Their ain't no middle ground!

Jay wrote: (@ HiTempGuy: ) (a) Refusing to rigourously segregate everything about your kid's life into "these are boys' things" and "these are girls' things" does not lead to cross-dressing later. (b) What's wrong with being a cross-dresser? If that's your thing it ain't my business to tell you not to! (@ Madmallard: ) We're talking about a BABY here.

No, we are not (if you actually read the article, you'd notice there are two other children involved). Second of all, what they are doing is setting their children up for a life of ridicule when they must face reality and realize everyone will judge them for dressing like a girl when they are a boy (or vice versa).

Even when I was 6, I would have thought it was screwed up for a buddy of mine to be dressed like a girl. This goes along those lines of the pussification of society, but I don't need to start that debate again.

Second of all, while YOU may not think cross-dressing is wrong, others do. Also, the younger a human is, the more impressionable they are. To think that they are not affected by these decisions in the way they act/dress/imitate/whatever at a later stage is ignorant.

Dressing unisexly is not cross dressing. Have you seen a girl wearing jeans and a T-shirt today? I'll bet you probably have. Is that cross dressing? Maybe in the 1910s it was. These days it's possible for clothes not to be "boys' clothes" or "girls' clothes".

Seriously, by your apparent definition, how would you not cross-dress a BABY? Little tiny business suits or frilly dresses? Black leather or French maid outfits? I'm just curious.

I've had long hair since I was WAY young enough to regularly get mistaken for a girl, and yes, that annoyed me at the time. (Seriously, since I was like seven or eight years old.) It was MY choice to grow it out, and my choice to keep it. My favourite colour has always been purple. I've never had gender identity issues, like, at all, ever. There is no causation. None. There isn't even a correlation.

Doesn't it mean society is getting more "pussified", when people can't take a little variation from the norm? You're not supposed to "conform" to "gender roles", it's the other way around... The idea of "roles", if that's even valid at all should be defined by what everyone makes of them. I got used to dealing with people who wanted to make fun of me for my long hair ages ago. I didn't immediately cut it off so I could conform. I think that made me a better person than if I would have, and I think it's better for everyone to learn to ignore the dumb comments they get for not fitting into whatever stereotype people are trying to apply to them. I'm talking about ALL stereotypes in general here, not just gender.

I'm not even going to get into "crossdressing is wrong..." Just be aware that YOU, personally, probably know someone who does at this very moment. Yes, even in Red Deer. You have no idea who it is because, well, there isn't a giant floating arrow over their head. That would probably be the only sure way to tell if it were true.

Bah, forget it, I'm out of this one. [Edit: no I'm not, I've ninja edited this post about twelve times over the last forty minutes and made two more already. As if I have better things to do with my time...] I've sat out way dumber arguments on this board, so I don't know why I made an exception here. I'm just tired of people on here throwing around good ol' 1950s values and acting like they are some sort of universal truths. Hay guys there was a cultural revolution about all this E36 M3 like 40 years ago, remember? That didn't come from nowhere.

Oh, and also, "get back in the kitchen, woman" jokes aren't funny. Not even ironically.

Sheesh...

Out of the whole article, this is what gets my attention:

"How did Stocker and Witterick decide to keep Storm's gender under wraps? During Witterick's pregnancy, her son Jazz was having "intense" experiences with his own gender."

Followed by this:

"Though Jazz likes dressing as a girl, he doesn't seem to want to be mistaken for one. He recently asked his mother to let the leaders of a nature center know that he's a boy. And he chose not to attend a conventional school because of the questions about his gender. Asked whether that upsets him, Jazz nodded."

I am all for letting kids figure out "who they are", and not letting society dictate it. However, all the parents here have done is create a very confused child. While it is refreshing that the boys don't see the same boundaries as other children in terms of gender specificness, they will certainly feel backlash. And while the backlash isn't right, that itself isn't the point. The point is, the kids won't understand WHY there is backlash. And thus, confusion. Thus, poor Jazz is upset. And had "an intense experience with his own gender". Jazz probably wonders why everyone calls him a girl, and when he corrects them, why he gets the funny looks. Might make him think something is wrong with him. And things spiral from there.

There are a million rabbit holes you can go down in this scenario. I would think that the wiser choice would be to raise them "normal", and always support their interests. If you buy a toy gun for a boy that wants a doll, he will let you know. Get him the doll in that case. But let the child take the lead on that. Let them understand that boys are boys, and girls are girls. But that it is OK for boys to want to do "girl" things, and vice versa.

Jay wrote: Dressing unisexly is not cross dressing. Oh, and also, "get back in the kitchen, woman" jokes aren't funny. Not even ironically. Sheesh...

Again, from what I can tell from the article, we are NOT talking about dressing unisexly.

Also, the jokes are funny, mainly because men and women are not the same, no matter how badly feminists wish it to be. There are differences. Differences to relegate one to serving the other? HELL NO. But that joke highlights those differences to me.

And finally, I've had long hair since I've been 17. Not down to my shoulders long, but longer than 95% of dudes you'll meet. I have very fine, but only mildly curly hair, so if it is short, I look like a dork/it is plastered to my head. So I grow it out.

Dude in the white shirt.

It's only fair you look like a dork, you are a dork

I am one of those old school guys. Not telling the sex of a baby? Get over it.

That's not long hair, if a girl had that haircut in the '70s she'd be called a tomboy. Mine goes down to the middle of my back. If I want to I can braid it, put it in pigtails, make a beehive, fill it up with hairspray and make the douchiest fauxhawk this world has ever seen, or stand next to a Tesla coil and look like a frigging koosh ball. I know you're from Red Deer but you're not a rebel for that haircut. (I'm not either.)

^^ Also, yes those are orange jeans and tragically I have NO idea what happened to them. I haven't seen them in three years. I want them back.

HunterJP wrote: Out of the whole article, this is what gets my attention: "How did Stocker and Witterick decide to keep Storm's gender under wraps? During Witterick's pregnancy, her son Jazz was having "intense" experiences with his own gender." Followed by this: "Though Jazz likes dressing as a girl, he doesn't seem to want to be mistaken for one. He recently asked his mother to let the leaders of a nature center know that he's a boy. And he chose not to attend a conventional school because of the questions about his gender. Asked whether that upsets him, Jazz nodded." I am all for letting kids figure out "who they are", and not letting society dictate it. However, all the parents here have done is create a very confused child. While it is refreshing that the boys don't see the same boundaries as other children in terms of gender specificness, they will certainly feel backlash. And while the backlash isn't right, that itself isn't the point. The point is, the kids won't understand WHY there is backlash. And thus, confusion. Thus, poor Jazz is upset. And had "an intense experience with his own gender". Jazz probably wonders why everyone calls him a girl, and when he corrects them, why he gets the funny looks. Might make him think something is wrong with him. And things spiral from there.

That is EXACTLY why I have a problem with it. The child is obviously being deeply affected by his parents decision to raise him "outside the norm" or whatever you want to call it.

It's not that I care how they are raising him, it's that the kid is already showing signs he doesn't like it. So if the parents are claiming he is smart enough to choose for himself, why aren't they respecting/changing their behaviours based on his?

In reply to Jay:

i think i saw em at a local thrift store in Lowndes County....

z31maniac wrote:

HunterJP wrote: I am all for letting kids figure out "who they are", and not letting society dictate it. However, all the parents here have done is create a very confused child. While it is refreshing that the boys don't see the same boundaries as other children in terms of gender specificness, they will certainly feel backlash. And while the backlash isn't right, that itself isn't the point. The point is, the kids won't understand WHY there is backlash. And thus, confusion. Thus, poor Jazz is upset. And had "an intense experience with his own gender". Jazz probably wonders why everyone calls him a girl, and when he corrects them, why he gets the funny looks. Might make him think something is wrong with him. And things spiral from there.

That is EXACTLY why I have a problem with it. The child is obviously being deeply affected by his parents decision to raise him "outside the norm" or whatever you want to call it. It's not that I care how they are raising him, it's that the kid is already showing signs he doesn't like it. So if the parents are claiming he is smart enough to choose for himself, why aren't they respecting/changing their behaviours based on his?

Because, obviously forcing your kids to rigidly adhere to established stereotypes solves every problem ever.

The problem with this argument is that, according to the article anyway (big BIG caveat!) the parents are raising this kid by letting him wear whatever the hell he wants and deal with the consequences. He's already decided, "I'm going to wear pink and still tell everyone that I'm a boy." That doesn't sound like 'confusion' to me.

The only "solution" I can see in your comments is to lay the boot down and force the kid to wear "boy clothes" which he doesn't want to. Don't get me wrong, there are some choices that SHOULD be made for kids at an early age. There are also some choices that, while not completely inconsequential, are generally not harmful and have the added bonus of letting the kids learn early on how to make real decisions that actually affect their own lives. That's not wrong! That's a GOOD thing. Maybe this kid won't have to go through adult life with the expectation that his only purpose is to get bossed around by some "superior"! The more people who come to THAT realization, the better we ALL are as a society.

HiTempguy wrote:

Jay wrote: (@ HiTempGuy: ) (a) Refusing to rigourously segregate everything about your kid's life into "these are boys' things" and "these are girls' things" does not lead to cross-dressing later. (b) What's wrong with being a cross-dresser? If that's your thing it ain't my business to tell you not to! (@ Madmallard: ) We're talking about a BABY here.

No, we are not (if you actually read the article, you'd notice there are two other children involved). Second of all, what they are doing is setting their children up for a life of ridicule when they must face reality and realize everyone will judge them for dressing like a girl when they are a boy (or vice versa). Even when I was 6, I would have thought it was screwed up for a buddy of mine to be dressed like a girl. This goes along those lines of the pussification of society, but I don't need to start that debate again. Second of all, while YOU may not think cross-dressing is wrong, others do. Also, the younger a human is, the more impressionable they are. To think that they are not affected by these decisions in the way they act/dress/imitate/whatever at a later stage is ignorant.

(I said this in an earlier thread, but there is nothing wrong with Bob Costas. I find it strange that people use it as a bad thing)

Crossdressing maybe wrong, maybe not. Raising a kid to be a little liberal or a young republican might be wrong, to, depending on your own leanings. As long as this kid is fed and clothed and gets medical attention, I don't think its that big of a deal.

Joey

Jay wrote: ^^ Also, yes those are orange jeans and tragically I have NO idea what happened to them. I haven't seen them in three years. I want them back.

So do the 70s!

BADUMTISH!!!!

Where did I ever imply strict adherence to a gender role in my post?

You're telling me that a 5-year old is purposefully choosing to wear pink when it makes him uncomfortable around people?

My little nephew likes playing with dolls and the color pink. He is 4. At his birthday party he DEMANDED to have his tiara on his head before he would blow out his candles and certainly doesn't act ashamed when you ask him about it.

I'll accept that I'm no child pyschologist and I could be wrong, but in my experience with nephews and friends children, they don't tend to continue to make choices that bring them pain/ridicule/etc. At least of their own volition.

Jay wrote:

z31maniac wrote:

HunterJP wrote: I am all for letting kids figure out "who they are", and not letting society dictate it. However, all the parents here have done is create a very confused child. While it is refreshing that the boys don't see the same boundaries as other children in terms of gender specificness, they will certainly feel backlash. And while the backlash isn't right, that itself isn't the point. The point is, the kids won't understand WHY there is backlash. And thus, confusion. Thus, poor Jazz is upset. And had "an intense experience with his own gender". Jazz probably wonders why everyone calls him a girl, and when he corrects them, why he gets the funny looks. Might make him think something is wrong with him. And things spiral from there.

That is EXACTLY why I have a problem with it. The child is obviously being deeply affected by his parents decision to raise him "outside the norm" or whatever you want to call it. It's not that I care how they are raising him, it's that the kid is already showing signs he doesn't like it. So if the parents are claiming he is smart enough to choose for himself, why aren't they respecting/changing their behaviours based on his?

Because, obviously forcing your kids to rigidly adhere to established stereotypes solves every problem ever. The problem with this argument is that, according to the article anyway (big BIG caveat!) the parents are raising this kid by letting him wear whatever the hell he wants and deal with the consequences. He's already decided, "I'm going to wear pink and still tell everyone that I'm a boy." That doesn't sound like 'confusion' to me. The only "solution" I can see in your comments is to lay the boot down and force the kid to wear "boy clothes" which he doesn't want to. Don't get me wrong, there are some choices that SHOULD be made for kids at an early age. There are also some choices that, while not completely inconsequential, are generally not harmful and have the added bonus of letting the kids learn early on how to make real decisions that actually affect their own lives. That's not wrong! That's a GOOD thing. Maybe this kid won't have to go through adult life with the expectation that his only purpose is to get bossed around by some "superior"! The more people who come to THAT realization, the better we ALL are as a society.

I'm agreeing with both of you at the same time.

But here's the problem. That one kid being raised like that when nobody else in his area is, is going to go through hell, IS going through hell because of it.

There's not one damn thing wrong with a little boy wearing pink if he wants to. What's wrong is the teasing/bullying he'll get because of it.

What's also wrong is that this kid isn't being taught anything with the current method other than that everyone thinks he's a freak. It's not HIS fault, but until SOMETHING is explained to him and he figures out what's going on, it's damaging, both mentally and emotionally.

The CAUSE may not be helped. The RESULT that happens because of the cause may not be helped. The EFFECT can absolutely be helped, and it's clearly not in this scenario.

What would probably work is sit the kid down and give him his options. 1) Wear pink in public, get picked on, and deal with it. 2) Don't wear pink in public, just wear it at home or something.

I realize that option #2 may be viewed as suppression and molding a child where it's not necessary and blah blah blah, and i would agree. However, at some point the kid needs to be educated that society as a whole sucks, and it's up to them whether to appease society, or do what the hell he wants.

In the end? The kid is probably too young to understand the issues at hand, and is getting more confused by the day.

It's not HIS fault. It's society, other kids/parents, but his parents aren't helping.

^^ That's a pretty good take on it from my point of view, except that I'd say "Option 2" is WAY worse than "Option 1." They'd be essentially telling him to keep himself bottled up and hide from the world. That's no way to live and is a good step down the road toward a myspace emo suicide at 16.

I do agree the parents should sit down and talk WITH him about why people are making comments and what to do about it. Communication is key. Of course, you're never really sure how much a five year old gets out of a discussion like that, but at the same time kids are a lot smarter than we sometimes think they are.

Honestly, and I know this sounds harsh, but I'd rather see young Jazz learn how to deal with getting picked on and maybe not have skin like tissue paper later in life.

"If there's something there then you are of the male gender. If there's nothing there you are of the female gender, that is unless your wife keeps everything under lock and key. "

So a female has nothing? That quote says volumes about you.

Jay wrote: I mostly agree with you Ben except that I'd say Option 2 is WAY worse than Option 1. You'd be essentially telling him to keep himself bottled up and hide from the world. I do agree the parents should sit down and talk WITH him about why people are making comments and what to do about it. Communication is key. Of course, you're never really sure how much a five year old gets out of a discussion like that, but at the same time kids are a lot smarter than we sometimes think they are. Honestly, and I know this sounds harsh, but I'd rather see young Jazz learn how to deal with getting picked on and maybe not have skin like tissue paper later in life.

That's my problem with Option 2 as well. But i also don't think it should be laid on a kid that young to make a completely uninformed decision in this case.

The parents have to inform him the what, how and why. I just don't think that your average 5 year old is capable of making the decision of whether or not to go with the new "what" without some guidance.

Either way, what's happening right this instance is damaging, even if you consider the parents to be doing the "right thing" by letting the kid choose.

They're doing a "right thing" that myself, nor anyone else, should have a problem with, but they're doing it "wrong."

4eyes wrote: "If there's something there then you are of the male gender. If there's nothing there you are of the female gender, that is unless your wife keeps everything under lock and key. " So a female has nothing? That quote says volumes about you.

I think it's more like belly buttons. You've got your "innies" and your "outies." You can't see the "innies" if you just look down there. You can see the "hole" where the "innie" resides, though.

Jay wrote: That's not long hair, if a girl had that haircut in the '70s she'd be called a tomboy.

Oh ouch, for shamed I have been. I guess since I don't live in the land of hippy central, it isn't long hair. But out here/up north it sure as hell is (and I'm not bragging about it or something, everybody I know says I have long hair, who am I to argue). Thank you for pointing out that I am such a rebel, its good to see people follow along.

As has been noted, other people are arguing my point much more successfully than myself. I still stand behind what I said though.

@ Aussie:

HOW DARE YOU TRY AND PIGEONHOLE ME INTO WHAT YOUR DEFINITION OF A DORK IS. I AM OUTRAGED AND OFFENDED YOU CAN'T SEE ME FOR THE JOCK I AM!

Oh, in case anyone is wondering, I'm also black. Because apparently we aren't what we are.

^^ Yeah, my point was, I've had mine long since I was young enough to be regularly mistaken for a girl. Seriously, I grew it out around grade four. And I've never had any "gender confusion" or identity issues at all. There is NO correlation. You don't have to macho up your boys or pretty-princess your girls in order for them to turn out to be sane, grounded adults.

HiTempguy wrote: Second of all, while YOU may not think cross-dressing is wrong, others do.

This reminds me of the last tattoo thread.

Uh oh, is this the sane, grounded adults section? I am in the wrong damn place....

I was going to add, "(or whatever passes for such around these parts)", but I'm actually trying to make my posts less long-winded. Believe it or not.

Jay wrote: (@ HiTempGuy: ) (a) Refusing to rigourously segregate everything about your kid's life into "these are boys' things" and "these are girls' things" does not lead to cross-dressing later. (b) What's wrong with being a cross-dresser? If that's your thing it ain't my business to tell you not to! (@ Madmallard: ) We're talking about a BABY here. NO kid that age gets a choice in ANYTHING, for a very good reason. If you're too young to even have teeth yet, having a bunch of stupid stereotypes forced on you by supposedly well-meaning acquaintances is a lot less of a choice than being spared those stereotypes... Seriously the only thing this kid is "missing out on" is getting 'birthday boy' or 'birthday girl' written on his/her cake, which the parents will eat anyway because the baby isn't old enough to have cake. By the time the kid is old enough for it to make any difference whatsoever s/he will have started TELLING people "I'm a boy" or "I'm a girl"... assuming s/he waned to.

not old enough to have cake? what kind of silliness is that? my whole family was raised with us shoving whatever we could get our hands on into our mouths from a very early age. we ate cake, chocolate, peanut butter (gasp- the horror!!) and pretty much anything that wasn't too hard or a real choking hazard.