Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Pop the mysterious child

1141517192024

Posts

  • Best AmericaBest America __BANNED USERS
    edited June 2010
    Hachface wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    Topweasel wrote: »
    "Well that's a nifty idea, I wonder how it will work out". But then I come to the realization that this is happening because of the decision the parents are making for their child. A decision that even if the kid eventually ends up fitting in somewhere, will undoubtedly have a horrible affect on their childhood.

    Why?

    Why do you think this?

    If Pop ends up conforming to a traditional role, which most people in this thread seem to agree Pop will, barring (wholly unsubstantiated) parental pressure, Pop probably won't have any memory of this part of his or her life.

    You're affected by shit that you can't remember, for starters.

    Beyond that, though, if the BEST CASE scenario out of all of this is "Pop ends up gendered anyway" then what the fuck is there to applaud here? The parents are risking their child's wellbeing, for zero potential benefit.

    The benefit is that if Pop ended up being, say, transgendered, he or she would have had an easier time of it growing up.

    This is something that should be blindingly obvious to you.
    The point I think we would raise next, though, is whether the initiative taken by the parents is excessive compared to some other choice. I mean, really, would it be much more difficult and damaging for the child if the parents had left this entirely in the rafters, but at the first signs of gender confusion or questioning on Pop's part, they came out and talked to Pop about it and voiced their support for whatever?

    I don't think that the "damage" potential is so high that it would make the parents' choice irrefutably poor or wrong, but I am curious whether it confers any real benefits for its being proactive versus reactive.

    right you got it
  • ArchArch An insect, therefore, is not afraid of gravity Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Hachface wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    Topweasel wrote: »
    "Well that's a nifty idea, I wonder how it will work out". But then I come to the realization that this is happening because of the decision the parents are making for their child. A decision that even if the kid eventually ends up fitting in somewhere, will undoubtedly have a horrible affect on their childhood.

    Why?

    Why do you think this?

    If Pop ends up conforming to a traditional role, which most people in this thread seem to agree Pop will, barring (wholly unsubstantiated) parental pressure, Pop probably won't have any memory of this part of his or her life.

    You're affected by shit that you can't remember, for starters.

    Beyond that, though, if the BEST CASE scenario out of all of this is "Pop ends up gendered anyway" then what the fuck is there to applaud here? The parents are risking their child's wellbeing, for zero potential benefit.

    The benefit is that if Pop ended up being, say, transgendered, he or she would have had an easier time of it growing up.

    This is something that should be blindingly obvious to you.

    Or what if Pop has chosen a specific cis-gendered role? Pop is now much more confident that is "who Pop is" instead of going through the dilemma of wondering whether they are the wrong gender or not!

    This exact scenario happened to me, and I was raised cis-gendered!

  • HachfaceHachface Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    I don't think that the "damage" potential is so high that it would make the parents' choice irrefutably poor or wrong, but I am curious whether it confers any real benefits for its being proactive versus reactive.

    I think this is reasonable. I think this is what I believe. What the parents are doing is excessive but I doubt it's harmful.

  • ArchArch An insect, therefore, is not afraid of gravity Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Topweasel wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    Topweasel wrote: »
    "Well that's a nifty idea, I wonder how it will work out". But then I come to the realization that this is happening because of the decision the parents are making for their child. A decision that even if the kid eventually ends up fitting in somewhere, will undoubtedly have a horrible affect on their childhood.

    Why?

    Why do you think this?

    If Pop ends up conforming to a traditional role, which most people in this thread seem to agree Pop will, barring (wholly unsubstantiated) parental pressure, Pop probably won't have any memory of this part of his or her life.

    My belief is that this will feed a gender role confusion that will continue for quite awhile. I figure that while he will find his place, its not going to be one day him saying to himself (assuming its a boy) "hey I am guy, time to stop wearing dresses, playing with barbie dolls, liking the color pink, pissing in the girls bathroom...etc". Each one will slowly and surely be stamped out by pressure from same sex classmates, possibly even opposite sex classmates, and the later these happen the harder emotionally any damage incurred will be to overcome. Even if its almost all like normal by the time they are 7 or 8. You have successfully made your child's childhood harder on him, just because you wanted to. A child isn't some kind of barbie doll so we should just keep on truckin' and enforcing the traditional views.

    I added something to your post, do you see how it invalidates your entire argument? Because by raising them cis-gendered you are raising them in a way you want to which ignores the problems a transgendered individual raised cis genderedly can face! You have just made their childhood harder on them!

  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Hachface wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    Topweasel wrote: »
    "Well that's a nifty idea, I wonder how it will work out". But then I come to the realization that this is happening because of the decision the parents are making for their child. A decision that even if the kid eventually ends up fitting in somewhere, will undoubtedly have a horrible affect on their childhood.

    Why?

    Why do you think this?

    If Pop ends up conforming to a traditional role, which most people in this thread seem to agree Pop will, barring (wholly unsubstantiated) parental pressure, Pop probably won't have any memory of this part of his or her life.

    You're affected by shit that you can't remember, for starters.

    Beyond that, though, if the BEST CASE scenario out of all of this is "Pop ends up gendered anyway" then what the fuck is there to applaud here? The parents are risking their child's wellbeing, for zero potential benefit.

    The benefit is that if Pop ended up being, say, transgendered, he or she would have had an easier time of it growing up.

    This is something that should be blindingly obvious to you.

    except that there are OTHER ways to be accepting of a transgendered child without creating a whole artificial secrecy thing.

    Again, it is unnecesary risk without justifiable reward

    georgersig.jpg
  • HachfaceHachface Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    I do find it amusing that now, well into late adolescence and adulthood, many of us still tremble at the bullies who teased us in grade school, and we still let that fear dictate our grown-up choices.

  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Sipex wrote: »
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    You also seem to have a problem with confusing negative gender stereotypes (women can't be competitive, boy's can't cry) with simple elements of society that don't damage us except by our failure to conform to them. You gain nothing by trying to get your children to buck these trends, and only make their lives worse.

    Except that when dealing with a small child, other people will take the way the child is dressed and other external presentations as a signifier of their gender, and treat them differently as a result. If the parents wish to avoid having outside sources enforce toxic gender norms on Pop, the only way they can accomplish this is by keeping Pop's gender presentation ambiguous.

    Thank you

    Also Namrok and jeepguy- You guys would do REALLY WELL to read everything backwardsname, feral, and myself said back on page twenty because you are arguing strawmen that nobody here is using

    One day you see a toddler wearing little jeans, a skull t-shirt and playing with a truck.

    The next day you see the same toddler wearing a sundress and playing with barbies.

    You will instantly assume that the child is a little girl. This child is not being raised gender ambiguous, this child is being raised as a girl. Everyone will assume that it's a girl, because girls can wear what they want and do what they want at this age, and boys don't wear dresses. Girls can do boys things and wear boys clothes and no-one will bat an eyelid if they are little, boys doing 'girls' things will face cruelty at any age.

    Gender ambiguity is always going to make you assume 'female' until they are old enough to make it be obvious either way. Pop is, right now, a girl because anyone who meets Pop a few times will treat Pop as such.

    In the US or Canada I would say you are right.

    For Sweden.

    No clue, really. I don't know sweden well enough.

    For sweden, exactly the same. I've been to sweden. The little girls wear whatever they want, and the little boys wear little boys clothes. Europe is more 'permissive' than the US, but nowhere near to that extent. Again, there is a difference between gender equality which the scandinavian countries are EXCEPTIONAL at (see, paternal leave in those countries, and female CEOs there) and the absence of gender identity. A man can be a stay at home dad for four months and everyone will respect him, but if he does so while wearing a dress people will be less accepting.

    Your puny weapons are useless against me
  • ArchArch An insect, therefore, is not afraid of gravity Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Hachface wrote: »
    I do find it amusing that now, well into late adolescence and adulthood, many of us still tremble at the bullies who teases us in grade school, and we still let that fear dictate our grown-up choices.

    Some of those "bullies" still plague us; for instance if I wanted to wear a nice business-casual skirt to my business casual environment (let us pretend I don't work in a science lab, where skirts are unsafe) I would be mocked

  • sidhaethesidhaethe Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Disrupter wrote: »
    But if you had a son who had slight build and wanted to play football, you'd do the same, right? If so, then your steering your daughter away from football has nothing to do with her gender and everything to do with her size. So why make a point of claiming there's a gender role involved?

    Because I can make an easy assumption a girl wont have the right build. Like...very easy! With a boy, I have no idea, so I dont have enough information to push him away from football as a small child. I can guarentee my daughter wont be able to play football, and if I leave that door open for her, and she choses it, shes going to experience failure and rejection that I could have avoided for her.

    Its about making decisions with the evidence you have. To discount the facts we can gather about someone based on sex is silly, there are some hard facts which shouldnt be ignored for the sake of the rare exceptions.

    But you said both you and your wife were fairly small people. Why would you guess your son would have a chance at being a beefy linebacker? That's evidence you have, right there.

    Also: what's wrong with your daughter playing football as a child anyway? Something she's interested in even at a high-school level doesn't mean she has to go pro - like most child sports. So what if she (hypothetically) is interested in playing football at age 6, and plays it with other kids her age (whom she is not destined to be smaller than just because she is female, since we are talking pre-pubescent children). She can easily lose interest, as children do, for lots of things.

    She will probably figure out on her own that she doesn't have the right build to continue in football once everyone hits puberty anyway.

    I wanted to be a ballerina (a gender-appropriate role!) when I was a child. I turned out to be very short. Oh well.

    I get that in your example you're trying to avoid giving your children unrealistic expectations, but you might be being a might extre pre-emptive in deference to gender roles when, really, kids do sort out these things themselves.

  • SipexSipex Registered User
    edited June 2010
    Hachface wrote: »
    I do find it amusing that now, well into late adolescence and adulthood, many of us still tremble at the bullies who teased us in grade school, and we still let that fear dictate our grown-up choices.

    It's more of the fear that you know there is nothing socially acceptable you can do to protect your child from this.

    The best you can do is prepare them for it and hope they can weather it.

    Horseshoe wrote:
    I've got good news and bad news about 6th level, That Guy. The good news is that Forbiddance spell allows you to prevent enemies different alignment from entering a consecrated area, which is actually useful! The bad news is that the only other new sixth level spell makes lunch for everybody. Guess which one the party is going to expect you to cast.
  • Casual EddyCasual Eddy Fighting the War on String Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    I don't understand the objection.

    what should a parent do if their child is born with ambiguous genitalia? pray they get it get right?

    75trafim7bi2.png
  • TopweaselTopweasel Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Hachface wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    Topweasel wrote: »
    "Well that's a nifty idea, I wonder how it will work out". But then I come to the realization that this is happening because of the decision the parents are making for their child. A decision that even if the kid eventually ends up fitting in somewhere, will undoubtedly have a horrible affect on their childhood.

    Why?

    Why do you think this?

    If Pop ends up conforming to a traditional role, which most people in this thread seem to agree Pop will, barring (wholly unsubstantiated) parental pressure, Pop probably won't have any memory of this part of his or her life.

    You're affected by shit that you can't remember, for starters.

    Beyond that, though, if the BEST CASE scenario out of all of this is "Pop ends up gendered anyway" then what the fuck is there to applaud here? The parents are risking their child's wellbeing, for zero potential benefit.

    The benefit is that if Pop ended up being, say, transgendered, he or she would have had an easier time of it growing up.

    This is something that should be blindingly obvious to you.

    Transgendered is something that should be handled (with care) when it happens. Not something you try to make your child in the first place.

    This would be like in Georgia circa 50's if genetic engineering was possible, a white couple having the pigment of their kids skin changed prior to birth to be darker. Sure the kid isn't African-American, and even if he was shouldn't affect the way he is treated. But why in the world would you go out of the way to make life harder on your kid as a social experiment.

  • Best AmericaBest America __BANNED USERS
    edited June 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    I do find it amusing that now, well into late adolescence and adulthood, many of us still tremble at the bullies who teases us in grade school, and we still let that fear dictate our grown-up choices.

    Some of those "bullies" still plague us; for instance if I wanted to wear a nice business-casual skirt to my business casual environment (let us pretend I don't work in a science lab, where skirts are unsafe) I would be mocked
    Yeah, but you remain an agent

    Notice that Hach said "dictates"

    right you got it
  • SipexSipex Registered User
    edited June 2010
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Sipex wrote: »
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    You also seem to have a problem with confusing negative gender stereotypes (women can't be competitive, boy's can't cry) with simple elements of society that don't damage us except by our failure to conform to them. You gain nothing by trying to get your children to buck these trends, and only make their lives worse.

    Except that when dealing with a small child, other people will take the way the child is dressed and other external presentations as a signifier of their gender, and treat them differently as a result. If the parents wish to avoid having outside sources enforce toxic gender norms on Pop, the only way they can accomplish this is by keeping Pop's gender presentation ambiguous.

    Thank you

    Also Namrok and jeepguy- You guys would do REALLY WELL to read everything backwardsname, feral, and myself said back on page twenty because you are arguing strawmen that nobody here is using

    One day you see a toddler wearing little jeans, a skull t-shirt and playing with a truck.

    The next day you see the same toddler wearing a sundress and playing with barbies.

    You will instantly assume that the child is a little girl. This child is not being raised gender ambiguous, this child is being raised as a girl. Everyone will assume that it's a girl, because girls can wear what they want and do what they want at this age, and boys don't wear dresses. Girls can do boys things and wear boys clothes and no-one will bat an eyelid if they are little, boys doing 'girls' things will face cruelty at any age.

    Gender ambiguity is always going to make you assume 'female' until they are old enough to make it be obvious either way. Pop is, right now, a girl because anyone who meets Pop a few times will treat Pop as such.

    In the US or Canada I would say you are right.

    For Sweden.

    No clue, really. I don't know sweden well enough.

    For sweden, exactly the same. I've been to sweden. The little girls wear whatever they want, and the little boys wear little boys clothes. Europe is more 'permissive' than the US, but nowhere near to that extent. Again, there is a difference between gender equality which the scandinavian countries are EXCEPTIONAL at (see, paternal leave in those countries, and female CEOs there) and the absence of gender identity. A man can be a stay at home dad for four months and everyone will respect him, but if he does so while wearing a dress people will be less accepting.

    Really? The more you know. Thanks.

    Horseshoe wrote:
    I've got good news and bad news about 6th level, That Guy. The good news is that Forbiddance spell allows you to prevent enemies different alignment from entering a consecrated area, which is actually useful! The bad news is that the only other new sixth level spell makes lunch for everybody. Guess which one the party is going to expect you to cast.
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Hachface wrote: »
    I do find it amusing that now, well into late adolescence and adulthood, many of us still tremble at the bullies who teased us in grade school, and we still let that fear dictate our grown-up choices.

    We must prevent children from being raised by mixed race couples because that will make them mocked. We must also forbid them from being raised by anybody outside the norm lest they be mocked.

  • HachfaceHachface Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Sipex wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    I do find it amusing that now, well into late adolescence and adulthood, many of us still tremble at the bullies who teased us in grade school, and we still let that fear dictate our grown-up choices.

    It's more of the fear that you know there is nothing socially acceptable you can do to protect your child from this.

    The best you can do is prepare them for it and hope they can weather it.

    I think we tend to underestimate the resilience of children, especially young children.

  • ArchArch An insect, therefore, is not afraid of gravity Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    I do find it amusing that now, well into late adolescence and adulthood, many of us still tremble at the bullies who teases us in grade school, and we still let that fear dictate our grown-up choices.

    Some of those "bullies" still plague us; for instance if I wanted to wear a nice business-casual skirt to my business casual environment (let us pretend I don't work in a science lab, where skirts are unsafe) I would be mocked
    Yeah, but you remain an agent

    Notice that Hach said "dictates"

    Hmmm I thought the implication was there that this gets passed down to our children because we don't want them to be mocked like us.

    If it wasn't there it is.

  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    Topweasel wrote: »
    "Well that's a nifty idea, I wonder how it will work out". But then I come to the realization that this is happening because of the decision the parents are making for their child. A decision that even if the kid eventually ends up fitting in somewhere, will undoubtedly have a horrible affect on their childhood.

    Why?

    Why do you think this?

    If Pop ends up conforming to a traditional role, which most people in this thread seem to agree Pop will, barring (wholly unsubstantiated) parental pressure, Pop probably won't have any memory of this part of his or her life.

    You're affected by shit that you can't remember, for starters.

    Beyond that, though, if the BEST CASE scenario out of all of this is "Pop ends up gendered anyway" then what the fuck is there to applaud here? The parents are risking their child's wellbeing, for zero potential benefit.

    The benefit is that if Pop ended up being, say, transgendered, he or she would have had an easier time of it growing up.

    This is something that should be blindingly obvious to you.

    Or what if Pop has chosen a specific cis-gendered role? Pop is now much more confident that is "who Pop is" instead of going through the dilemma of wondering whether they are the wrong gender or not!

    This exact scenario happened to me, and I was raised cis-gendered!

    Is Pop confident?

    An assumption is being made that the parents are teaching pop all of the different gender options for Pop to decide among, but that is nowhere in the article. The article actually seems to suggest that they are giving Pop as little information as possible, and forcing Pop to create Pop's entire identity popself.

    Which is not a bad thing in and of itself, but DOES NOT lead to a lot of confidence once Pop gets out in the word, and sees that the vast majority of other folks conform to a binary proposition.



    I am ALL ABOUT building a child's confidence in who they are. I don't see this experiment as doing that. I see this experiment as serving both as an isolation booth and an echo chamber, essentially leaving Pop completely unprepared for introduction in to society at large.

    georgersig.jpg
  • Best AmericaBest America __BANNED USERS
    edited June 2010
    I don't understand the objection.

    what should a parent do if their child is born with ambiguous genitalia? pray they get it get right?
    Go with your gut, be communicative with your child, adapt as necessary, love unconditionally

    nothing there requires the excess this couple is going through, which is why Hach and I are questioning whether it's superfluous

    right you got it
  • DecomposeyDecomposey Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Decomposey wrote: »
    Decomposey wrote: »
    I grew up as a girl who identified more with the male gender role, playing with trucks and hating dresses. And I NEVER got teased for it. I got teased, but not for that. On the scale of things kids will tease each other about, gender role is small potatoes.
    Decomposey wrote: »
    I grew up as a girl who identified more with the male gender role, playing with trucks and hating dresses. And I NEVER got teased for it.
    Decomposey wrote: »
    I got teased, but not for that. On the scale of things kids will tease each other about, gender role is small potatoes.

    On the one hand, all of the dead women who died where you "weren't teased" are rolling in their graves, and on the other hand, all of the dead would-be-women who wore a dress to school when they shouldn't have and ended up in the same place are also rolling in their graves and I'm unable to choose which group you were just more insensitive to.

    "Gender role is small potatoes" is ... it's a mind-bogglingly stupid thing to say. I don't know the context of where you grew up, but the fact you were able to make such a sweepingly broad and sweepingly horrendously wrong statement makes me think you come from either the furthest echelons of privilege or the goddamn moon.

    Seriously, her post was a god damn joke. What the hell were you thinking, Decomposey? That your awesome experiences apply to everyone?

    No I'm assuming that the kids I grew up with had worse problems which they got teased over. Like the kid with the malformed hand that was teased ruthlessly. Or the kid who had serious throat scarring that caused his voice to sound like an 80 year old smoker. Or of course, me, who had a serious speach impediment that resulted in years of brutal mockery. Kids have juicier targets then gender to tease over and they will USE them, ignoring gender role discrepency as a 'small potato' compared to more hurtful targets they can go after.

    At a young age, girls who want to play with fire trucks and whatever are fine. Little girls might mock them, but little boys will think they are the only cool girl in the class. Conversely a little boy who wears a dress will be mocked FURIOUSLY, possibly more than anything else that could be observed. Kids have jucier targets than little girls who like trucks yet, but a little boy who wears a dress and likes dolls? I can't think of anything a small child would mock more.

    First, I think that is Pop is sexwise male, and decides to wear dresses, everyone will assume 'he' is a girl, and won't know different because 'his' parents sure aren't going to correct them. So the kids won't know or care, at least until facial hair starts growing. And by the then gender idenity will be firmly established for Pop and their parents can help them deal with it.

    You may be disgusted with my posts, but I'm just as disgusted with those who are proclaiming that children should bow to the pressure of their peers or face exile, and that parents should make sure their precious darlings fit societal molds so well that they won't get teased. Heaven forbid anyone rock the boat. God help anyone that chooses who they want to be instead of succumbing to what others tell them they SHOULD be.

    I feel good for the kid that their parents are giving them the room to choose, and sorry for all you geese that are screaming there's something wrong with that.

    Before following any advice, opinions, or thoughts I may have expressed in the above post, I feel I should warn you: I found Keven Costners "Waterworld" to be a very entertaining film.
  • RocketSauceRocketSauce Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    What would be wrong with a genderless society anyways? Ie a society where gender roles are not assigned to anyone.

    The status quo seems to be just fine

  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Topweasel wrote: »
    This would be like in Georgia circa 50's if genetic engineering was possible, a white couple having the pigment of their kids skin changed prior to birth to be darker. Sure the kid isn't African-American, and even if he was shouldn't affect the way he is treated. But why in the world would you go out of the way to make life harder on your kid as a social experiment.

    No, it would be as if they let the kid choose their skin pigmentation.

    The parents aren't forcing jack shit on the kid. They are letting the kid choose whenever the kid wants to. Can you grasp this?

    The kid chooses, the parents support. The horror.

    PSN: allenquid
  • ArchArch An insect, therefore, is not afraid of gravity Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    Topweasel wrote: »
    "Well that's a nifty idea, I wonder how it will work out". But then I come to the realization that this is happening because of the decision the parents are making for their child. A decision that even if the kid eventually ends up fitting in somewhere, will undoubtedly have a horrible affect on their childhood.

    Why?

    Why do you think this?

    If Pop ends up conforming to a traditional role, which most people in this thread seem to agree Pop will, barring (wholly unsubstantiated) parental pressure, Pop probably won't have any memory of this part of his or her life.

    You're affected by shit that you can't remember, for starters.

    Beyond that, though, if the BEST CASE scenario out of all of this is "Pop ends up gendered anyway" then what the fuck is there to applaud here? The parents are risking their child's wellbeing, for zero potential benefit.

    The benefit is that if Pop ended up being, say, transgendered, he or she would have had an easier time of it growing up.

    This is something that should be blindingly obvious to you.

    Or what if Pop has chosen a specific cis-gendered role? Pop is now much more confident that is "who Pop is" instead of going through the dilemma of wondering whether they are the wrong gender or not!

    This exact scenario happened to me, and I was raised cis-gendered!

    Is Pop confident?

    An assumption is being made that the parents are teaching pop all of the different gender options for Pop to decide among, but that is nowhere in the article. The article actually seems to suggest that they are giving Pop as little information as possible, and forcing Pop to create Pop's entire identity popself.

    Which is not a bad thing in and of itself, but DOES NOT lead to a lot of confidence once Pop gets out in the word, and sees that the vast majority of other folks conform to a binary proposition.



    I am ALL ABOUT building a child's confidence in who they are. I don't see this experiment as doing that. I see this experiment as serving both as an isolation booth and an echo chamber, essentially leaving Pop completely unprepared for introduction in to society at large.

    Dude fucking seriously. I swear you either lied about reading this article, or just plain can't fucking read.
    "I believe that the self-confidence and personality that Pop has shaped will remain for a lifetime," said Pop's mother.

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    What would be wrong with a genderless society anyways? Ie a society where gender roles are not assigned to anyone.

    The status quo seems to be just fine

    Unless you have a vagina or are a guy who wants to do something "traditionally" feminine.

  • HachfaceHachface Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    I don't understand the objection.

    what should a parent do if their child is born with ambiguous genitalia? pray they get it get right?
    Go with your gut, be communicative with your child, adapt as necessary, love unconditionally

    nothing there requires the excess this couple is going through, which is why Hach and I are questioning whether it's superfluous

    Actually, in the specific case of an intersex child, I think that some variant of what these parents are doing is the only responsible choice.

  • Best AmericaBest America __BANNED USERS
    edited June 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    I do find it amusing that now, well into late adolescence and adulthood, many of us still tremble at the bullies who teases us in grade school, and we still let that fear dictate our grown-up choices.

    Some of those "bullies" still plague us; for instance if I wanted to wear a nice business-casual skirt to my business casual environment (let us pretend I don't work in a science lab, where skirts are unsafe) I would be mocked
    Yeah, but you remain an agent

    Notice that Hach said "dictates"

    Hmmm I thought the implication was there that this gets passed down to our children because we don't want them to be mocked like us.

    If it wasn't there it is.
    Ohh, I see what you're getting at. Well, no, I wouldn't put my child through what I went through even though it would not be "wrong" to do so. If that's an irrational emotional decision, I'll just cede the point. I wouldn't stop my child from making those choices, though ... I admit I'm not sure if I'm enough of a hero to protect them from all those slings and arrows in the worst case scenarios, though. It takes a lot, from both the child and the parents.

    right you got it
  • ArchArch An insect, therefore, is not afraid of gravity Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    What would be wrong with a genderless society anyways? Ie a society where gender roles are not assigned to anyone.

    The status quo seems to be just fine

    Hmmmmmm I think that lots of people really really disagree with you. And you may even be objectively wrong here.

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Hachface wrote: »
    I don't understand the objection.

    what should a parent do if their child is born with ambiguous genitalia? pray they get it get right?
    Go with your gut, be communicative with your child, adapt as necessary, love unconditionally

    nothing there requires the excess this couple is going through, which is why Hach and I are questioning whether it's superfluous

    Actually, in the specific case of an intersex child, I think that some variant of what these parents are doing is the only responsible choice.
    Deciding the gender of an intersex child usually leads to some really fucked up children with a lot of resentment.

  • Best AmericaBest America __BANNED USERS
    edited June 2010
    Hachface wrote: »
    I don't understand the objection.

    what should a parent do if their child is born with ambiguous genitalia? pray they get it get right?
    Go with your gut, be communicative with your child, adapt as necessary, love unconditionally

    nothing there requires the excess this couple is going through, which is why Hach and I are questioning whether it's superfluous

    Actually, in the specific case of an intersex child, I think that some variant of what these parents are doing is the only responsible choice.
    I academically agree, but I defer to tbloxham's examples of how "ambiguous" behavior carries its own stigmas and will tend to skew away from categorically ambiguous and towards various binaries that you were trying to dodge to begin with

    I think that you are right though, you should at least have made that much effort as a parent so that they can always look back on those very early, very formative years and see from the beginning that their parents had zero presuppositions about who their child was :^:

    right you got it
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Sipex wrote: »
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Sipex wrote: »
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    You also seem to have a problem with confusing negative gender stereotypes (women can't be competitive, boy's can't cry) with simple elements of society that don't damage us except by our failure to conform to them. You gain nothing by trying to get your children to buck these trends, and only make their lives worse.

    Except that when dealing with a small child, other people will take the way the child is dressed and other external presentations as a signifier of their gender, and treat them differently as a result. If the parents wish to avoid having outside sources enforce toxic gender norms on Pop, the only way they can accomplish this is by keeping Pop's gender presentation ambiguous.

    Thank you

    Also Namrok and jeepguy- You guys would do REALLY WELL to read everything backwardsname, feral, and myself said back on page twenty because you are arguing strawmen that nobody here is using

    One day you see a toddler wearing little jeans, a skull t-shirt and playing with a truck.

    The next day you see the same toddler wearing a sundress and playing with barbies.

    You will instantly assume that the child is a little girl. This child is not being raised gender ambiguous, this child is being raised as a girl. Everyone will assume that it's a girl, because girls can wear what they want and do what they want at this age, and boys don't wear dresses. Girls can do boys things and wear boys clothes and no-one will bat an eyelid if they are little, boys doing 'girls' things will face cruelty at any age.

    Gender ambiguity is always going to make you assume 'female' until they are old enough to make it be obvious either way. Pop is, right now, a girl because anyone who meets Pop a few times will treat Pop as such.

    In the US or Canada I would say you are right.

    For Sweden.

    No clue, really. I don't know sweden well enough.

    For sweden, exactly the same. I've been to sweden. The little girls wear whatever they want, and the little boys wear little boys clothes. Europe is more 'permissive' than the US, but nowhere near to that extent. Again, there is a difference between gender equality which the scandinavian countries are EXCEPTIONAL at (see, paternal leave in those countries, and female CEOs there) and the absence of gender identity. A man can be a stay at home dad for four months and everyone will respect him, but if he does so while wearing a dress people will be less accepting.

    Really? The more you know. Thanks.

    Well, I haven't LIVED in Sweden, so possibly there is an underlying layer of permissiveness that I missed, but I saw lots of little girls running around in long pants and doing 'boyish' things, and no little boys in dresses. It's just the way the world is right now.

    Your puny weapons are useless against me
  • Protein ShakesProtein Shakes __BANNED USERS
    edited June 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    Dude fucking seriously. I swear you either lied about reading this article, or just plain can't fucking read.
    "I believe that the self-confidence and personality that Pop has shaped will remain for a lifetime," said Pop's mother.

    Yes, we have the parents' word that pop has "shaped [a lot of] self confidence and personality". Except for the little detail that, a lot compared to what? How did they measure it? Is Pop significantly and noticeably more self-confident than other kids her age?

    Again, you're waaaaaay too biased towards the parents here, and giving them the benefit of the doubt when they don't really deserve it.

    Modern Man wrote: »
    Well, if my mom met the following criteria... I'd be in favor if waterboarding her.
  • Casual EddyCasual Eddy Fighting the War on String Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    the status quo is fucking awesome if you're a straight male

    75trafim7bi2.png
  • sidhaethesidhaethe Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    the status quo is fucking awesome if you're a straight white male

    Sorry, had to add the bolded

  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Quid wrote: »
    Topweasel wrote: »
    This would be like in Georgia circa 50's if genetic engineering was possible, a white couple having the pigment of their kids skin changed prior to birth to be darker. Sure the kid isn't African-American, and even if he was shouldn't affect the way he is treated. But why in the world would you go out of the way to make life harder on your kid as a social experiment.

    No, it would be as if they let the kid choose their skin pigmentation.

    The parents aren't forcing jack shit on the kid. They are letting the kid choose whenever the kid wants to. Can you grasp this?

    The kid chooses, the parents support. The horror.

    But again, the kid isn't choosing. Society assigns 'female' to a child who wears dresses at all regularly and plays with dolls if not informed otherwise. The parents have assigned female to their child by their plan.

    Your puny weapons are useless against me
  • ArchArch An insect, therefore, is not afraid of gravity Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    Dude fucking seriously. I swear you either lied about reading this article, or just plain can't fucking read.
    "I believe that the self-confidence and personality that Pop has shaped will remain for a lifetime," said Pop's mother.

    Yes, we have the parents' word that pop has "shaped [a lot of] self confidence and personality". Except for the little detail that, a lot compared to what? How did they measure it? Is Pop significantly and noticeably more self-confident than other kids her age?

    Again, you're waaaaaay too biased towards the parents here, and giving them the benefit of the doubt when they don't really deserve it.

    And the opposite viewpoint is frankly, MORE ridiculous (that is, the view that these people are irrational lunatics who should not be trusted with children)

  • RocketSauceRocketSauce Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    What would be wrong with a genderless society anyways? Ie a society where gender roles are not assigned to anyone.

    The status quo seems to be just fine

    Hmmmmmm I think that lots of people really really disagree with you. And you may even be objectively wrong here.

    Having an androgenous society is quite a big shift, I'd like to see some evidence that it would solve any of the problems people are bitching about, and not lead to a whole set of other problems. From what I can gather, it's just what people feel would be better, not any actual hardcore data.

  • sidhaethesidhaethe Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    tbloxham wrote: »
    It's just the way the world is right now.

    This is precisely why I am supportive of Pop's parents. Because the observation of the "way the world was" 50 years ago was fucking unacceptable, and we are immensely better off for the horrible people who experimented with their children, putting blacks into white schools and making crazy mixed-race babies and teaching their children that there was no reason to believe in a deity.

  • Protein ShakesProtein Shakes __BANNED USERS
    edited June 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    Dude fucking seriously. I swear you either lied about reading this article, or just plain can't fucking read.
    "I believe that the self-confidence and personality that Pop has shaped will remain for a lifetime," said Pop's mother.

    Yes, we have the parents' word that pop has "shaped [a lot of] self confidence and personality". Except for the little detail that, a lot compared to what? How did they measure it? Is Pop significantly and noticeably more self-confident than other kids her age?

    Again, you're waaaaaay too biased towards the parents here, and giving them the benefit of the doubt when they don't really deserve it.

    And the opposite viewpoint is frankly, MORE ridiculous (that is, the view that these people are irrational lunatics who should not be trusted with children)

    You are entitled to your opinion on that, but the FACT stands that we do not know whether Pop is actually more self-confident and has a "better" personality, and, even if she does, it can be attributed to her genderless upbringing (and not to countless of other possible factors).

    Modern Man wrote: »
    Well, if my mom met the following criteria... I'd be in favor if waterboarding her.
  • ArchArch An insect, therefore, is not afraid of gravity Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    What would be wrong with a genderless society anyways? Ie a society where gender roles are not assigned to anyone.

    The status quo seems to be just fine

    Hmmmmmm I think that lots of people really really disagree with you. And you may even be objectively wrong here.

    Having an androgenous society is quite a big shift, I'd like to see some evidence that it would solve any of the problems people are bitching about, and not lead to a whole set of other problems. From what I can gather, it's just what people feel would be better, not any actual hardcore data.

    That is a very different statement than "The Status Quo is just fine", and I hope you realize that.

  • SipexSipex Registered User
    edited June 2010
    sidhaethe wrote: »
    the status quo is fucking awesome if you're a straight white male

    Sorry, had to add the bolded

    None of that please, comments like this explode quickly.

    Then this thread gets closed and no more discussion.

    Horseshoe wrote:
    I've got good news and bad news about 6th level, That Guy. The good news is that Forbiddance spell allows you to prevent enemies different alignment from entering a consecrated area, which is actually useful! The bad news is that the only other new sixth level spell makes lunch for everybody. Guess which one the party is going to expect you to cast.
Sign In or Register to comment.