Couple Finally Reveals Their Child's Gender...Five Years After Birth(!!)

[BrenDAnn]

I was perusing my Facebook feed and this gem popped up. http://shine.yahoo.com/parenting/cou...180300388.html

Now, first of all, let me say that I agree with many of the comments: Your child should NOT be made into a social/psychological experiment. Really? You're gonna do more damage to the kid this way than you would letting their gender be known to them and everyone, but still letting them have freedom to decide on their toys/clothes/etc. Also, it seems like the boy is only free to choose what he wanted as long as it fits what the parents want-- overly masculine shirts, for example, are not allowed. As someone in the comments said, what if he wanted to wear them? You'd deny him that, all while saying you're allowing him freedom and "not slotting him in"? Bullshit. I'm not a parent (just an aunt who loves to overly spoil her nieces and nephews) but I have to say this is just pure insanity!

[Andara Bledin]

I'd be very curious to know who chose the term "hyper-masculine." And is restricting your kids from wearing "hyper-masculine" t-shirts a big deal? Or only when it's coupled with other stuff, and if so, why should that matter?

The parents aren't wrong that people will make completely arbitrary assumptions about what is "appropriate" based on nothing more than the expressed gender of their child. There is no way to avoid that other than denying them the knowledge to use and force those around the child to actually get to know him or her, instead.

There's a lot of kneejerkery going on around both this couple and the other who is doing the same or similar, but I continue to fail to see how this is particularly harmful to the child since they will express what they express when they're ready, no matter whether the parents pigeon-hole them into a specific role or allow them the entire sandbox until the child either asks for guidance or makes their own decisions.

^-.-^

[anakhouri]

What gets me is that they say they want him to wear whatever he likes without being restricted by gender stereotypes. Yet he is not allowed to wear 'hyper-masculine' stuff (how is a little kid hyper-masculine?). So what they are saying is, he can wear what he likes as long as it is neutral or girly. If he wants a Jolly Roger t-shirt or camo pants, no way. Princess dress? Sure. Like there's something wrong with being a boy. That seems hypocritical to me. You're not really offering your kid ALL the options that are out there then.

[BlaqueKatt]

What gets me is that they say they want him to wear whatever he likes without being restricted by gender stereotypes. Yet he is not allowed to wear 'hyper-masculine' stuff (how is a little kid hyper-masculine?). So what they are saying is, he can wear what he likes as long as it is neutral or girly. If he wants a Jolly Roger t-shirt or camo pants, no way. Princess dress? Sure. Like there's something wrong with being a boy. That seems hypocritical to me. You're not really offering your kid ALL the options that are out there then.

Well if I said I'd let my daughter wear anything she wanted, but drew the line at anything from victoria's secret or fredrick's of hollywood, then I guess I'm a bad parent for not letting my child partake of ALL the options now am I? I could allow my hypothetical 5 year old to wear makeup, a push up bra and a miniskirt because she "wants to", but as a parent I can say no, am I sending her the message "it's not ok to be a girl" with that?

Maybe the parents disagree with camoflage clothing(don't believe in hunting or military), stuff with guns on it(gi joe sometimes has weapons), things that depict or allude to violence(skulls, the jolly roger flag), they aren't saying "its not ok to be a boy" they're saying "we don't like this".

[anakhouri]

Um, the article specifically says he is not allowed to wear 'hyper-masculine' clothes. I don't know if that the word the parents used to the describe it, or if the article writer is trying to stir things up, but if the parents did say it that way, to me that means they want to make their child gender neutral by disallowing things that are, in their opinion, too 'male', not that they have a problem with violence or what-have-you.

I don't think you can compare camo pants and skull t-shirts to whorish clothes for girls, that is an entirely different discussion (that's saying, 'It's not OK to dress like a ho when you're 10', not 'It's not OK to be a girl'. I'm cool whether my son wants to wear a robot shirt or a pink dress, but I wouldn't be cool if he wanted to dress like a ho).

This is more like saying your daughter can't wear glittery Hello Kitty dresses and cute knee socks because they are too hyper-feminine.

[Ree]

Well if I said I'd let my daughter wear anything she wanted, but drew the line at anything from victoria's secret or fredrick's of hollywood, then I guess I'm a bad parent for not letting my child partake of ALL the options now am I? I could allow my hypothetical 5 year old to wear makeup, a push up bra and a miniskirt because she "wants to", but as a parent I can say no, am I sending her the message "it's not ok to be a girl" with that?

Huge, huge difference between not letting a girl wear those things that are designed for more mature women, and "hyper-sexual" in style and nature, and in not letting a boy wear cargo pants or a shirt with a skull logo, or that is obviously a masculine style. (I would still love to have clarification on just what "hyper-masculine" means, because cargo pants and a skull on a shirt seems like very silly criteria, since I know a few girls who love skulls and camo and that type of thing.)

I find it very interesting that you equated dressing provocatively with feminine. I don't see that they are the same thing at all.

[Kheldarson]

I'm kinda concerned about the mom intervening in the school's dress code too to keep her son gender neutral. While in kindergarten it's not going to matter much (hopefully), if it continues it will get him singled out. And I don't think that's what mom wants.

Frankly, this article just made my head hurt, all around.

[KabeRinnaul]

Standard new-age derp that says gender identity is a harmful social construct, masculinity is the unnatural result of marketing, and any sense of sexuality is to be banished from a child's development? I think I've heard this before, and it really doesn't surprise me.

[BlaqueKatt]

I find it very interesting that you equated dressing provocatively with feminine. I don't see that they are the same thing at all.

I find it interesting that a miniskirt and makeup are "hyper sexual" and "dressing like a ho"(fyi both fredrick's and victoria's have some very nice clothing-heck I see more tweens in the store in the mall than I do adults, and they're buying sweats and yoga pants)-have you seen the "pink" line-sweats are in no manner provocative, and victoria's secret is an exclusively feminine store, they sell nothing for men at all, which is why I define it as feminine. Look at their sweaters, Jeans, suits, etc. all feminine, most not the least bit provocative.

FYI-I define(and webster's) a miniskirt as above the knee-which hey look all the toddler skirts from target are listed as being "above the knee"-"OMG target is sexualizing our childrens!"

[Kheldarson]

There's two types of above the knee skirts, honestly. There's the modest one-or-two inches above the knee types (which include most skirts for toddlers) and then there's the modern definition for miniskirts type of skirt which is mid-thigh or above. And usually tight as to look like you just took a belt of cloth and tied it around your bottom and called it done.

But, yes, at a certain age, above the thigh skirts and makeup is sexualizing. There's no reason for children to be wearing makeup. Makeup is supposed to highlight good areas and hide defects. Children don't need that. Children also don't need short skirts that show their bottoms, tight tops, bras, fishnets, string bikinis, or anything like that.

Children do need to be given options, but should learn how to dress modestly, in whatever colors or patterns they like.

[Sleepwalker]

Eh, kid is young enough for it not to matter one way or another, and I love the head explosions this causes.

[BrenDAnn]

True, Sleepwalker, he's young enough NOW, but what about down the road? His parents, IMO, are setting him up to be singled out and picked on. Hey, I could be wrong too, and like I said...I'm not a parent.

[Ree]

I have to agree with the comments regarding the viewing of masculine tendencies as wrong.

Yes, they are making a point that gender stereotypes are bad, but it seems to me that they are actually leaning more toward the view that it's OK if the boy accepts the female traits but completely wrong if he accepts the masculine traits.

He's a boy, yet they specifically state that they frown on "hyper masculine" clothing choices, but there is no mention of not allowing him "hyper feminine" choices.

They are quite content with him wearing his sister's clothing if he chooses, but draw a line at typically male clothes like cargo pants and T-shirts with "masculine" type logos, etc.

The picture shows him with some purply satin gown with feathery type accents and beads. That seems rather hyper feminine to me.

If they're going gender neutral, then they should be gender neutral.

They are sending a completely negative message toward masculine gender and implying that there is something wrong with that.

What's wrong with providing all the options available and just letting the child choose his preference?

[Gravekeeper]

The picture shows him with some purply satin gown with feathery type accents and beads. That seems rather hyper feminine to me.

If they're going gender neutral, then they should be gender neutral.

Yeah, I'm trying to figure that one out. He's allowed to dress in skirts, girl's swimsuits and tu-tus or as the spitting image of, well, Prince. But anything in the other direction is "hyper masculine"? That's not gender neutral at all. Plus she said she's trying to avoid stereotyping but has just tossed him out there onto the internet. She just typecast him for anyone that ever Googles him for the rest of his life.

If he ( honestly I fear inevitably at this rate ) gets bullied, he's going to blame his parents down the line. You don't perform social experiments on your kids >.>

[Lace Neil Singer]

If they feel that strongly, then why didn't they do it themselves rather than put their kid thru a social experiment that is sadly going to end in the child being bullied or worse later?

When I was a kid, I prefered to wear my older brother's handmedowns and my parents were happy enough to let me; however, they didn't refuse to allow me to wear anything girly at all. The whole "gender stereotype" thing is only wrong if parents refuse to allow their children to wear certain clothing items, or play with certain toys; ie, forcing a girl to wear only pink and not allowing a boy to play with Barbie. These parents seem to be ironically doing exactly that by saying their son can wear feminine clothing but not masculine.