't pidgeonholing them either.
They encourage their boys to be independent and do and wear things even if rest of society tells their boys that they're boys and shouldn't do or wear "girl" things.

And they aren't raising Storm to "be" gender neutral, they're making a point of not telling other people about Storm's gender so that other people won't change their behaviour or gifts and start pushing storm into one direction or the other.
As in, they don't want other people to start giving storm exclusively "boy" or exclusively "girl" gifts or attention.

That way, regardless of Storm's gender or sex, Storm is likely to grow up to enjoy things without being pressured into them since birth!

I get the impression Cindy, that they are not giving their sons 'girl's' clothes, rather they are letting them decide what they feel comfortable wearing and enjoy wearing.

It is a rather challanging approach from a orthodoxy point of view. But it seems to be the parents seeking to emphasis, to the children, that their sexuality is their businesss.

If I were a parent, I don't think I would be quite so fanitical, personally. I would tell the child and others, what their birth sex is. But equally, I would not impose gender stereotypes on their appearance or play.

Having said that, I do not accept that children are not aware of their gender, at a young age. I believe Frued suggested children became aware at the age of 3. It may be a little more fluid than that.

I made a point of not telling anyone whether I was having a girl or a boy while I was pregnant because I didn't want to get 100% blue or pink clothes as gifts.
As a result I saw older women looking at the belly and deciding based on it's "shape" whether I had a boy or a girl and as a result, some people gave me all "boyish" things while others gave me all "girlish" things.
But there were enough reds and greens and purples and so on and teddies and plush cars and so on and so she didn't get "pidgeonholed" at birth, which I thought was awesome.

But I also got complained at by both her grandmothers that they'd seen "pretty dresses" and wished they'd known cause they wanted to buy the pretty dresses but didn't dare cause they didn't know.
Actual serious  complaints!
And also the complaints that the "little girl" didn't look enough like a girl in her "neutral" clothes.
Serious complaints!
As if I was doing something horribly "wrong" to her by not making sure she looked like a little doll!
And all the adults who knew wanted to play dress up with the little girl and coo at her as if she was the pretty little delicate flower and I watched the demeanor of those who didn't know but assumed "boy" change when they were told they were wrong.
I wish I'd had the information, and the balls, to go "that's none of your business!" when asked.

I'm happy to be corrected. I was not implying that children need the stereo type sexulisation  that seems to be creeping in to life. I sincerely believe that children should be children . Have tha chance to do what ever they want in a safe environment, both physically and mentally. I have no interest in little girls being transformed into a 'doll' nor should little boys be transformed into 'little men'. They should be allowed to grow as naturally as they wish. I obviously misinterpreted the information on this family

Cindy

Quote from: CindyJames on May 30, 2011, 03:17:20 AM
. I obviously misinterpreted the information on this family

Cindy

With respect, I think that is the intention.

In the 70s, I mixed with a number of, what might today becalled, New Age types. Most were promoting their own notions. Those that had children were certainly promoting some interesting ideas about bringing up their kids.

For example, one, apparently prominant member of the Maharishi group who claimed the Maharrishi had told her only to feed her children on uncooked vegatables and fruit. I particularly recall that her baby seemed about 9 or so months but apart from having a tendency to get skin leasons was,  otherwise fairly normal. I was a little shocked to discover that it was actually 18 months old. (That woman and her husband came from Texas, He claimed to be a naturopath).

Almost all of these people, whichever group they ascribed to, tried to deny gender differences in their younger children. The Maharishi people in particular, would claim that such notions are a product of the stress which has poluted the human gene pool, (or something like that) and would soon be eliminated. (The Maharishi people always seemed to be claiming that World enlightenment was just around the corner. The Scientologists, who are actually quite similar in many ways, claim that enlightnment is only coming for the minority, ie, them).

There were groups, which I had only casual or indircet contact with, in the US, claiming to be living some sort of native American spiritual quest, also with siomilar ideas about gender in children.

The point is, such ideas are not in any way new or unusual. Those children, from that period, will now be, at least in their 30s.

Yet this single example has been splashed across the world's press as an almost unique example of the downfall of contemporary western civilisation. These children are being held as representing unique form of child abuse, with the implication that this could easily become a cult, poluting the next generation of children.

A scandal, a disease, some major castrophy.

I can't help but wonder if this is actually some sort of hype cooked up.

If I need to go into who is probably behind it, those that know won't need it and those that don't, won't listen.

What I do know for certain is that, 3 children are being help up for international ridicule, that the armies of so called experts wheeling out their apparently reasonable ideas and repsonses need to be slowly dipped in acid and this family needs to be left alone.

What I do know for certain is that, 3 children are being help up for international ridicule, that the armies of so called experts wheeling out their apparently reasonable ideas and repsonses need to be slowly dipped in acid and this family needs to be left alone.

This and wondering.

Hugs J\\Love Cindy

is anyone else getting burned out on this story? i feel bad that the kids are still caught in the middle of all this bs and i also wonder if some day 10, 15, 20 years from now they'll all say "hey you guys remember when the whole world was talking about us endlessly? saying all kinds of stuff true or not, and giving unwanted advice? even saying we were being abused?"

i can see how only feeding your kids certain things and they get obvious malnutrition from it being child abuse but this? really?