Parents of 2-year-old keeping gender a secret

[Horadrius]

Came across this article on the Escapist forums, and I can honestly say I've never been more revolted:

Swedish parents keep 2-year-old's gender secret - The Local

A couple of Swedish parents have stirred up debate in the country by refusing to reveal whether their two-and-a-half-year-old child is a boy or a girl.

Pop’s parents [see footnote], both 24, made a decision when their baby was born to keep Pop’s sex a secret. Aside from a select few – those who have changed the child’s diaper – nobody knows Pop’s gender; if anyone enquires, Pop’s parents simply say they don’t disclose this information.

In an interview with newspaper Svenska Dagbladet in March, the parents were quoted saying their decision was rooted in the feminist philosophy that gender is a social construction.

“We want Pop to grow up more freely and avoid being forced into a specific gender mould from the outset,” Pop’s mother said. “It's cruel to bring a child into the world with a blue or pink stamp on their forehead.”

The child's parents said so long as they keep Pop’s gender a secret, he or she will be able to avoid preconceived notions of how people should be treated if male or female.

Pop's wardrobe includes everything from dresses to trousers and Pop's hairstyle changes on a regular basis. And Pop usually decides how Pop is going to dress on a given morning.

Although Pop knows that there are physical differences between a boy and a girl, Pop's parents never use personal pronouns when referring to the child – they just say Pop.

"I believe that the self-confidence and personality that Pop has shaped will remain for a lifetime," said Pop's mother.

But while Pop’s parents say they have received supportive feedback from many of their peers, not everyone agrees that their chosen course of action will have a positive outcome.

“Ignoring children's natures simply doesn’t work,” says Susan Pinker, a psychologist and newspaper columnist from Toronto, Canada, who wrote the book The Sexual Paradox, which focuses on sex differences in the workplace.

“Child-rearing should not be about providing an opportunity to prove an ideological point, but about responding to each child’s needs as an individual,” Pinker tells The Local.

“It’s unlikely that they’ll be able to keep this a secret for long. Children are curious about their own identity, and are likely to gravitate towards others of the same sex during free play time in early childhood.”

Pinker says there are many ways that males and females differ from birth; even if gender is kept ‘secret,’ prenatal hormones developed in the second trimester of pregnancy already alter the way the child behaves and feels.

She says once children can speak, males tell aggressive stories 87 per cent of the time, while females only 17 per cent. In a study, children aged two to four were given a task to work together for a reward, and boys used physical tactics 50 times more than girls, she says.

But Swedish gender equality consultant Kristina Henkel says Pop’s parents' experiment might have positive results.

“If the parents are doing this because they want to create a discussion with other adults about why gender is important, then I think they can make a point of it,” Henkel says in a telephone interview with The Local.

“You can talk about there being a non-stereotypical gender; if you are a girl you can do the same as a boy, and if you’re a boy you can do the same as a girl.”

Henkel also says a child's sex can deeply affect how they are treated growing up, and distract them from simply being a human being.

“If the child is dressed up as a girl or boy, it affects them because people see and treat them in a more gender-typical way,” Henkel explains.

“Girls are told they are cute in their dresses, and boys are told they are cool with their car toys. But if you give them no gender they will be seen more as a human or not a stereotype as a boy or girl.”

She says that without these gender stereotypes, children can build character as individuals, not hindered by preconceived notions of what they should be as males or females.

“I think that can make these kids stronger,” Henkel says.

Anna Nordenström, a paediatric endocrinologist at Karolinska Institutet, says it’s hard to know what effects the parents' decision will have on Pop.

“It will affect the child, but it’s hard to say if it will hurt the child,” says Nordenström, who studies hormonal influences on gender development.

“I don’t know what they are trying to achieve. It’s going to make the child different, make them very special.”

She says if Pop is still ‘genderless’ by the time he or she starts school, Pop will certainly receive a lot of attention from classmates.

“We don’t know exactly what determines sexual identity, but it’s not only sexual upbringing,” says Nordenström. “Gender-typical behaviour, sexual preferences and sexual identity usually go together. There are hormonal and other influences that we don’t know that will determine the gender of the child.”

Both Nordenström and Pinker refer to a controversial case from 1967 when a circumcision left one of two twin brothers without a penis. Dr. John Money, who asserted that gender was learned rather than innate, convinced the parents to raise 'David' as 'Brenda' and the child had cosmetic genitalia reconstruction surgery.

She was raised as a female, with girls’ clothes, games and codes of behaviour. The parents never told Brenda the secret until she was a teenager and rebelled against femininity. She then started receiving testosterone injections and underwent another genetic reconstruction process to become David again. David Reimer denounced the experiment as a crushing failure before committing suicide at the age of 38.

“I don’t think that trying to keep a child’s sex a secret will fool anyone, nor do I think it’s wise or ethical,” says Pinker. “As with any family secret, when we try to keep an elemental truth from children, it usually blows up in the parent’s face, via psychosomatic illness or rebellious behaviour.”

But with a second child on the way, Pop's parents have no plans to change what they see as a winning formula. As for Pop, they say they will only reveal the child's sex when Pop thinks it's time.

[Qalbert]

thats fucked up

[Dimmauk]

I dont see what the big deal is. Why is this even news?

[Tristam]

This is the most revolting thing you've ever come across? I think this is pretty tame.

[Horadrius]

You don't see any problems with keeping the most basic of basic biology away from a child for years?

[Tyche]

I find it more interesting that revolting. As said in the article, they won't be able to keep it secret for probably more than another year.

[Qalbert]

No whats fucked up is naming your kid Pop.
Kidding aside, having a baby gives you no right to screw with their development for the sake of proving a point.

[Dimmauk]

Kids are very smart and observant. They see a girl on TV as a girl, and make the connection. I'm daughter knows Dora is a girl and Diego is a boy even though Dora doesnt dress like a girl.

The only thing the parents are doing is making a big deal out their decision to not call their child a certain sex.

[Tristam]

I don't think they're hiding the sex of the child from the child, just the rest of the world, and letting the kid do what it wants. I don't know if I see the harm in that, but I know nothing about kids, so meh.

[Tyche]

As long as they are adhering to other social constructs, I don't think it'll screw with the kids development as long as this doesn't carry on into school (and I cannot see how it would). At two, children are really just starting to gain a basic understanding of gender differences (see a couple other threads on the front page). If this carries on for another 6 months to a year, I'm sure the kid will be fine. The child will probably spill the beans sooner than later, as they won't have an understanding of their parents social experiment.

[HadesChubbs]

Treating your child like a girl/boy has quite a lot to do with how they turn out >.> it's fucked up, sure. But there is a lot worse they could be doing to the child.

[Ragnell]

Cant wait to see breast and penis grow

[Obev]

This is why social sciences can't have experiments like real science. Ethical or not, it'll be interesting. The idea of a third "neuter" gender exists in some cultures, which could be seen as evidence that gender is a social construct. It's a little odd to use a child as a walking (well, crawling) case study to prove it though.

Wonder if I can walk into a betting shop and put money on which side Pop is going to end up playing for when they grow up.

[Ziero]

Using your kid a social statement that they have no idea what in the hell you're trying to prove will just lead to bad results. And when this kid starts entering public areas and attending schools, the fact that he's been raised different from all the other boys and girls will be a massive issue. You don't have to treat every little girl like a little girl or every little boy like a little boy, but there are massive differences between the genders that go far deeper then social interactions.

[Alleya]

Knowing someone's gender changes your behavior towards them no matter how progressive and open minded you think you are. This is exactly why androgynous people inspire such rage and confusion--people don't know how to deal with them. This is true from the second the child comes out of the womb. Parents talk to (play with, feed, attend to, etc) their child differently depending on whether it's a boy or a girl from day one, and so does everyone else who interacts with it. Try this: When you have a baby, swaddle it up in a gray blanket and take it somewhere to meet new people. The first question out of their mouth will be "is it a boy or a girl?" That is significant. The parents in this story are 100% on target.

Like the article mentions, pre-natal chemistry will probably cause the kid to gravitate towards behavior patterns that are typical of whatever it is we define as gender long before it begins to ask about its gender.

What's important to keep in mind is that gender isn't a physiological phenomena. This article is another example of widespread public ignorance of this distinction. The chromosomal difference (which some have argued is the only difference, and a small one at that) is sex. That's what we're talking about here, the kid's biological sex. Gender is the social constructs of masculine/feminine that we are more or less forced to adhere to. This is what her parents are "trying" to avoid.

Which brings me to the point that you are all falling into their trap. These are feminists, and feminists are tricky. I would wager that they care a lot less about how their experiment turns out than you might think. Their real goal is probably to get people to have this exact discussion, to plant the seed of doubt and curiosity in people's minds. That's always a feminist's goal, to force people to challenge their beliefs and the status quo.

he idea of a third "neuter" gender exists in some cultures, which could be seen as evidence that gender is a social construct.

It's not an "idea" or "evidence", it's a cold hard fact. Native Americans had 3 genders, in India there's something like 4. Many cultures in existence today have multiple "gender" roles, or transend gender altogether and don't recognize the supposed differences between men and women beyond physical sex.

but there are massive differences between the genders that go far deeper then social interactions.

Huzzah unfounded statements!

[Saga]

Reminds me of Pat from SNL.

[Brill Weave]

I remember when Pat was dating Chris. Such a beautiful couple.

[Shade]

errr.. I dont see the big deal. They're not keeping the secret from the kid -forever-, theyre just not setting them up with preconceptions on how they are supposed to act or what they are supposed to like based on whether they are boy or girl. They'll be able to discover what the kid is like without influence. Whatever gender-based differences that exist that are because of biology and not upbringing will still be there, so I don't see where the worry is coming from.

I'm curious to see how it turns out.

[Dimmauk]

Using your kid a social statement that they have no idea what in the hell you're trying to prove will just lead to bad results. And when this kid starts entering public areas and attending schools, the fact that he's been raised different from all the other boys and girls will be a massive issue. You don't have to treat every little girl like a little girl or every little boy like a little boy, but there are massive differences between the genders that go far deeper then social interactions.

I'm more outraged at child mullets
http://www.mulletjunky.com/webimages/angry1.jpg

[Olo401]

Definitely not something I would personally do should I have a child someday, and I don't necessarily agree with the idea, but from a purely scientific and sociological standpoint it's a very interesting experiment.