This is interesting

[conuly]

Here's an article about a family in Sweden that's keeping the sex of their kid secret. Which reminds me of this story except of course it's in real life. (Don't read the comments, btw.)

Well, maybe read the comments. Some of them make reference to David Reimer, and - as I've actually read his book - I'm not so sure of the relevance. His problems seem to me to be much deeper than simply being raised as a girl when he wasn't - a lot of his "therapy" described in the book seemed to me to be very dubious or abusive even. *shrugs* (Which isn't to argue the matter of innate gender or whatnot, just that I think that in that specific case which is the one people always bring up when talking about gender anything (have you noticed?), there's a lot more stuff going on.)

Comments

[brownkitty.livejournal.com]

Is that family keeping their child in complete isolation?

[conuly]

There's no indication in the article that they're doing so, but this is the first I've ever heard of them.

[brownkitty.livejournal.com]

I'm just wondering how they expect their child not to ask questions, and not to see behavior of other people toward each other.

[conuly]

I don't think they do, though.

[siderea]

They don't. They're not trying to raise the kid without gender. They're trying to let the kid make up hir own mind what hir gender is (and how sie wants to express gender), which sie'll probably do in about two years, developmentally speaking, and that's about preschool age anyway.

[siderea]

Some of them make reference to David Reimer, and - as I've actually read his book - I'm not so sure of the relevance.

I think it's very relevant. They're trying to let the poor kid assert whatever gender and gender expression comes naturally. Just because the kid's probably got gender-identifying genitalia doesn't mean that's the gender identity that the kid would pick for hirself. They're trying not to do accidentally to their kid what was done to Reimer deliberately: force a gender on the kid that's not the kid's. Bully for them.

[conuly]

That's a good point, although the people mentioning Reimer are saying that the kid is going to end up suicidal like he was... and quite aside from the fact that there are many factors that can lead to a person's suicidal tendencies (or lack thereof, let's hope) I keep thinking that out of his childhood experience his therapist's weird ideas (I have to re-read this, at the time they struck me as a form of molestation, frankly, but it was a long time ago) about how to "socialize" him to be a girl were probably a bigger factor than the fact that this was occurring at all.

Which is to say: I agree with this comment, but I felt I should rehash what I already said anyway because I like to talk too much.

[fjorab-teke.livejournal.com]

You know, aside from a few dresses, I don't remember being EXPECTED to fit a gender role. And I don't think my sister was, either.

I've been raised by very open-minded, tolerant parents. I was very obviously a tomboy by age 6. I had my girly tendencies, sure, but I was just as likely to play with my Hot Wheels or play sports. I'm still the same way. After age 2 or 3, almost all of my pictures were in jeans and some kind of rugged shirt. Heck, the better to ride horses in, my dear. In icon, see "Buttercup" for my analogy.

My sister, on the other hand, is totally girly, though she has a select few "boyish" interests (mostly when it comes to movies and in-home entertainment). She's very "proper" and trendy. In icon, analogy with Blossom.

We were encouraged to be ourselves, though Dad is very traditionalist in some ways and gets excited with camera opportunities whenever I dress "like a woman." :-p

I wish more parents were open like that. But I don't know how far parents should go to "hide" the physical gender.

[leora.livejournal.com]

Boys get better toys. My mother didn't believe in buying "boy's toys" for girls or vice versa. This would have been totally unbearable except that computers, legos, and books were seen as gender neutral. But I never got to have transformers or hot wheels (although I played with the ones my next door neighbor had when I was 5. I really hate the artificial toy divides.

[fjorab-teke.livejournal.com]

Ugh. :-( My parents were glad to get me any reasonable "wholesome" toy that I happened to like. It was usually Breyer model horses, My Little Ponies, Hot Wheels, marbles, or something visually stimulating. To be honest? I still love all of those.

Ah well, at least you got Legos. Those are awesome. I got my 1 1/2-year-old niece Mega Blocks for Christmas. I had no idea she would immediately know what to do with them.

[leora.livejournal.com]

Oh yes, I loved legos and building blocks of all sorts. Plus, I had some of the legos with the wheels attached, so I made little vehicles out of lego. It wasn't so bad because I had computer games from a pretty young age. But my brothers generally had cooler toys than I did. And I was either discouraged from them because I was female or told that I could play with theirs, which was blatantly false as my mother would just say this to me as if clearly it was possible whereas there was no house rule that required them to let me play with their toys and in practice I very much could not play with most of their toys. Although sometimes I could get to use the lincoln logs, which I think I mostly liked from novelty. I wish the capsella had been in better shape. Capsella was very cool, but I was the youngest and by the time I was old enough to explore it most of the parts were gone and what was left was often grimy in disturbing ways.

Although when I got older and Rubik's magic came out I spent a while very happily working out all sorts of things with it. But I dislike the notion that some toys are for boys and some are for girls.

[leora.livejournal.com]

Ummm I thought the whole point of David/Brenda was that forcing a child into a gender role well after the child has made it clear that the child does not feel it is a good fit is harmful.

So, what is the issue with not forcing a child into a gender role? It's hard to think of anything more harmless, but I stopped at the comment calling it child abuse. It doesn't sound like they're keeping the sex secret from the child, just not sharing the information with outsiders.

If I have children I already had intended to dress them in greens and maybe yellows (and possibly black, white, grey, etc.) when they are infants and if asked if it's a boy or a girl say "probably". If you're not changing a baby's diaper, knowing the sex is utterly useless and potentially harmful. However, I feel full disclosure is important for diaper changing, since it does become relevant.

I'd like it if being raised with no public sex were actually accepted. It strikes me as the obvious solution for those born intersexed. Then they can fall into one of the gender roles when they're older if they decide one of them fits them.

[tenou-k.livejournal.com]

Come to think of it, it is a little weird for our culture (and some others) to keep information about sex organs and sexual behavior separated by a taboo set of behaviors while simultaneously seeing nothing contradictory about casually asking strangers whether their child has male or female sex organs (since that's essentially what asking something like "Is it a boy or a girl?" means).

[pne.livejournal.com]

True, I suppose.

[pne.livejournal.com]

a family in Sweden that's keeping the sex of their kid secret

Which is what it is -- when they say that "nobody knows Pop's gender" except for "those who have changed the child's diaper", that's sex (outward, physical), isn't it, rather than gender (inward, mental/emotional/behavioural)?

[conuly]

That's how I understand it. But I don't see the point in clarifying this in the comments over there.

[queenlyzard.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I read the book about Reimer too, and I agree his/her problems went far beyond gender confusion.

I like the idea for this Swedish kid, and I assume Pop with have determined Pop's gender pretty definitively by the time grade-school starts.

[queenlyzard.livejournal.com]

*will, not "with".