to think that when people say 'Goodness, he's such a boy', they really mean 'Goodness, isn't he ugly'?

[orangekatie]

Or am I being paranoid? Is there any way anyone could give me an answer I could ever believe? (I think he's gorgeous anyway, so I suppose it doesn't really matter...)

Well, my ds (who is now 6 and utterly, utterly gorgeous) was a bit of an odd-looking baby. I know a mother shouldn't say it, but he was not a good looking child.

I found nobody made any comments at all about his appearance. They all looked for something else to comment on .

He looked OK once he got some hair and he grew into his ears though .

Oh yes, ds did have ENORMOUS ears. He was prem, and they were bigger than Mickey's.

DS was Yoda.

Spitting image.

Apart from the colour.

I get those comments all the time about the DS's.

About the ears - DS3 is very gorgeous (of course ) but he does have very odd ears - as my (very lovely) HV said "one of his ears is still all squashed" - and it is - looks just like when they're first born and have that "squashed ear" look about him - the other one looks completely "normal"

When I first started looking at Mumsnet a while ago, there was a hilarious thread about (in post birth hormonal stupor) thinking you had given birth to the most attractive child ever and pitying everyone else in the maternity ward for the ugly critters they had produced.
Had tears of laughter rolling down my face whilst I read it - even looked at some early photos of DS (looking like George Clooney - but not in a good way, what with the jaundice) to remind myself of having thought exactly that!
He's v. gorgeous now though (obviously)!

Agree with the others -- "he's such a boy" means "he's a bit noisy" or "hmm, should he be climbing onto the kitchen counter unaided at his age?" or "does he ever sit still?". Looks don't come into it.

DS had furry little werewolf ears...

I remember when ds1 was a baby meeting two little old ladies in the supermarket. One said "Is it a boy or a girl?" and the other one ELBOWED her in the ribs and said loudly "Of course he's a boy, you'd never mistake him for a girl!"
After that I always took it that to look like a boy was a compliment, at least to old ladies.

Definately not ugly at all! My 9 month old DD has a little friend (my friend's DS) and once at mother and baby group another lady mistook him for a girl, which my friend was a little shocked at. When we were chatting about it I said "there's no way you could make such a mistake as he is such a boy!" By me saying this my friend knows that I mean that he is cute, (which he sooo is ) a bit of a cheeky monkey and for another thing he is dressed in boys clothes .

I would take it to mean a lively boy, I have one of those!
I wouldn't take it to mean he is ugly. Boys can be just as gorgeous as girls if you ask me. Loads of boys seem to have the longest eyelashes I have ever seen which make them very handsome.

Rugged and handsome, full of life and mischief.

awww no, some wee boys just really lookey likey wee boys.imo, no harm intended.dome boys look masculine and not babyish at all.

some wee boys look really masculine, like wee men

My ds (5) is stunning with extremely long eyelashes (poor dd has definitley got the short straw where they are concerned )and a really cute grin, but he is also most certainly 'such a boy' - he is never still, rarely clean, forever playing football or on the trampoline and most definitley fascinated with water, rarely staying dry for long!

er, no. Boys are not ugly just because they look like boys ... or do you think only girls look appealing?

My DS is 8mo and i would say he's 'such a boy'- meaning there's no mistaking him for a girl. I also think he's beautiful.

My DD up until maybe 18mo was often mistaken for a boy, particularly by old ladies, even when wearing bright pink outfits! Think it was the short hair...I would get upset by it a bit, even though i knew she was beautiful.

There are photos on my profile if you want to see what i mean.

I think it means they look masculine, not that they're ugly. Some babies really do seem to fit their gender while with others it's hard to tell for ages. I had four feminine-looking babies, despite two of them being boys.

Why oh why oh why, do little old ladies so often ask me, " oh, what a gorgeous baby, is it a boy? " when my daughter ( who is utterly beautiful, of course ) is dressed head to toe in pink, and is in a buggy, with a pink and white buggysnuggle on it?

Why? Why would I put my son into a pink buggy with pink clothes on? I realize eye sight may be poor as you age, but surely, common sense doesn't fade, along with colour identification, does it?

oh, and to the OP, what almost everyone has said, not ugly, just, 'such a boy" really!

Maybe it's because pink used to be strictly for boys?

"There has been a great diversity of opinion on the subject, but the generally accepted rule is pink for the boy and blue for the girl. The reason is that pink being a more decided and stronger color is more suitable for the boy, while blue, which is more delicate and dainty, is prettier for the girl.? [Ladies Home Journal, June, 1918

no.. really ? ????

Am shocked!

see?

Maybe the old ladies haven't been brainwashed into gender stereotyping, Susie.

A while back on MN there was mention that pink used to be worn by boys, pre-WW2, so maybe that's why. Also, anything goes here here in Nigeria, men wear all sorts of pink clothing without a second thought.

Lol Colditz beat me to it.

Message withdrawn