Raising gender-neutral or gender-specific kids.....Does it matter?

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
That's just your opinion. Unless you can show a study of children who have been raised in this environment and studied many years later, there's really no way we can say that this is bad or abusive.

Of course it's my opinion.

We can't categorically say that this is bad or abusive, but we can reasonably make a case, using a modicum of common sense and reason, that these children aren't exactly going to have the easiest social interactions when growing up - to put it nicely.

To intentionally encourage your children to adopt a genderless identity in a society where a deviation from very broad gender norms makes them a very visible target for bullying, ostracisation and social exclusion is emotional abuse.

Following your argument, if I were to raise a child and make him dress in a dunces cap and wear humiliating and insulting slogans on his shirt, then, without a study of children raised in these circumstances, we cannot say whether it would be bad or abusive.

Then again, we could avoid waiting years for a reactive - and more than likely disputed - analysis to come out informing us of how harmful raising children in this way is, or we could make a proactive assessment of the likely effects that this upbringing would have on children and form our opinions on that basis.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
What if this 'gender neutral' way turns out to produce even more well-rounded and confident kids? I don't think "not unduly harmful" is a goal for which I'd strive if I were raising kids.

Gender-neutral children could feasibly turn out to be more well-rounded and confident in a society that accepts them. As our society generally does not tolerate these children, then it's highly unlikely that they will grow-up into anything like well-rounded or confident individuals. The oldest son, who is 5, even shows indications in the report that he's upset and bewildered by the reactions that he causes. Obviously, the child doesn't know how the world works, and he will be confused why people react to him in a curious and sometimes negative manner.

''Not unduly harmful'' is what you should strive for, as it is realistic and fair. It is an acknowledgement that there is no perfect way to raise a child and also that there are so many uncontrollable variables that may make one particular method of raising children harmless to one and harmful to another.

Dressing boys in boys' clothing and girls in girls' clothing is not unduly harmful. I'm sure that if you took a straw-poll of everyone you knew, that you'd get about 99% of responses that indicated that they were not harmed by being dressed in a gender-specific way. Of course, to people with a gender identity crisis, encouraging your child to wear gender-specific clothing may turn out to be harmful.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
All children are guinea pigs. Everyone does something a little different. The rule used to be spare the rod and spoil the child. That's how I was raised and OOPS! That messed me up really bad! If I hadn't had my mom's gentleness and nurturing nature to counteract what my dad did to me, it's hard to say how messed up I would be.
Some people today don't EVER lay a hand on their kids. It's a big change as we as a society search and try different things to see how the kids turn out. We are all Guinea pigs.

Children aren't really guinea-pigs. Most people are influenced by the way that their parents brought them up, and, as you say, they may add something different or take advice from parenting books or courses. But the ''something different'' is hopefully grounded in logic and applied to the child's upbringing in the hope that it will be beneficial to the child, not the parents.

These ''parents'' are using their children as guinea-pigs in an ego-filled social experiment. There is no way that anybody conducting a risk assessment study on the methods used would conclude that this is likely to be beneficial to the children and their social development.

The motivation for the abusive way in which they are raising their children is about stroking their own deluded egos.

''Spare the rod and spoil the child'' doesn't sound like a very good motto to raise a child by. Beating a child is physical abuse, and hopefully it is less prevalent nowadays.

Personally, I don't think a ''corrective'' slap is a bad thing if it is used sparingly and if the intention is to shock the child rather than to hurt him or her. After all, young children aren't fully aware of the potential recklessness or danger of their actions, and they cannot always be reasoned with. But, in the end, it's up to the parents to decide whether or not they want to use occasional corrective hits when necessary.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Exactly. Overcoming the damage of childhood is a by-product of how the kids are raised. Why not try something different that might omit that damage in the first place?

You're talking as if everybody is a mental wreck from being brought up in a more conventional or normal manner. Most people aren't damaged from the way their parents raised them, and hardly anybody would claim that emotional problems in their adult lives stemmed from being dressed in boys' clothing and having their hair cut short.

There is no need to try anything different in regards to raising children in a gender-oriented way, when that doesn't even show on the radar of factors that will haunt sufferers of parental abuse.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
You cannot possibly know that. The only way to avoid the damage of childhood is to do it differently and see what happens.

There is no avoiding the fact that children have to be raised by their parents or other adults. They cannot raise themselves, and, consequently, any negative or damaging experiences are the unavoidable by-product of the necessary fact that they will be influenced by the particular adults who are tasked with bringing them up.

You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about this unfounded notion that there is something inherently wrong with the way that children are raised. Most people are raised well, and I'm sure that a large proportion of negative childhood experiences are the result of factors far beyond the parents' control.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I'm confused that you are resigned to the idea that all kids are going to grow up damaged because of how they're raised, yet you're not willing to consider the idea of raising them differently, to get a different result...

Nowhere did I say anything about all children growing-up damaged. Where exactly did I indicate that I'm against the idea of raising children differently ?

Also, doing something differently is not going to guarantee a different outcome. Although, I'm pretty sure that we'll get a different result from these genderless children, although not a desirable one...

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I disagree. Putting gender expectations and forcing gender roles on a child is NOT the same as letting their gender identity develop naturally.

One set of parents are indoctrinating their child with gender roles, while another set of parents are indoctrinating their children to ignore gender roles.

You can't raise children to be genderless and claim that you are not inherently influencing their future choices by forcing this upbringing upon them.

Just as you can't raise a child to be amoral and claim that that choice of upbringing wasn't influential in any disreputable behaviour that they are involved in later in life.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I'm not talking about stripping all guidance and influence from child rearing... You're taking this to the illogical extreme for argument's sake. We're not talking about letting wolves raise these kids, you know...

I'm not taking it to any illogical extreme.

You said that many children are ''raised in this society and spend much of their adult life trying to overcome the conditioning (and wounding) they received from their parents.''

Guidance and influence equals conditioning. So if you accept that some degree of guidance and influence should be involved in child rearing, then you accept that conditioning is going to take place.

Whether that conditioning is beneficial or negative remains to be seen, and will vary from child to child.

As I've said, conditioning a child to believe in certain moral principles may well harm someone who grows up to be a nihilist. Then again, conditioning a child to be nihilistic may harm someone who later becomes a moral paragon.

The fact of the matter is that there are no absolutes in what may result in emotional harm from one person to another; so people have to play percentages when bringing up a child.

Turning your children into genderless circus freaks does not have a high percentage chance of ending happily for the children in question.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Again, I disagree. I think we're doing something VERY wrong. People are screwed up.

If you think that ''people are screwed up'', then why are you attributing it to the way children are raised rather than the multitude of external and uncontrollable factors that make people screwed up ?

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
True, but doing the same thing and expecting different results is the definition of insanity. If you want a different result, you have to do something DIFFERENTLY. Whether or not this will help, I don't know. I'm not judging that. I'm saying that I commend them for trying something different and I would do so, too, were I a parent.

You appear to be fixated with this idea that we're going to hell in a hand-basket because of a systemic parenting failure.

Look, some parents are crap, because they are violent, abusive, uncaring, selfish, unloving, unattentive and generally tools. This has nothing to do with dressing girls in girls' clothing, and everything to do with the parents being useless and completely unfit to raise their children.

If you take a look at the good parents, then you'll see that the very broad and general way that children are raised works out just fine.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I do believe that there are necessarily ''better'' ways to raise children.And we won't know what they are unless we start changing what we're doing.

What do you mean by ''better'' ? What do you expect to be achieved from these methods that will surpass the way that are currently used ?

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
You have no basis upon which to make this statement. This is purely your opinion and holds no more weight than the opinion of these parents. They are not raising them to be genderless, they are just not forcing society's stereotypes and gender roles on these kids.

My opinion, which is based on common sense and logic, holds far more weight than the warped views of these ''parents''. That 5-year-old looks like something from a horror film, and they'll become social pariahs who have been deprived of a normal childhood for the sake of their ''parents''' egos.

Remember their names - well, it's hard to forget them - as I think one or more of them will be making headlines in a few years, but for all the wrong reasons.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Maybe, maybe not. I have no personal experience and cannot quote a study. No doubt the kids will be teased by other kids. ALL kids get teased by other kids. I got teased for various reasons and I came out OK.

Teasing is on a slightly different level to vitriolic, hate-filled bullying.

Letting their son wear pink skirts and pigtails is about the same as painting ''bully me'' in large fluorescent letters on his top.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
It's not like they have NO access to the outside world.

They interact with people, see men and women and probably watch TV.

I'm not too sure the ''parents'' would let them watch TV, considering that all TV programmes involve men dressing and behaving like men and women dressing and behaving like women...

Maybe they do, but it says in the article that they are ''encouraged to challenge how they’re expected to look and act based on their sex.'' In other words, the parents are trying to get them not to conform, even if they wanted to look like someone they saw on TV.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Their questions are answered. It's not like they're locked in a room and never see society!

Besides, I'm not convinced that "social appropriateness" is all it's cracked up to be.

They're homeschooled, which, in itself, isn't a bad thing, but can lead to a lack of social interaction.

Most normal children will not want to be seen with these poor children because of peer-pressure and because it would harm their credibility.

I fear that these children will not have too many meaningful interactions outside of their family, especially as most people's first reaction to them is to question them about their peculiar appearances.

Originally posted by Annee
I believe you stated in "black and white" - - that a Girl is a Girl and a Boy is a Boy - - and that's it.

I did no such thing, please re-read my posts. If you quote something, be sure to quote the whole thing.

I did state that society sees in "black and white", which you may know now...

Originally posted by Annee
I was a child of the 50s - - - I've seen the progression of society - - and how accepting differences is part of today's society - - and will be even more so in the future.

That does not change the fact that these parents are using their child to "force" the issue. Which is what I have been saying since the begining, and you seem to be avoiding...

Also, remember what I said about "Appeal to Authority"?

Originally posted by Annee
Does anyone believe Kobe would have been fined $100,000 in the 50s for uttering a gay slur?

Red Herrings now? What does this have to do with the price of tea in China? Or are you using it as an example of this "change" you mention? What about that prom that was held down south? You know the one, where they had a super secret special prom for the non-gays. Would you have seen that in the 50's?

Originally posted by Annee
Children need to be raised for their society - - not their parents. Integrity and Responsibility transcend generations. Gender roles don't need to.

Sigh

You don't seem to understand, society has the gender roles. And society says boys acting as girls is wrong. Hoping/arguing for "we can change society" is a PERFECT WORLD FALLACY. It is all fine and dandy, hoping that people will accept things. Doesn't mean they do, or will.

Originally posted by adigregorio
I did state that society sees in "black and white", which you may know now...

Really? Which society is that?

It seems to me we live in little "pockets" of society.

I live in both SW Arizona and the Los Angeles Beach area - - not far from Hollywood.

Near me in Los Angeles is China Town - Korea Town - Olvera Street - - - West Hollywood - - - etc.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by adigregorio
I did state that society sees in "black and white", which you may know now...

Really? Which society is that?

so·ci·e·ty  [suh-sahy-i-tee]
–noun

1. an organized group of persons associated together for religious, benevolent, cultural, scientific, political, patriotic, or other purposes.

2. a body of individuals living as members of a community; community.

3. the body of human beings generally, associated or viewed as members of a community: the evolution of human society.

4. a highly structured system of human organization for large-scale community living that normally furnishes protection, continuity, security, and a national identity for its members: American society.

dictionary.reference.com...

Take your pick, I happen to be in both 3 and 4. Seems you are too!

Originally posted by Annee
It seems to me we live in little "pockets" of society.

This is true, but those "pockets" are part of #3 and #4 from above. Semantics, that's what this is becoming.

Originally posted by Annee
Near me in Los Angeles is China Town - Korea Town - Olvera Street - - - West Hollywood - - - etc.

Now I think you are confusing culture with society.

cul·ture [kuhl-cher]
–noun

1. the quality in a person or society that arises from a concern for what is regarded as excellent in arts, letters, manners, scholarly pursuits, etc.

2. that which is excellent in the arts, manners, etc.

3. a particular form or stage of civilization, as that of a certain nation or period: Greek culture.

dictionary.reference.com...

China Town, Korea Town, those are both reflections on their respective cultures. And while culture and society are spun together, they are seperate entities.

And none of this negates the FACT that the parents are using their children to "teach lessons". That is moral pushing, and well it stinks.

Originally posted by adigregorio
Now I think you are confusing culture with society.

I thought of that - - and it might be a fine line - - but I'm going with society.

I looked up all the definitions too - - and could have posted them.

I've watched society change for 60+ years. I've raised/am raising 3 generations of kids.

Through their eyes - - I see where we may be going. I like it.

I like the changes I see in society - - even though we are in a tough transition.

You can hang on to the old if you choose - - - I choose moving forward.

Sex= The biological difference between men and women

Gender= The CULTURAL definition of masculine and feminine.

Gender is not sex.

By not revealing what sex the child is, they are only hiding the biological aspect.

The definitions of masculine and feminine genders vary from culture to culture. The parents are confused. What they are really trying to shield their child from is their cultures definition of gender roles.

Some of the responses here just makes it plain that some people really have no clue about the civilization they live in and some of the females in this thread are pretty clueless on what it is to be male, and even about what it is to be female.

Basically everything that you see around you today was conditioned on mass to be that way. And if like the parents in the op's link you go against the grain there will be trouble, and yes more so if you condition a boy into a girl then if you were to condition a girl into a boy, but either way its ignorance to not teach your kids about themselves and there world, and expect the world to not hammer them down.

Ever hear of this Japanese proverb “the nail that sticks out is hammered down.” It's true, and it really makes me wonder what kind of bubble some of you on this thread have lived in if you think this will have no adverse effects on the kid. Really WTF are you all smoking especially some of the females who responded, I really cant imagine what Micky Mouse Disney land fantasy world some of you came from.

Because I personally witnessed what some of these more feminised or gay males go trough and they were not ignorant of the scope of there circumstances. # when I was in school I remember that some duches jumped a gay male and kicked the # out of him, as he is lucky to still have his teeth and remember his name after the beating I heard he took from the actual dude who instigated the jumping.

Isn't this site supposed to be all about deny ignorance, because what these parents are doing is a form of perpetrating ignorance. You all realize how much of this world is conditioning? if not, think on this! If anybody wanted to they could grow a child that thinks he is a dog barking and all, and get the kid to believe it unconditionally. So yes males are conditioned to large degrees to be males, and females are conditioned to large degrees to be females, as in you all act the way you do because of conditionings from your predecessors by way of teachings and ethics, morals, ways of acting, peer pressure from all sides, the pressure of the greater world, and the whole shebang, its all conditioning. There is no such thing as natural other then biological functioning and even those in time will be tested and broken if humanity survives that long, everything else is pretty much conditioning to one degree or another.

I ain't saying if this kid wants to be gay or female then to pressure him to be male, what I am saying is. Whatever he or she is be it male or female, teach him about it's biology and the greater scope of the world and how it will see him or her, by bringing him or her up into whatever gender he or she is. And if latter he or she does not want to fit into what he or she is biologically, and is gay, or trans-gender or whatever then it is what it is, really there will be nothing you can do but support he or she. But to keep he or she in limbo and expect that he or she will find its way is stupid, its a dam kid it will probably go for the easiest and shiniest things that it sees depending on his surrounding and copy what he or she's parents want to see. It's basically kid see kid do. Kind of like monkey see monkey do.

Originally posted by galadofwarthethird
. . . . you go against the grain there will be trouble,

And Change.

What a shocking statement. I can't even imagine what society would be today if it hadn't been for those independent thinkers going against the grain.

reply to post by Annee


Hey your preaching to the quire, I rarely go with the grain, so I am just saying its not all cake and roses out there for those who go against the grain or stick out. They do tend to get the hammer more often then not, but fortunately for me I don't give a #, am pretty crazy, and also I am hammer proof.

And the only advice I give is to do what I say, not what I do. And even that is not very good advice.

So as this saying says it. "Don't follow in my footsteps I walk into walls.... Anonymous." and sometime I walk trough them, but whatever back on topic.

I don't think the parents thought there little experiment out that there doing with there kids, and I don't think its really all that big of a deal as the kids will most likely forget it when older, but it can be bad and get tragic if it keeps going on. And you got to remember that kids are extremely impressionable, especially at a young age, things that happen or are learned while young will stick with you for a whole lifetime most times.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by galadofwarthethird
. . . . you go against the grain there will be trouble,

And Change.

What a shocking statement. I can't even imagine what society would be today if it hadn't been for those independent thinkers going against the grain.

And most importantly, it is not the role of children to do, but adults. Putting your child in trouble because of your selfish desire to change the society is the height of stupidity and immaturity.


Not to mention that these parents seem to raise not only gender-neutral kids, but gender-ignorant kids. Not teaching your child about the role of gender in human society is emotional child abuse, and it will have negaitve consequences. It already has, otherwise the oldest one will be in school.


Seems to me you are fighting a straw man:

Raising gender neutral kids = nobody cares.
Raising gender-neutral (or gender-ignorant) kids in a gender-specific society = bad for the kids.

reply to post by galadofwarthethird


Can you tell me what it is that I don't know about being female.

Because, I seem to be doing a pretty good job of it over all. I'd like to know what the source of your expertise is.

If they don't like the way that society expects, to a degree, children to be brought up in a gender-specific manner, then why knowingly bring children into this society in the first place ?

Surely opting not to have children would be far better than using them as guinea-pigs in their twisted, ego-fuelled social experiment.

Of course, that would involve putting your own desires on the back-burner, personal responsibility and personal sacrifice; three concepts that are totally alien to the New-Age, neo-hippie types.

A lot of us born right after the civil rights movement were raised "genderless." Not to the degree of our parents refusing to tell people if we were male or female, but in the sense that we were given free choice over clothing, and toys, and not pushed into "roles" that would shape us.

Being "yourself" was a big, big thing in parenting when I was an infant, toddler and child, and Im forever grateful for it. Not I, nor my biological siblings grew up with any confusion about our gender. The two females were female our brother was male, and we all were heterosexual. BUT, there was a lot less difference between us in thoughts, likes, dislikes, hobbies, skills, and abilities than in families where the kids are molded into "typical" males and females.

I think people absolutely should be allowed to grow up to be who and what they are, and they should be the ones to choose that. Sexuality etc., are hardwired in, having the right to choose your toys and clothes isnt going to change that. So is gender identity. I have never once had a problem with my gender, although I firmly reject the drag queenish mockery of femininity that our culture tries to pass off as ideal.

Originally posted by Maslo

Raising gender-neutral (or gender-ignorant) kids in a gender-specific society = bad for the kids.

I disagree. I see more miserable people trying desperately to force themselves to remain "in character" over the course of their lives than I see miserable people who have been allowed to be themselves. A lot of human beings are miserable wrecks just below the surface, and as I see it, thats no accident. I never have a problem "fitting in" to society because I was allowed to be myself, the big difference is, I have a lot less inner conflict and need to please others than people who were forced into roles do.

You CANT really be raised "gender ignorant" no matter what your parents do. Gender identity is hardwired in. You know if you are male or female, which is why kids who have a gender identity that conflicts with their body cannot be trained, encouraged, forced, etc., to accept the gender identity that is not their own. Even if their parents and society punishes them for it, they know what they are, and many of them fight lifelong battles to be able to be that. Live that way.

The way these people are raising their child will just help to sort out nature from nurture. Whats 'really" male/female from what we program in.

reply to post by galadofwarthethird


I am a woman and am not clueless. But I also try and think outside the box now and then....

I do believe that the way these parents are raising their kids is not healthy because of how society will treat them. They cannot force society to be acceptating....

But putting the "norm" and "society" aside....I do question if this REALLY matters at the end of the day.....going back to our roots as humans......society has dictated what a boy can be, how a boy should dress and how a boy should behave. Boys are not born wanting blue and trucks and GIJoes....

I think it is a valid question and certainly not clueless.....

I mean, I even admitted that if I had a boy, he would probably be raised to be the "societal normal" boy....blues and trucks and dirty...

But I still question whether or not, at the end of the day, society aside....does it all matter....

I think this is old news. There used to be this Documentary with a character named Pat. I saw it on this news program called SNL. It was very enlightening.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

The way these people are raising their child will just help to sort out nature from nurture. Whats 'really" male/female from what we program in.

And meanwhile, everyone of their peers will ridicule them and call them a girl-boy, because their parents raised them gender-IGNORANT (not even gender-neutral), only due to their selfish ideology or conducting a sick social experiment.

These people do not raise their kids for a real society, but for their dreamed-up ideal one. Thats not what a responsible parent does at all.

reply to post by greeneyedleo


I dont know why you assume "society" will treat people who are not forced into roles any worse than anyone else. My personal experience is that as a female my treatment is much, much better than the treatment more "typical" females get. Much much better.

"Typical" female role modeling teaches you to seek "power by proxy." Ie; to be attractive, sexy, sweet, etc enough for someone powerful to protect you and extend their personal power to cover you. The problem with that theory is he/she who giveth can also taketh away.

I get along great with men and women. Im not competitive with other women based on looks or man hunting, I have no seeping resentment over male freedom and power, (as I have my own freedom and power) and over all, it makes for a much better, easier life. When I worked in construction, the guys I worked with overall were much older than I was, and even them, as soon as they got to know me, we got along great. As soon as they were able to stop looking at me as "a girl" and just look at me as a person, it was transformative for them. So much so that all these years later I am still friends with many of them, and the guy most opposed to me in the beginning told me he hoped his girls grew up to be like me when we parted ways.

I dont understand why people think you are going to stand out like Edward Scissorhands or something if you are raised to be yourself. I think you have a much lower desire/need to "stand out" visually if you are yourself already. Its the people rejecting "roles" they have been shoved into that make spectacles of themselves trying to be different, in my experience.

reply to post by Maslo


Those parents are going a little far in the sense that they are not acknowledging gender verbally, but by the time those kids go to school, they will already know what their gender identity is, and they will probably have a lot less trouble than you think.

Rigidity in parenting is a bad thing, both in terms of pushing your kids toward "traditional" roles, and in forcing them out of it. It would probably be better for the kids if the parents werent so militant about the whole thing, to be sure.

Edit to add,

And, the people raised with more gender freedom are responsible for breaking down a lot of traditional barriers. I know some people cling to tradition and find that horrible, but they are insane. Change is. Evolution is. And societies that do not change and evolve die out.

green - My son is a gigantic lout of a 4 year old. No one would ever think to question that he is a boy. But on here, without visual evidence to see him....would you think he wasn't?

He has cars, and swords, and bey blades. He pretends to throw fireballs at people.

But he doesn't like his clothing to be dirty. He'll play hard, and then change immediately.

He has a boy doll, and every night he makes sure it is in its PJs when he goes to bed. He's a "good Daddy."

You don't need to push the gender norm. And it isn't actually fair to a boy steer him away from who he is.

Does wanting to be wearing clean clothing make him not a boy? Does being a "good Daddy" make him not a boy?

I feel the same way about these people as I do about the men who swat a doll out of their boys hands. I actually watched a muslim father WRESTLE a doll away from his son at McDonald's. I've seen Christian men speak about their disguest with stupid women while hitting their sons to make them not play with a doll.

Those people are considered normal, but they are really just the same thing as these parents. People enforcing their gender views onto their children. Remaking who they are because who they are isn't "right."

See, I find this all very interesting. I've had men, usually very angry men, try to say that I'm not a female. Anyone who meets me, would never think I was anything but a female.

People's ideas of gender enforcment are literally insane. People ignore the evidence of their eyes. These people and society at large are doing THE SAME THING. They are teaching their children that they only love them if they are "right." Right being, being a girl or a boy EXACTLY the way they are TOLD to.