The kid who's parents think it's cool to let their kid chose their sex.

if that's how they want to raise their child let them. It's not my duty or right to impose MY values/morals/believes onto THEIR child.


in the short: it's THEIR child, not yours

 

You seriously think people should be able to raise their kid however they want?

It's a person, not a toy.

 

You seem to be assuming there is a correct way to raise a child; these people are only doing what they think is best to prepare their child for later life, unless there is significant evidence that what they are doing is harmful, what right do we have to intefere?

 

So your god in this matter, right? You get to decide who is a fit parent and who isn't? Whose style of bringing up children is right and whose is not?

 

I seriously think people should be able to raise their kid however they want, yes. Why should you be able to tell me how to raise my child? Why is your parenting method better than mine?


You have a very closed mind

 

I seriously think that you do not understand the issue well enough to determine how other people how they should raise their children.

 

I can't believe i'm about to disagree with Nexxo, i'll probably regret this as he twists my words around to make me think it's actually me that's responsible for this and everything else bad since WWI lol jk.

While i totally agree that yes, kids will be bullied regardless of the hook that said bullying latches onto, raising the children to not accept bullying as the norm will not stop the bullying and could quite possibly make it worse. The path these parents are taking with raising their child WILL, without any doubt increase the bullying this child will receive significantly and that bullying will most likely come from people who are bullied themselves.

How these children will view the bullying is irrelevant in my opinion, it will happen and will be that much worse because of the way the parents are choosing to raise them. What gives the parents the right to knowingly inflict this upon them? Accepting it as the norm or not, the child will suffer and that is wrong and should not be allowed.

But that isn't the real discussion i don't think, i just had to comment on that.

I'm sorry but I really don't get this. If it's a boy, raise it as a boy, plain and simple. If in later life it then realises that it prefers a different way of living/behaving then fair enough but as a child it in no way has the capacity for such a complex decision, at least i don't believe it does anyway.

I hate to be the person to stereotype people (i really don't mean to do that but i do, a lot, and guess what, 9/10 times it's right so maybe it's just morally wrong to stereotype but i digress) but look at the names given to the children, all three of them. I get the distinct impression that this whole charade is a pair completely nutty fruitcake hippies trying to cause a media fire, sorry but who the hell calls their baby 'Storm' or 'Jazz', seriously?

EDIT: incorrect name listed for a previous child

 

Are you suggesting that parents should teach their children to accept bullying as the norm just so they might have an easier life (a notion which in itself is contradictory)? Perhaps, as I said before, Black parents in Apartheid South Africa should have taught their children to accept that they are inferior to Whites, this being the prevailing societal norm and all.

Why raise a boy as a boy? why do you need to? Children are pretty good at working out all by themselves what gender they are. They don't need anyone to tell them.

Raising a boy as a boy only works for a given value of 'boy' in any case. As mentioned before cross-dressing is more common with men who are raised according to very gender-differentiated, masculine roles. This is because there is no male framework for experiencing and expressing sensuality, tenderness, vulnerability etc. They literally have to adopt a female role to express and experience these human needs and behaviours. Similarly, many girls are burdened by preconceptions about what girls should be like: submissive, passive carers who cannot show any assertiveness, autonomy or leadership. Perhaps the greatest value of letting a child choose its own gender identity is that it can also choose what it is going to look like.

 

I don't understand how the majority of people in this thread seem to support this decision. The issue here for me is that this is not a case in which it might make sense to undertake the drastic measure of leaving a child to figure out why it doesn't fit in with anyone - they're doing it for the hell of it.

NEWSFLASH:

1. As Sharon Shoesmith has timely brought back to the headlines - some people? Not cut out to be parents. Just because you can make a baby doesn't make you capable of raising it in a manner that will allow it to make remotely informed decisions.
2. Your child is a being in and of itself and deserves respect. You don't OWN it and you do not 'experiment' on it until it is OLD ENOUGH TO CONSENT.

There's a reason that children are generally raised as either boys, or girls, and that is that most of the time they usually are boys or girls. These parents are vastly increasing the risk that their child will suffer catastrophic gender identity issues at the time they need it least - puberty.

What the f*** is wrong with these people?!

 

Yeah, I agree. It does seem like a cruel experiment. And I know some in this thread have said "Well it's 100% the parent's choice as to how they bring up their children" - but that's flat out wrong. Hence why Governments/social services do frequently take children off their parents. And newsflash: the big bad evil society isn't always wrong. Sometimes social norms and constructs exist for a reason. I know that in Nexxo's original post/rant he uses the example of 8 year olds in high heels and thongs* to tar 'society' with a negative brush, but that doesn't mean that social constructs are automatically a bad thing.

And I still don't get why these 'parents' have drawn an arbitrary line at gender.

As I mentioned previously, they should really go all the way and not restrict their children to acting like Humans (after all, if males shouldn't necessarily act like males, why should Humans act like Humans? It just seems harsh of the parents to force their children into acting in this socially-predicated manner...) - following their own line of thinking, of course (since if 'anything goes', why draw arbitrary lines on where to 'stop'?)

Meh, I guess we'll find out in a decade or so whether these parents' experiment has worked or not..


* Just like to point out that I've never heard of 8 year olds in high heels and thongs. But in the interest of PC and liberalism/the theme of this thread, what's wrong with allowing children to wear that at the age of 8? Surely parents have the right to choose/bring up their children in this way? (Obviously not, but again this is an example of arbitrary lines being drawn in some cases and not in others)

 

Newsflash: you are wrong. I'm not sure how often I can repeat this: children work out for themselves what gender they are. They see boys and girls and identify themselves with the gender peergroup that corresponds with their own gender. They do it just like that. It's wired in.

Example: people with gender dysphoria often report knowing from an early age what gender they feel they are, irrespective of the strong indoctrination they receive from parents and society to be the gender that they are perceived to be. The same with sexual orientation. What makes you think that it is any different for other children?

You guys are simply not getting the paradigm. Your argument is no different from the one that says children should be raised to be heterosexual, and not be allowed to choose their own sexual orientation lest they get confused or become homosexual. It does not work like that. Sexual orientation is predominantly wired in. You are what you are. A sexually mature society allows you to discover, explore and express that orientation, whatever it is. A sexually immature society forced you into a sexual orientation that does not agree with 10% of the population. That does not make for well-adjusted people.

 

Doesn't mean they are automatically a good thing either.

And what's wrong with 8-year olds in high heels and thongs? It sexualises them, before they have the sexual and cognitive ability to handle that sexualisation.

 

It certainly doesn't, nope.

And I agree; parents who allow 8 year olds in 'slutty' clothing are clearly making a mistake. (Just as, IMO, the parents in this article are making a mistake)

 

Yes, but that's not what I'm saying.
When parents have a child, from birth they are asked questions like "What is it?" or "What did you guys have?" etc. These parents are going out of their way to not give the obvious answer, so the child doesn't get the same chance we had to learn what gender it is. Many children can answer basic and common questions by the time they are 1 year old, such as "what's your name?", "How old are you?" and "Are you a boy or a girl?" How is a 1 year old supposed to know who they really are? Isn't it fair that a 1 year old is informed of what gender they are?

Many children display gender specific traits by the time they are 1 year old, and things become more and more obvious each year, such as preferences for clothing, toys, activities, etc. If a baby girl is a total tomboy, as in prefers to wear boys clothes, play with boys toys, and playfight like a boy with everyone, especially other boys... that doesn't mean imo, that the parents should say "hmmmm, she obviously feels like a boy, let's book in the gential reassignment surgery and make things official"

For me, in my example, I'd say she's a girl. A rougher than usual girl yes, but still most definitely a girl. If by the time she's an adult, if she ends up really wanting to be a boy complete with bait and tackle, well then that's her choice.

Exactly. I haven't and wouldn't have the heart to conduct the experiment, but I assume that if the gender of a baby is hidden from them, that by the time a child is 1 or 2 years old, they would find themselves asking the question. Does a baby not deserve to know the answer? In my example above, I think the baby deserves an honest answer: "You're a girl"

I think it's extremely unfair to put responsibilities on babies.

Babies can call their parents when they are hungry, or need to have their nappy changed, or need to visit the poty, but these aren't expected duties. These actions are usually figured out by the baby, but parents can and should imo, encourage/teach babies how to do these things.

A baby can be free to choose what types of clothes, toys, and even have a little choice with what food they will eat for lunch, but it's not like a baby is mature enough to choose what gender they really are.

 

I see Nexxo's point, as well as the others espoused.

Boys will be boys-or will they? It's a slippery slope trying to decide what is inborn and what we impress upon them from a very early age. Nexxo's statement of inborn identity will out itself has a basis in something we can all see-look at the case of Elledan. She knows she's female, even though her body is mostly ambiguous over the subject. It's shaped all the decisions she's made thus far-to believe she's female trapped in that body. (What she's doing about it is irrelevant to this conversation, merely the concept of self-identification.)

What's cross-dressing but an attempt to flout a convention that's mostly grounded (for our society) in Judeo-Christian ideals influencing dress in the first place? Is there anything less functional about a skirt? Apparently the Scots disagree. It's like Nexxo said-an outlet for a concept not allowed in our society.

What I do think is wrong is the laissez-faire approach to the whole thing. It will increase bullying-but not only by other children, but imagine the derision they'll encounter from adults they meet. It's an easily avoided thing as well-even if they don't want to force gender identities, a simple identification of external sexual characteristics would avoid a lot of issues-like a boy in the girls' restroom because he's figured out he can get away with it in this context. Never overlook the ability of children to try your patience.

I don't agree with thongs for eight year olds any more than I do with this. It is the job of the parents to raise them, but also to protect them from harmful influences, and encourage their growth in such a way that they will choose to reject harmful influences and accept helpful ones. I tend to view these parents as harmful.

 

I don't quite get their point of view - as acknowledging sex as a biological construct is not the same as acknowledging gender or indeed sexual preference.

Allowing the child to make it's own decisions in terms of what to wear/how to act is fine, but there is going to be an influence from others - even if they don't know whether it's a boy or girl - only now the influence would be distinct from any 'normal' influence.

Short of isolating the child, they will learn soon enough what genitalia they have and what sex they are - but there is the risk that by withholding the 'normal' gender role the child may not identify with that gender because it was withheld - eg. They have a Penis, and so think they are male, but if no one acknowledges this is it because they are not really male?

 

Does anyone reckon, these parents just wanted Daughters instead of Sons?

 

I'm not disagreeing with any of this. People can be any shade on the male-to-female spectrum, or the asexual-bisexual spectrum; that's their choice and quite frankly I'm not bothered. I am what I am, they are what they are, etc. I don't care.

That's not the argument I'm making here. This has nothing to do with what the child will self-identify as later in life and everything to do with denying the child basic ideas of what is male and what is female, because that is the only way you can raise a child that is emphatically not a hemaphrodite as 'genderless'. That's not allowing the child to make a choice, it's keeping it purposefully ignorant. Picture the scene - child says, kids at school use different toilets. Which one do I use? Parent says ****ed if I know, aren't you done contemplating the complex nature of physiological sexuality yet in your semi-formed brain?

If you find yourself associating yourself with a gender you are, or a gender you are not (chromosomally speaking), then you know vaguely where you are coming from and vaguely where you are going to. This kid isn't going to have a clue about either.

Just because you think it would be cool for a kid to be brought up genderless, doesn't qualify you to test it on your kids.

 

This^^

The problem isnt them letting their kids decide what they want. It's imposing views that they are too young to understand. Just let the baby grow up with a normal childhood, once they're a teenager they might care about their gender identity, but while they're still young, thers no gains to this approach, and the kids will just be confused.



Does anyone here wish they had been brought up like this baby?

 

My daughter has a lot of pink clothes, a bag full of Barbies, and loves princess stuff. She also enjoys firing off model rockets, playing sports, and playing in the dirt. Gender roles are pretty useless in my opinion, and we have no real expectations for what she should or shouldn't be when she grows up.

Then again, she also likes the original Star Wars trilogy and didn't really care for the new movies. Maybe she's just a genius.