Raising a "Genderless" Child

[Espy]

No, this isn't about some bizarre experiment performed by Steinman.

It is about a bizarre experiment performed by someone else however.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/05/24/genderless-child-creates-media-firestorm-toronto/

A Toronto couple raising their 4-month-old without identifying the child as a boy or a girl have created a media firestorm in Canada, where some have likened the scenario to a "bizarre lab experiment" that seeks to undo thousands of years of social evolution.
Kathy Witterick, 38, and David Stocker, 39, are raising their third child, Storm, to be free of societal norms regarding gender. Is Storm male or female? The parents won't say, so no one knows except Storm's older brothers, Jazz and Kio, as well as a close family friend and two midwives who helped deliver the baby, according to the Toronto Star.

I for one am horrified. I mean, really... "Storm"? Who the hell do these people think they are? Gwyneth Paltrow and Boring Guy from Coldplay?

But stupid coldplay and wife related jokes aside, this is actually quite fascinating. Thoughts?

 

[AshburnerX]

There's a reason we don't let abandoned/orphaned kids be adopted by people planning to experiment on them, just as there is a reason why we have Child Services. This is tantamount to child abuse and they are likely going to lose their kid/s over this.

Seriously, this is the kind of thing someone needs to consent to first and this kid isn't being given a choice.

 

[Espy]

There's a reason we don't let abandoned/orphaned kids be adopted by people planning to experiment on them, just as there is a reason why we have Child Services. This is tantamount to child abuse and they are likely going to lose their kid/s over this.

Seriously, this is the kind of thing someone needs to consent to first and this kid isn't being given a choice.

Thats the thing that bothered me about it. As fascinating of an idea as it is, it won't last and the kid, rather than the parents, will be the one to bear the brunt of any effects.

 

[Chad Sexington]

People named Storm:



But anyways, that's madness. Madness.

 

[Dirona]

There's a reason we don't let abandoned/orphaned kids be adopted by people planning to experiment on them, just as there is a reason why we have Child Services. This is tantamount to child abuse and they are likely going to lose their kid/s over this.

Seriously, this is the kind of thing someone needs to consent to first and this kid isn't being given a choice.

Thats the thing that bothered me about it. As fascinating of an idea as it is, it won't last and the kid, rather than the parents, will be the one to bear the brunt of any effects.

Not that I agree with the parents but... aren't there a lot of things that parents do to/for/on behalf of their kids that in any other circumstance requires consent? (I'm thinking along the lines of medical things, education, and, well... religious things too.) Parents get some pretty strong rights in terms of what they can do to their children without their consent. Wouldn't this *whatever it is* (I don't want to call it an experiment) fall into that category? Doing what they deem best based on their role as the kid's parents?

That said, I think it is shortsighted and foolish, and that the kid is likely going to have a harder time of things as a result (at least for a few years). Heck, all three of the kids are going to have a hard time once they get closer to the age of majority.

 

[Hailey Knight]

What exactly are they doing that's bad? Clothes? A lot of kids wear the same stuff, pants and shirt. Having both genders' toys? I'm trying to see what exactly is so heinous except for that name. There just aren't details to point out what's a problem, aside from saying "girls go to finishing school and boys play sports".

The kid is four months old. S/he doesn't have a fucking clue what's going on and won't be self-aware for a while yet. If it's a boy, people will know pretty quickly, just from how boys act with their external organs even at the age of 2.

"I don't think there's any question that this is going to do severe harm to this child," Fischer said. "That child is either a male or female, and it’s a tragedy that his parents or her parents are apparently unwilling to base their approach on scientific and biological truth."

The attempt to keep the child's gender a secret is simply a "terrible disservice," Fischer said.
"The vast majority of people have enough common sense to recognize that this is lunacy," he continued. "The vast majority of people are motivated by a deep level of concern of what's going to happen to that poor child."

Maybe other people need to mind their fucking business. Four months old. The kid doesn't have a clue what a boy or girl is, can't even understand the words you're saying, can't feed itself. You dress most kids of that age in a neutral color, and no one has any idea what gender the child is, so they just guess.

 

[strawman]

Even at one month old infants are picking up on tone of voice, handling, reactions, etc. Thing every adult does differently based on sex of the child.

Enculturation starts long before four months old.

I wonder if they are using 'it' for the pronoun.

 

[Philosopher B.]

Society is pretty fucked up when it comes to gender and gender expectations. However, seeing as one still has to live within that society, I don't know how stellar of an idea this is. I think rushing to call this child-abuse and wanting to string the parents up by their pull-strings is a ridiculous overreaction, though I do wonder how much serious thought they put into this beforehand.

Alternate post:
Brb, getting a degree in social psychology.

 

[Philosopher B.]

Interesting - here's a longer article on the family and their practices:

http://www.parentcentral.ca/parent/...le/995112--parents-keep-child-s-gender-secret

 

[Hailey Knight]

Even at one month old infants are picking up on tone of voice, handling, reactions, etc. Thing every adult does differently based on sex of the child.

Enculturation starts long before four months old.

And clearly the parents know what the gender is--they're withholding that from others. It's not their privilege to know, and I'm sure the kid is getting as many cheek pinches and people babbling nonsense as any other infant.

I wonder if they are using 'it' for the pronoun.

That'd be bad.


Unless you're a person who hard-lines keeping genders as complete polar opposites, which is no longer true in the modern day and is sexist without needing to hear Charlie say so, there's really nothing different that would be being done at 4 months between either gender. Their general day is going to be eat, sleep, burp, crap, and cry, and sometimes put plastic in their mouths.

Social experiment aside, this is a fun game for dealing with the intrusive. "What gender is that baby?" "If you can't tell, why should we tell you?"

 

[drifter]

Reading the article, they briefly considered going with "z" as a pronoun, but they are currently using (s)he. As in, pronouncing it as she, but pretending the s is in brackets. :I

 

[Hailey Knight]

Reading the article, they briefly considered going with "z" as a pronoun, but they are currently using (s)he. As in, pronouncing it as she, but pretending the s is in brackets. :I

If the kid's in any developmental danger, it's from stupidity.

BUT, as can be seen anywhere you go, that's clearly not ground for removing children from parents.

 

[Wasabi Poptart]

To an extent I can understand what they are doing. With both of my kids I refused to give into the parade of blues and pinks that came with each of their genders. I do not and will not make my kids play with toys because this is what a boy plays with and this is what a girl plays with. My son plays with his sister's tea set and cooking set. She plays with his Star Wars toys and dinosaurs. Noah has worn my heels and clothes when he was playing at home. I used to put on my grandfather's clothes and pretend I was a man. I feel it's natural to want to explore gender roles and I will not discourage either of them from doing it. I agree with giving children the freedom to express themselves and not being rigid about what males and females should or shouldn't do.

However, I don't necessarily agree with what these parents are doing. But then again there are a few things I read in the article PhilosopherB posted that I don't agree with as far as how they are raising their kids ("unschooling" for instance). I think the psychologist at the end of the story sums up my feelings well in saying that the parents have possibly denied Storm a way to identify him/herself. I believe (s)he will take cues from the parents and older brothers as to gender. I don't see it as abuse, but as something that bucks societal norms and could leave a lasting, possibly negative, effect on Storm later on.

 

[@Li3n]

I think that naming the kid Storm will have way more negative effects then not enforcing on it societies expectations of one or the other gender...

Now if they start forcing it to not do stuff it wants so it can stay neutral, that will be the thing that will have negative effects.

 

[Azurephoenix]

As much as the parents think they are doing their kids a favour by "freeing" them from the tyranny of pronouns and stereotyped colours and whatever the hell else they're worried about... do they not realize their children do actually have to try and fit into society at some point? I see their three children growing up to be social pariahs.

 

[sixpackshaker]

I just wonder how parenting decisions become news. Did the parents release a statement or were the grandparents, grandstanding to the media.

I just hope they teach the child which bathroom to go into by time (s)he hits kindergarten.

 

[Joe Johnson]

"Friends said they were imposing their political and ideological values on a newborn."

What? This is a stupid quote from the article. Really? Weird, cause no one else does this. At all. Everyone else who raises a child does so in a completely unbiased manner. They ask if they want to go to church, or what school to attend, or what political party/system they believe in. All the time.
/sarcasm

 

[Espy]

I think the real issue will be how long will they keep it up? At a certain point they will be forced to either lie to the child about gender & society or they will have to try to explain to the kid their odd and conveluted worldview to a child who won't get it.

 

[drawn_inward]

Let kids be kids. If you are a boy with 4 older sisters, you will probably play dress-up, and play with barbies. That doesn't mean your son is gay. That's retarded. Admonishing your son for wearing a dress or enjoying dancing or your daughter for rough-housing or playing football is equally appalling. Kids are little sponges and absorb the culture around them. If they are into something and you make it seem bad/wrong, then they are going to think that there is something wrong with them. That's where a bunch of psychological damage is done.

Having said that, I think it's a little weird to not tell people if your kid is a boy or a girl. Who cares? People love babies and are curious. I've heard people ask some seriously personal things. Did you have them vaginally? ---

I don't have kids, but I hope I don't enforce ridiculous gender roles on them as infants. I would be fine if my boy wants to be in ballet and my daughter wants to play baseball/football. Let them be kids for goodness sake and teach them to respect their elders, and teach them right from wrong, by being their example and not just lecturing them.
QED

 

[Adam]

I thought I'd be concerned but in the big scheme of things, all they're doing is fucking up their kids mentally and socially; it's not like they're physically hurting them /s

 

[MindDetective]

Eventually those hormones will kick in and the child's gender will assert itself. This will probably happen a lot sooner than adolescence too. As an experiment it is interesting. As a parenting tactic, it is a bit naive.

 

[Adam]

It's funny that by creating a 'genderless' child , they're reinforcing that certain behaviours or decisions are gender specific. The fact that one child picked purple is something to be heralded where back in reality wouldn't have generated a second look. Yet somehow this selection is indicative of a movement past gender. My wife rode BMX bikes, played video games and didn't own one barbie doll and it didn't take her parents pushing her to break traditional gender roles to do that.

As an experiment, if the children grow up to be gender stereotypes or conversely completely fucked up, I wonder if the parents will actually change their minds on gender roles in child rearing.

 

[Dei]

So I didn't raise my son to really play with one toy over the other, and all his toys were pretty gender neutral, and yet the most fascinating thing in the world for him was watching cars zip down the road. OMG IT'S A BOY TRAIT THAT I CLEARLY IMPOSED ON HIM, etc etc. I think for the most part, kids will like what they like, and I think gender influences some things whether we want to admit it or not. Mostly I'm with the whole "I hope the parents let their kids know which bathroom to use by the time they are going by themselves.".

 

[MindDetective]

I'll just put this here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/dec/20/chimps-play-male-female-genetic

 

[Espy]

I'm probably gonna buy my son (god forbid I ever have one) a shitton of GI Joes and Transformers. But I'm not gonna tell him if they are boy or girl toys. Oh he is gonna be MESSED up.

 

[Joe Johnson]

Oh yeah? Well, I'm going to buy mine Barbies, but have her dress in camo with a gun, and tell him that anyone can be a soldier!

 

[sixpackshaker]

My Sis-in-law was not going to buy my nephew "violence" toys. But every time he found a 2 foot long stick at age 2 it became a gun or sword. She can't even think of a time he has seen some one wielding a sword or gun... So "violence" toys were added to the OK to buy list.

 

[AshburnerX]

My Sis-in-law was not going to buy my nephew "violence" toys. But every time he found a 2 foot long stick at age 2 it became a gun or sword. She can't even think of a time he has seen some one wielding a sword or gun... So "violence" toys were added to the OK to buy list.

Try reading Killing Monsters. It explains fairly well that make believe violence is necessary in child development not just because it relieves stress and empowers children, but because it also helps them understand what is real and fantasy. It's a great book and I highly recommend it.

 

[Disconnected]

Oh shit, it's the Third.

 

[Covar]

Can't believe no ones said this yet.

They should have named the baby Pat.

 

[Wasabi Poptart]

I'm probably gonna buy my son (god forbid I ever have one) a shitton of GI Joes and Transformers. But I'm not gonna tell him if they are boy or girl toys. Oh he is gonna be MESSED up.

You won't have to tell him. What I found out with my son is that they figure it out on their own. When my son was 3, he had a bunch of toy cars from the movie Cars. I was only allowed to play with Miss Sally because I am a girl and so is she. If I wanted The King, Doc Hudson, or (God forbid) Lightning McQueen, I was told I couldn't play with those because they were only for boys. We never assigned genders to his cars. He learned it though. And I would have to "fight" to get to play with the car I wanted instead of the powder blue girl Porsche.

 

[sixpackshaker]

You are much younger than I thought.

 

[Wasabi Poptart]

Who me? I'm an old lady with little kids.

 

[Dei]

Once you have kids, you're old. (Or at least, you feel old )

 

[Azurephoenix]

Try reading Killing Monsters. It explains fairly well that make believe violence is necessary in child development not just because it relieves stress and empowers children, but because it also helps them understand what is real and fantasy. It's a great book and I highly recommend it.

Sounds like an interesting read... I may have to check that out.

(my two and a half year old runs around with a superman cape wielding a truck in one hand and a toy screwdriver in the other making laser noises lol).