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

[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.