The Times today,article on gender neutral parenting.

[TheTimesMNer]

Thought you may be interested!!!

[claig]

Thank you, Rupert

[yama]

Ditto SGM

[tengherksamerkin]

Yes, ditto. Interested in all sorts of ways (teaching language and gender at AS Eng after Xmas break, for one) but WILL NOT swell Murdoch's coffers.

[ISNT]

Yes copy and paste please

Would be interested in reading it.

[sethstarofbethlehemsmum]

is it for or against?

[tabouleh]

Yay for the MN namecheck. I have the actual paper here so can't type it all out but here is a quote:

"I grew up believing that feminism was a battle that had been won. I bought into the whole Spice Girls idea of empowerment. Then I read a thread on Mumsnet about rape that made me question my thinking!".

I know that the person featured in the story "TheTimesMNer" wants to remain incognito so lets make sure we don't speculate/link MN names etc.

[tabouleh]

Just to set the scene for the article it is called "what are little boys made of?" Is it possible to raise children free from gender stereotypes? New research suggests it's an uphill struggle, says Linda Blair, but the three families interviewed here disagree.

[ISNT]

Sounds interesting. Shame I don't have it!

Well done TheTimesMNer on being in the papers, I wish I knew what you'd said!

[lalalonglegs]

Here you go:-

Is it possible to raise children free of gender stereotypes? Rachel Bell talks to three families who think it is

If you?ve been buying Christmas presents for the children in your life recently, you?ll no doubt have realised how difficult it is to find toys or clothes that don?t announce whether they are intended for a boy (blue, strong and probably aggressive) or a girl (pink, soft and cuddly). In spite of all the progress that has been made in the fight against sexism, why do such stereotypes persist? Didn?t the feminists of the 1970s envisage a world in which boys were equally happy playing with dolls as with cars, and girls with soldiers as with Wendy houses?

Are we as a society to blame for this strong distinction? New research suggests that forces stronger than nurture are at work. An article in the latest edition of Current Biology, out today, says that when playing in the wild, both male and female chimpanzees use sticks as toys, but the females are more likely to treat the sticks as dolls, ?mothering? them. This is due to ?biological predilections?, say the researchers.

To really answer the question of nature versus nurture, we need to understand the difference between sex and gender. Sex is defined biologically, by our genetic make-up, our hormones and our anatomy. Gender, on the other hand, is culturally defined ? the meanings of ?male? and ?female? gender are created by the people who live in any given society, and those definitions can vary enormously according to personal opinion and the culture in which we live.

There are two reasons why there always seem to be such definite, either/or distinctions between the definitions of male and female. One is commercial and the other is cognitive; that is, related to our understanding of the world and ourselves.

Commercially, creating as wide a difference as possible between what?s meant for boys and what?s for girls is clever, because that will sell more products. If you have a daughter, for example, and your second child?s a boy, the pressure?s on to start all over again with new clothes and toys. You can see how well this works if you consider this: psychologists have found that families with only daughters tend to produce more ?feminine? girls and families who have only sons tend to have more ?masculine? boys, whereas the distinction is less clear-cut in families with both. That makes sense when you think about the hand-me-downs that pass through families.

The gender distinction is further reinforced in our society by an interesting prejudice: it seems we?re more tolerant of girls who dress up in boys? clothing and play with boys? toys than we are of boys who dress up in girls? clothing and play with girls? toys.

The second reason is that young children need distinct categories to help them to understand themselves and the world about them. One of the first ways they?ll identify themselves is by gender, and in order to make their choice young children need clear-cut categories. As they mature, however, they?ll become able to understand that these categories needn?t be rigidly defined. Therefore, when they?re older the best thing we can do is to encourage them to think carefully about gender differences themselves, rather than to insist they share our views, however liberal we feel those views might be.

What this all boils down to is that there?s really no need to worry about the gender implications of the gifts you select this Christmas. Just choose what you?d like to give and what you think the recipients will appreciate, and enjoy their delight on Christmas Day.

Linda Blair is the author of The Happy Child: Everything You Need to Know to Raise Enthusiastic, Confident Children (Piatkus, 2009)

THE PARENTS WHO ARE STRIVING FOR NEUTRALITY

?Sammy is learning to crochet. He?s good?
Lisa-Marie Taylor, 40, has a full-time job in human genetic therapies. Her partner Howard Lewis, 43, is a business consultant. They live in Surrey with Lisa-Marie?s son Sammy, 11, while Howard?s sons, aged 7 and 14, mainly reside with their mothers

I?ve brought Sammy up without sexual stereotypes as much as possible. He has been free to play with whatever he chooses. He?s had dolls, a pram, fairy dresses and enjoyed them as much as his cars, planes and trains.

Sammy did become aware that some people disagreed with his toys and would hide them when certain visitors came. Close friends were never a problem ? they are all completely accepting of Sammy, but if someone came round who we didn?t know so well, he would hide his ?girls?? toys under my bed. He also asked me once to please say that the fairy dress belonged to a girl he knew rather than admit that it was his.

Sammy has been home-tutored for the past three years. Our tutor is a staunch feminist; she just made a snow-woman with Sammy! She has a library of feminist books, and makes sure that Sammy?s activities aren?t just typical boys? activities, but things like yoga too. She is teaching him to crochet and he has made a couple of dresses ? he?s really rather good at this!

I think Sammy has benefited immensely from home schooling. Recently he and his tutor discussed a display that I put together on international feminist subvertising ? stickering of sexist posters for a conference.

He has also explored equality of pay, and how group action changed the law so that lap-dancing clubs are no longer licensed like coffee shops.

We have been really careful to introduce Sammy to the children of like-minded people. We hang out with home-educating groups, feminist friends both male and female, and we have friends of different sexual orientations, races and abilities. They tend to be free-thinking and nonconformist ? all qualities that help Sammy to learn. His friends are all ages, all sexes, unlike in school where children are separated very much in terms of age and sex.

His male friends may sew, knit, cook, dance, try make-up on and dress up in sparkly clothes sometimes. Some have long hair. All are accepting of each other. I also make sure Sammy is responsible for house jobs, the same as everyone else. It?s unbelievable to me that I still come across people who see it as a girl?s role to tidy and clean yet allow boys not to bother!

You can?t stop children from encountering stereotyping outside the home, but we combat this by talking. Whenever we see an advert that conforms to stereotypes, I can?t help but challenge it. Sammy will challenge people if they say ?he? rather than ?he or she?.

Despite the support from the majority of friends and family, some have had issues with Sammy?s upbringing. Only yesterday I was told that ?really, his hair needs cutting?. At times I?ve felt that my parenting has been trashed simply because I let Sammy have his hair the way he wants it.

Yet Sammy has a fabulous and happy life filled with friends, freedom and love. He is imaginative, empathic, fun, intelligent and courageous. My hopes are that he will grow up to be himself. I want him to tap into the wealth of real feelings that come with being a free individual.

?I was disappointed when my daughter wanted to be a model?
Melodie, 41, and Daniel Holliday, 47, are lecturers at the London College of Communication. They live in North London with their two daughters, Delilah, 14, and Ursula, 13

Melodie says: I thought that being a forceful woman who likes the freedom to express herself would be enough. But more talking with my daughters about feminism became necessary. Delilah and Ursula alert me to things that go on ? girls trying to get the attention of boys by drinking or smoking; this need to show you?re so sexual. I?m disappointed that so many girls in 2010 think that?s the most important thing.

Secondary school is crunch time for both genders to make decisions about themselves and we started to have a lot more discussions ? about politics, relationships, body image, everything.

I did a fashion degree and I?m in a band, so I?ve long been concerned about young women portrayed in the music and fashion industries, and we talk about why those representations are narrow and harmful. One episode in particular rang alarm bells: when the pop star Rihanna was beaten by her then boyfriend, Chris Brown, Ursula said that a lot of girls thought Rihanna was to blame. I was horrified. These kind of things come up all the time.

Delilah writes songs, plays guitar and piano while Ursula plays the drums; I encourage their creativity. When Delilah didn?t know what to write about, I said, express your own lives. They named their band Skinny Girl Diet. Delilah explained to me recently that she was going through a phase where she wanted to be thinner and that was an actual diet she found on the internet. I was really disappointed when I found out that Delilah was considering becoming a model, because of all that entails.

Recently, I attended a parenting workshop, How to Break the Stereotypes at Home, at the Feminism in London conference, while my daughters took part in the workshop for teenagers, Dealing with Pressure. Delilah said she really liked the workshop because it was nice to be in a room full of people that had the same views as her.

Ursula said that before the workshop, she thought that feminism was for women only but there was a boy there who agreed with feminism and she said she found that truly inspiring. The workshop showed that feminism is not about hating boys and men.

Dan says: I don?t like to put any labels on myself but I am sympathetic to the feminist cause, as I am to any form of equality. Since our daughters started secondary school, I have noticed there are lots of girls who dress to impress. They?re bombarded with images of women as sex objects, women as decoration. But Delilah and Ursula have very strong identities; they are strong individuals. I don?t think they?re suddenly going to turn into Barbie dolls. They reflect their mother more than Paris Hilton.

?The boys have dolls in pushchairs?
Kellie-Jay Keen, 36, is a full- time mother who is about to launch a clothing brand. Her husband Ryan Minshull, 36, is a global conference director. They live in Bristol with their daughter Mabel, 4 and their sons Roman, 7, Carter 8, and Artemus, 2

Kellie-Jay says: We?re from very different backgrounds. My father did lots of housework, Ryan?s dad was a builder with traditional values at home. Ryan had a pair of breasts on his cake when he was 21!

I grew up believing that feminism was a battle that had been won. I bought into the whole Spice Girls idea of empowerment. Then I read a thread on Mumsnet about rape that made me question my thinking.

I?ve come to the debate quite late, so while we?ve not restricted our boys in their choices, we?re now filling my daughter Mabel?s room ? where there are lots of pink dresses and dolls ? with different books where the female character doesn?t needs rescuing! I am also using Letterbox Library children?s books to find more diverse stories featuring children with disabilities, gay and ethnic minority characters.

I do not subscribe to the notion that boys are more violent, so my children were taught that hitting is not acceptable and we never say, ?Boys will be boys?. I hope we?ve equipped our children with the right words to resolve a dispute. We don?t expose them to violence, including computer games, cartoons such as Ben 10, or wrestling.

I hate those T-shirts that say Little Monster for boys and Little Angel for girls ? I think of our two-year-old as high-energy, not a Little Tearaway. I took Mabel out of her ballet class because it was all, let?s put lipstick on, let?s get Mummy?s heels , aren?t we the prettiest. What if she turns 18 thinking that prettiness is all there is to her?

When Mabel announced that she wanted to marry a rich man who?d buy her a pink house, I took her out and showed her all the women doing jobs. When she told us that she wants to be a doctor this week, my husband and I high-fived.

Ryan says: Kellie opened my eyes to sexism. She is very open-minded; the boys have dolls in pushchairs. We never say ?That?s for girls?, or ?That?s for boys?. I would cry in front of the kids if I was upset. We let them know it?s OK to cry. I want to give the boys confidence to talk about feelings, allowing them to resolve their anger without throwing a punch.

Interviews by Rachel Bell

[Chibubilwee]

Article link (for the next 24 hours) till 9pm on 22.12.10:

www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/life/families/article2850821.ece

[cakeretention]

"The gender distinction is further reinforced in our society by an interesting prejudice: it seems we?re more tolerant of girls who dress up in boys? clothing and play with boys? toys than we are of boys who dress up in girls? clothing and play with girls? toys."

...and here lies the core of the whole problem with equality. Historically (and probably because of a Christian past), society views women as inferior to men. Girls who do "boy things" or who dress up in "boy clothes" are seen by all of us, including dyed-in-the-wool feminists as enhancing their status in society.

Conversely, boys who do "girl things" or behave in a way that is "girly" are reducing their status. They are "sissies" or objects of ridicule.

Unfortunately for us, and because this difference exists deep in our subconscious, it is almost impossible to address. None of us wants to be the trailblazer whose DS wears a pink dress to school or who takes his dolls out for walks in a pram. Even the family above with a home schooled son have to hide his "girls toys" for fear of ridicule.

Yet until we manage to address this, we will continue to raise boys who think they are superior and girls who think they are inferior without ever knowing why.

[itsawonderfuldarleneconnorlife]

It is much easier to gender neutral parent boys than girls.

[notjustapotforsoup]

Fashions change all the time, though, cakeretention. It was only in the last 80-100 years that pink became the colour for girls, for example. But you're right about the superiority/inferiority problem and when fashions change it may be that other things fill the vacuum. I think (hope) it might be moving slowly in the right direction, but women and will have to be active (rather than passive) in their choices much more often.

[snowflake69]

Having seen lots of children go through child care settings I have seen many with prams with dolls in. They bring in their own from home. I have never met a boy that doesnt play with dolls and I have never met a girl that doesnt play with cars within a setting. Also in my current setting all the children fight over who gets pink eg plates, cups etc. Its constant because they all want that colour they all try and fight until they get pink. The second you come out the kitchen they start fighting saying I want pink, give me pink.

Additionally out of all outfits at the nursery the most popular for both sexes are Disney Princesses. We have pics of some of the boys as princesses for the front of their work books. None of the parents mind and we have never heard anyone say thats for girls, or thats for boys. I think children who have been in childcare from a young age dont have preferences for one type of toy.

When my husband was growing up he had a doll called Amy who he had until he was 8 and no one ever said anything to him. That was back in the 80s.

[anastaisia]

snowflake,

on the otherhand my brother had a doll that he asked for for his 3rd (I think) birthday. It was his baby and he looked after it and took it to lots of places.

Then over the summer (so only 3.5ish) 2 bigger boys on a day out were so mean to him about it that he only ever played with it in the house after that. That was in the 80s too, and the bigger boys must only have been about 6 themselves.

None of us knew exactly what they'd said to him but my mum and dad weren't able to reassure him that it was fine to take the doll out still :(

Your setting sounds really positive about it being fine to like anything - they aren't all like that though. I've worked in a number and they vary hugely.

[snowflake69]

I have worked in quite a few round the country but have never experienced anyone say/or remark that anything is for girls or this is for boys etc.

All of my current children are from council houses/hb residences. Nobody really cares what the kids play with I dont think. I think its different at the poorer end of the spectrum and the kids are left to get on with it and play with whatever makes them happy. Nobody is pushing them in to what they want to do when they grow up, they are instead just playing.

Also with my husband it never bothered him. He was brought up in Newcastle and no one said anything to him about having the doll. He is also one of the most popular boys in his year. I think if you dont think its anything to be ashamed of then no one will say anything to you.

[Treats]

DH and I had an interesting chat about this article last night. He said that he felt really sorry for Sammy. He's broadly supportive of my wishes regarding not buying pink things for DD but he felt quite strongly that Sammy's mother was going too far.

My response was that we shouldn't make assumptions about how children will grow and develop based on what their gender is. To my mind, it starts with girls only being 'allowed' to have pink things and develops into their only being one kind of body shape and hairstyle that's acceptable, to there being only a limited range of careers that they can aspire to. Our DD is already (at 15 months) developing a very definite personality which is very specific to her and nothing to do with the fact that she's a girl.

We agreed that we would both do our best to introduce our DD to as broad a range of experiences as possible and not to limit her because she's a girl. And the same goes for any sons that we might have in future.

But gender stereotyping exists in the world - partly, as the article points out, for commercial reasons - even if we don't like it or agree with it. I actually wondered if Sammy's mother was using him to try to change the status quo rather than genuinely allowing him to be the person he wants to be.

BTW - agree with cakeretention that boys aren't allowed to like girly things or wear dresses because anything feminine is regarded as intrinsically inferior.

[TheTimesMNer]

Both my DSs have pink tees.

[ISNT]

Interesting.

The thing that struck me was that in the 70s and 80s when people talked about doing gender neutral parenting type stuff, I think it was more extreme - to me the idea of a boy playing with a doll or a girl playing with a car isn't particularly groundbreaking it's just normal. So my first question is, have we really gone that far backwards from where we were in the 70s/80s in terms of clothing and toys - I think the answer is yes isn't it. But then like snowflake - for preschoolers anyway - I know and have seen loads of boys playing with dolls in pushchairs and girls with cars etc and no-one bats an eyelid. The thins I notice more is the expectation on girls to look a certain way and the enormously positive reaction when they do. I have girls and they're both small so not really noticed what goes on with boys. Oh apart from one time a little boy being urged to climb something high and he really didn't want to, but a girl had just done it and the dad was applying quite a lot of pressure. I think that sort of thing is more common, a girl would be allowed not to/not encouraged to do something physically difficult in the first place maybe.

I also agree with the superior activities/inferior activities thing which cakeretention talked about - I think it turns from an indulgent eye to something worse as they get older. And you have this double whammy of "boys" activities are superior - but girls "aren't allowed" to do them and there can be consequences if they do.

Finally hello thetimesMNer I didn't realise this was you! Nice one

[ISNT]

Oh final point.

So because some chimps have played with sticks in a certain way, we are to infer that this absolutely reflects a truth about humans?

My first question is - do chimps know what sex they are - do they emulate adults of the same sex? Do chimps have gender roles?

The second is that their conclusion is, what? Females are inherently nurturing and males are inherently violent? How shit. Especially for men. And strangely, in my life, I know loads of nurturing men and no-one who is violent. So stick that in your pipe and smoke it, chimp researchers

[SantasSackura]

cakeretention OMG, how did I not realise that the reason it was not okay for boys to play with girls' toys because they were effectively losing status when doing so, whereas tomboy girls are acceptable because they are seen as increasing their status; and it's seen as perfectly acceptable for any human being to want to be a member of the dominant class. Oh, it's so obvious! How did I not realise...
DS loves prams, dolls and whatever, and I'm not bothered at all, but there it is, it is different when girls play with boys' toys

THeTimesMNer, well done on the article

[ISNT]

"An article in the latest edition of Current Biology, out today, says that when playing in the wild, both male and female chimpanzees use sticks as toys, but the females are more likely to treat the sticks as dolls, ?mothering? them. This is due to ?biological predilections?, say the researchers."

In fact it doesn't say what the males did with them. Don't know where I got the violent thing from - maybe that's what things like this usually say. For all we know the male chimps were using the sticks as knitting needles and knitting tiny clothing to go on the baby stick dolls...