Parents of 2-year-old keeping gender a secret

[Tristam]

This is why social sciences can't have experiments like real science.

Aww, everytime someone says something like this I feel bad for people studying humanities, history etc. lol. Just because they don't mix chemicals or have complicated equations doesn't mean you can't approach the study of people and societies in a scientific way.

[gamez]

That right there is true child cruelty Dimm.

I typed a little too much I think on my perspective of the OP, as I grow long-winded after staying up all night, so I'll just spoiler it to save your scrolling fingers;

Spoiler: show

My thoughts on the OP is that in the short run, this will be an interesting thing to see. Though I would find it slightly awkward that a little boy is potentially being stuck in dresses more then a little girl is being dressed in both if I was in the immediate process of raising a child; I can't honestly see wardrobe and neutral treatment from those outside the family as harmful or potential to damage the child if I was in the situation to judge though.

I'd take the only concern out of this is being raised under feminism. If there's an extreme level of such present, it can damage effectively boy or girl through zealot devotional teachings on equality.

My only outside glance of feminist culture and raising children so far has been brief, but what I had viewed was parents assigning studies, dissecting magazines for treatment of women, provoking harsh thoughts of the sexual oppression and empowerment. It was hateful stuff.

In this situation, forcing the girls to live more empowered/equal and right, took away a lot of fun of being a little girl for these kids in the environment, so I'm on the fence with extreme feminists vs. casual supporters of equal rights.

This pertains not to these parents, and only one situation, so I'm open that not every parent would be like that, but also hesitant because of first impressions.

[Vigilia]

Bit extreme but imo no better than the parents that hammer set "big boys don't do that" or "little girls are supposed to be like this" behavioural patterns into their children. You'd be surprised how deeply set they are in some people's heads. We nearly drove my partner's parents potty by refusing to find out the sex of our child before he was born and opted for all sorts of bright colours and white when picking baby clothes and furnishings. When he was three days old sure enough his grandmother showed up with a huge bag full of baby blue boy-related presents. /sigh
Any kind of "forced" gender patterns like those for Brenda/David mentioned later in the thread are guaranteed to bring about far more harm. You don't even need to be that extreme to cause trouble. I went to an art college in Dublin where the combination of catholicism and well-meaning parents meant that in my year alone there were half a dozen confused/closeted gay students. Like the angst and period of trying to figure out who we are we all go through as teenagers and young adults isn't enough hassle already. Compared to that growing up without any expectations from society around you doesn't sound so bad.

[Moridam]

Aww, everytime someone says something like this I feel bad for people studying humanities, history etc. lol. Just because they don't mix chemicals or have complicated equations doesn't mean you can't approach the study of people and societies in a scientific way.

I agree, but there are pretty strict ethical standards that limit what you're allowed to do in any kind of psych experiment. You can approach all those problems in a scientific way, to be sure, but because of ethical restrictions, you're somewhat limited in what you can study, how you can study it, and what types of variables you can isolate.

The two most famous examples of experiments you couldn't get away with today, at least that I can think of offhand:

Milgram experiment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Stanford prison experiment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Not Kuno]

One of my college psych profs knew the twins in question, at the end of the article. He worked on the life story/tell all book about the twins with someone else that was released a few years back.

[Beckwin]

there's nothing really revolting; Pop knows what Pop has between his legs and Pop obviously can tell the difference between mommy and daddy- nothing is being kept from him. the only thing being kept is Pop's physical gender, and only from the outside world. this allows Pop to not be readily formed by environmental pressures stemming from assumptions, stereotypes, etc about whatever Pop's gender is.

how is this "unethical" in the slightest? basically everyone calling it unethical is assuming the "worst": Pop won't know what it means to be a "proper" boy or girl and will end up faggy/dykish!

[Qalbert]

no it will affect his/her development in ways that will lead to his/her peers treating him/her differently, and so on. its cruel

[Alleya]

no it will affect his/her development in ways that will lead to his/her peers treating him/her differently, and so on. its cruel

Wait...is this a troll? lol

[Qalbert]

How is that trolling if its common fucking sense? kids, by nature, tend to shun, pick on, bully, etc anyone perceived as different. Not establishing your child's gender identity is setting said child up for a horrible childhood, full of being bullied and outcast. ergo, fucking cruel

[Alleya]

How is that trolling if its common fucking sense? kids, by nature, tend to shun, pick on, bully, etc anyone perceived as different. Not establishing your child's gender identity is setting said child up for a horrible childhood, full of being bullied and outcast. ergo, fucking cruel

You do realize that people treat you differently because you're a man, right? Everyone you know would treat you completely differently if you were a woman, or transgender, or androgynous, or whatever other variation you can come up with. If setting up your kid to be treated differently from other kids is cruel, then all parents are cruel.

People are going to treat a kid differently regardless of how they are brought up. Worrying about whether or not your kid is going to be picked on is a pretty silly thing to do, as they will be picked on for something and anything and everything regardless.

[Senoska]

Who names their kid Pop?

[Obev]

Maybe the kid's just sweet and bubbly.

But surely then they'd have named it Soda.

[Beckwin]

there's no way to say that a kid getting picked on/treated cruelly because of it's gender is less cruel than getting picked on/treated cruelly because of who it is beyond gender.

[Qalbert]

ok so if your parents had named you Faggoty McFunbags that would be ok since you were going to be picked on in the first place? There's different levels of abuse, and a kid being joked on for say, braces, or glasses, is going to be nowhere near as harsh as what Pop will undoubtedly face. Additionally the experiment itself is unethical. Children can't be expected to understand or give consent to any number of things, but performing a social experiment on a child during their development, undoubtedly altering the whole course of their life is ok? Its a fucking double standard, and some seriously fucked up shit.

[Shade]

How is that trolling if its common fucking sense? kids, by nature, tend to shun, pick on, bully, etc anyone perceived as different. Not establishing your child's gender identity is setting said child up for a horrible childhood, full of being bullied and outcast. ergo, fucking cruel

By this logic we should always aim for the lowest common denominator... Teach your kid to never stray too far from what the other sheep are doing, reading is for chumps, feelings are for sissies, girls love babies, and the most important thing in the world is who wins American Idol.

What fun.

[Beckwin]

lol, yep, you are indeed assuming that it's a boy who is gonna be acting too faggy to not get his ass kicked.

anyhow, little children aren't gonna string Pop up behind a powerwheels and drag Pop around. young children inevitably tease along gender perceptions, but most of it isn't too severe. There have always been tomboys and more "feminine" little boys; in Pops case Pop might not fit into either mold socially which will likely work out just fine until he starts to mature a bit and more definitely assume some sort of identity that Pop is comfortable with, at which point there will be more severe gender-based teasing (that every child has the potential to go through).

[Jaraude]

Unless the parents are planning on buying a private island somewhere and isolating themselves from the rest of the world their experiment is not going to matter in the long run. Once Pop begins interacting with other humans who are not operating in the experiment the child will be forced to deal with these stimuli and will develop accordingly. Considering that many adults often have trouble establishing their own identity I highly doubt that the genderless programming from Pop's parents will stick since society in general does not operate that way. I just don't see how the child would be able to remain assertive of a genderless identity when you know that peers (other children) and adults are going to pressure a choice in the matter (male or female). Definitely an interesting experiment but I don't see how the parents can pull it off.

[Senoska]

Maybe the kid's just sweet and bubbly.

But surely then they'd have named it Soda.

You have upset me with the amount of wrong you just posted.
Pop.

[Qalbert]

I still think thats wrong but for the sake of discussion I will drop the teasing point, but what about the sheer unethical nature of it?

[Beckwin]

I don't think it's about maintaining a genderless identity, but allowing Pop to develop one on his own without his environment deciding it for him. Eventually Pop is gonna form habits he's comfortable with and when Pop hits puberty he'll figure out who Pop wants to fuck.