Aibu in thinking this is explotative

[userfame]

I can't link it but I read an article today about a woman who blogs about her son whom she refers to as gender non conforming. He's 7 and from the flick through I gave the blog it's about his life and the family's. raisingmyrainbow.com/

She's also got what appears to be a popular book out.

My query is whether any agrees that this is exploitative of the child? What's really interesting is that on the few posts I looked at the photos are all carefully taken so as not to show the little child's face. So clearly there's some thought given to privacy but it can't be anything other than a nod to it when the whole blog identifies the family.

Please don't get me wrong. I don't think the child has a thing in the world to be ashamed of but surely it must be weird to have a parent so invested in your differences that she's making a living out of publishing about you? And what will he feel when he's old enough to make a decision about how much of his life he wants to share on the net.

Maybe the same could be said about any blogging parent. I don't even put photos of mine on Facebook.

was the article in the times? i read an article about it the other day.
yes, i did wonder if he will thank her
it also seemed a big fuss over nothing, from the article, as if a boy has to be society's idea of a boy, or he is gender confused
eg liking pink
when i was young, toys weren't colour coded
pink used to be a manly colour
so how can liking pink be an example of gender confusion?

anyway, ds loved pink, dolls, dresses and dora when he was young. i really never felt a need to worry about gender identity. she says she started the blog as when she googled, she couldnt find anything. quite possibly as noone else thought it worth getting het up about

I agree. A boy likes pink...so what?
What's really interesting is that she's made this into her career. Writing about her son's supposedly radical differences. What's he supposed to do with that? Being blog fodder

Once again, I can't seem to get through the first paragraph of a post on a parenting blog.

Am I dead inside?

A lot of people have made a lot of money by writing about their families, including children. Julie Myerson got crucified for it on MN (but she also paid for their nice house & things out of the profits, so hard to know if her kids really want to complain).

Just saw the title. Don't know what explotative is! I meant exploitative.

I didn't know who Julie Myerson is. I've just looked it up. There are obvious parallels but the blog linked up above just seems so horribly intrusive. Her whole USP seems to be that she has such a "different" kid and here are all the ways he's so brilliantly different.

That's faintly disturbing. Child likes "girly" stuff, mother makes huge song and dance and a career out of it and tells herself and everyone else what a great person she is for doing it.

How about - child is who he/she is, no one makes a big deal out of it, and they go on to make their own decisions. WTAF is wrong with that approach? If this child suddenly decides he wants to "conform", then he deprives his mother of her income. No pressure there, then .

To be fair, i think some of the things the child is supposed to have said are slightly exaggerated. Fair enough my oldest is only 4 so don't know how a seven year old expresses themselves but it just seems slightest forced to how the mum would want it to sound, if that makes sense.
Also i don't really think the contents of the purse are anything shocking, if my son filled up a bag (in the uk so don't call it a purse anyway) he would have all kinds of crap in there and he absolutely loves pink and watches Sophia the first but also likes red, blue, green, purple. He adores trains, loves racing cars and football. There is a little girl on his football team, noone bats an eyelid. The sooner we learn that kids are kids and they like what they like the better.

I read the article and to be fair to the mother, if its all true, it's a bit more than him just liking girly stuff. On the SN boards there is a lot of support for the idea that you know if your child is a bit different way before any outsiders will admit / acknowledge the depth of the problem, so maybe we should give the parents some credit here. As to the blog, well, she does explain that her reason for starting it was to attract attention so that she could find out how to help and understand her son. If it has become bigger than that then maybe it will help others in a similar situation.

Pink is a masculine colour and lucky in Thai culture. Some of the most macho blokes I know, who are Thai boxers in the uk, wear pink shorts and paint their toe nails pink. I find it very hard to stomach using a social construct to decide a child is " different".

Presuming fairylights that there is a "problem" is it really fair to put the kid under a microscope and record his life for posterity when he couldn't possible understand or appreciate the ramifications of that?
I think if when I hit 18 I'd become aware of that my formative years and every little event during them had been broadcast that I'd have been devastated.
And as stealth said how do you even begin to appreciate the pressure of his "difference" being his Mother's raison d'être?

I agree. We do tend to know if there is something a bit different about our own children. But why try fitting her child into this neat little box of non-conformity? Why not just let him/her be their own person who is comfortable with their place in the world?

He/she might like pink and Lego and fairies and chess and books about cars and all manner of other stuff but why make a 'thing' of it?

My dd (when she was much younger) liked volcanoes and fossils and polly pockets and lego and pokemon and red. But I didn't feel the need to disguise her gender in order for her to be able to like what she did.

Exploitative or not, her writing style makes me want throttle her with her own hackneyed, faux-modest laboriousness, although I acknowledge that is my personal preference and I am sure it appeals to some.

I did feel a bit sorry for the child's brother too - he is defined by his relationship to 'the most captivating child you will ever meet' and she says nothing about his that isn't couched in terms of his relationship to her gender creative wonder-child (except for one cringe-inducing sentence where she crowbars in a reference to the fact that he is at a special school for the gifted).

For every argument about how it might affect her younger son to be the subject of such a lot of his mother's work, there is also a case to be made for the damaging effects that it could have on her other son to be marginalised by his mother's continual chronicling of his brother's every move.

Oh god. She just sounds like such an utter wanker.

A special school for the gifted? Really?

Just let the poor little buggers be themselves.

It sounds to me like she is a guilty of channeling her child towards a certain stereotype as parents who won't let their sons play with a typing girly.

His interests (as defined by her) are not well rounded at all.

I used to work (as a TA) with a boy who was being raised as a girl by his mother by her choice. She refused to cut his hair or buy him boys' or even gender neutral clothing. The boy was miserable. There was extensive SS intervention, it was heart breaking. As least CJ seems to enjoy his life.

In answer to your question OP, yes I do think it is exploitative.

"At the bottom of the [Xmas] list, you’ll notice he wants a WWE wrestling ring set. That one really surprised me. When asked about it, I learned that C.J. likes the figurine that it comes with (you should zoom in to take a closer look) and he thinks that ring will go well with his Monster High dolls."

You can almost hear the "phew" from Mom. He doesn't really like a boys' toy. Thank goodness.

What a surprise she live in California

the place is full of people trying not to conform but doing exactly that the pretentiousness is laughable at times

YANBU. She sounds bloody awful.

I'm with YoutheCat. The first thing that struck me (other than all the blogging awards she's received - what planet are they on?) was the Special School for the Gifted.

I think her kids are gonna have issues when they grow up.

She's basically saying her 7yo is gay. If you read 'cast of characters' section of the blog it's very clear (because her ds likes 'colour' and 'art' and 'Barbie princesses' and this has been going on for some years ).
I can't believe someone would be so keen to be SPESHUL that they would do this to their kid, decide their sexuality for them. It's one thing to put your kid in special school and promote all the G & Tness. But this is on another level.

And I don't think she's in it necessarily for the money. But most definitely for the attention.

This always pisses me off... If you read any cheap and tacky magazine, you'll find pics of kids plastered all over them as their parents sell their story! It shouldn't be allowed

Oh no, poor kid. She refers to him as 'effeminate', isn't that a bit prescriptive? He's only small still, kids change their likes and dislikes on a whim, but she is pushing him firmly in a singular direction. I wonder what she will do if he suddenly decides he wants to join the football team and get a dirt bike.

Rainbow Dash From My Little Pony: It reminds me of my mom’s book called Raising My Rainbow.

The child did not write or say that. It's total bollocks.

What a load of old crap.

And yes, it's exploitative.

I wondered was it just me.
And I hadn't even thought of the brother. Proves your point Dojo.
It's dire.

I think writing excessively about your DC is a solipsistic and that it is inappropriate.

And I agree with the posters who point out that it's bad for the DC in question (global publication of their every detail) and the other family members.