Butch Femme Planet - View Single Post - Swedish Parents Keep 2-year-old's Gender Secret

Nawen · 09-05-2010, 03:32 AM

I had a long post thought out last evening, but it kinda disappeared in the early morning

, so I'll keep it short.

It seems that Pinker presumes that the child is being raised sexless, while it seems to me it is only being raised genderless.
I got from this story that the parents are open with their child as far as its sex is concerned.
They are giving it options, not pushing him into dresses or pants but offering both.
They have also said that they will disclose sex when Pop wants to. So if Pop, at 6, decides to wear dresses and is a male... they didn't push him for 6 important years into something he doesn't want. If Pop chooses clothes that fit into its sex+gender stereotype, fine, too. (+ Pop's a child - s/he doesn't know that we, adults, see this cut of fabric as feminine, and this, with a stitch between legs, as masculine.)

I think it's important to take some more things into account.
- This is Sweden.
(Not necessarily this or that, just... different. It's interesting for me to see how their experts are either pro or 'not sure'.)
- This is a new generation.

The David/Brenda case.
For me, it doesn't stand. The comparison might, the likening doesn't.
The child's sex was taken from him and he was made to live as opposite.
Pop: the sex is Pop's and Pop is given a choice, presented both. Or none, too, I guess.

I don't think Pop's intersexed, because the parents said they'll do the same with the second child.
Doing the same to the second if they were just protecting the first would seem too much, no?
I don't know what the chances are for two children to be both born intersexed.

I think it's also important to view some things like this:
- Pop may be special, later in life, but maybe not because Pop was given a choice, but because others weren't. (I can't explain it much better at this time, but I think about it like this: some kid, Alex, is not weird because s/he has a dog, but because all the other kids in the neighbourhood have cats. There's nothing wrong with having a dog per se and to think there is, just because Alex will feel 'out', isn't right. It's not about the dog, it's about groups.)
- If Pop grows up to be a sad person, it shouldn't be blamed on this.
- If Pop grows up to be a happy person, it shouldn't be blamed on this. (And I think the former is more likely to garner attention and blaming, unfortunately. In both cases it should be examined what part of Pop's happiness is linked to this and just that part be blamed on it.)

This is, of course, just my take on things.

Thank you, Nat, for putting this story up, and HowSoonIsNow for making it into a topic. I really enjoyed reading all these responses in both threads

.

Edit: Well, not so short in the end, it seems

.

09-05-2010, 03:32 AM	#15
Nawen Junior Member How Do You Identify?: ♪ Preferred Pronoun?: Name, please, English is not my language :) . Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Europe Posts: 30 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 62 Thanked 37 Times in 17 Posts Rep Power: 480	I had a long post thought out last evening, but it kinda disappeared in the early morning , so I'll keep it short. It seems that Pinker presumes that the child is being raised sexless, while it seems to me it is only being raised genderless. I got from this story that the parents are open with their child as far as its sex is concerned. They are giving it options, not pushing him into dresses or pants but offering both. They have also said that they will disclose sex when Pop wants to. So if Pop, at 6, decides to wear dresses and is a male... they didn't push him for 6 important years into something he doesn't want. If Pop chooses clothes that fit into its sex+gender stereotype, fine, too. (+ Pop's a child - s/he doesn't know that we, adults, see this cut of fabric as feminine, and this, with a stitch between legs, as masculine.) I think it's important to take some more things into account. - This is Sweden. (Not necessarily this or that, just... different. It's interesting for me to see how their experts are either pro or 'not sure'.) - This is a new generation. The David/Brenda case. For me, it doesn't stand. The comparison might, the likening doesn't. The child's sex was taken from him and he was made to live as opposite. Pop: the sex is Pop's and Pop is given a choice, presented both. Or none, too, I guess. I don't think Pop's intersexed, because the parents said they'll do the same with the second child. Doing the same to the second if they were just protecting the first would seem too much, no? I don't know what the chances are for two children to be both born intersexed. I think it's also important to view some things like this: - Pop may be special, later in life, but maybe not because Pop was given a choice, but because others weren't. (I can't explain it much better at this time, but I think about it like this: some kid, Alex, is not weird because s/he has a dog, but because all the other kids in the neighbourhood have cats. There's nothing wrong with having a dog per se and to think there is, just because Alex will feel 'out', isn't right. It's not about the dog, it's about groups.) - If Pop grows up to be a sad person, it shouldn't be blamed on this. - If Pop grows up to be a happy person, it shouldn't be blamed on this. (And I think the former is more likely to garner attention and blaming, unfortunately. In both cases it should be examined what part of Pop's happiness is linked to this and just that part be blamed on it.) This is, of course, just my take on things. Thank you, Nat, for putting this story up, and HowSoonIsNow for making it into a topic. I really enjoyed reading all these responses in both threads . Edit: Well, not so short in the end, it seems .