Swedish Parents raise 2 year old with no gender identity

[AndreaisSlowlyLosingIt]

www.thelocal.se/20232/20090623/

Had a discussion with the manshape about this who seems to belive the parents are insane. I however think its quite a good idea. The child is allowed to dress itself however it feels and its wadrobe includes both boys and girls clothes.

I'd love to know what the rest of you think.

It's not intrinsically a bad idea, but I suspect that pretty soon Pop will become interested in the nature of Pop's genitalia and how that relates to Pop's parents and other children. Especially if the parents' second baby turns out to be of the opposite sex physically. But I don't think it will have done Pop any harm to have been treated in a non-gendered way by the world at large up to that point.

Until the age of about 3 yrs and depending on what you tell the child, they dont know what sex they are. If not told then child will wear what ever it fancies not really caring what he/she looks like. Its ok i gues to do this, , ,but eventually the child will realise what sex it is at school etc.
I dont much like the Macho breed and the female regarded as the home maker, chief cook and bottle washer whilst DP sits watching the footy. We should all do all roles, nappy changing, cooking cleaning and fine to work F/T as mum as well.

i'm not sure about this.

I know my girls and what they were like as young babies/toddlers and they were girls. We had a range of toys, cars, dolls, happyland ball pit ect and DD1's toy of choice from as soon as she could move and get it was a soft rag doll she loved it and cared for it. She has never shown any interest in cars other than as something to drive her dolls around in. I think children are different. With DD2 we had a wide range of toys and she favoured the dolls and doll accessories but i think that was more because thats what DD1 was playing with.

They aren't ignoring them, though -- if the child wants to wear sparkly pink dresses and plait the hair of My Little Ponies all day, the child is able to do that, and if the child wants to run around and hit things with sticks all day then the child is also able to do that. Any innate differences are getting a full chance to express themselves. It's anything other than innate differences that are being ignored.

I dont think they are messing with the childs identity Eleanor. . .because they dont know their identity till after about 3 yrs old. Perhaps they are delaying the establishment of their childs identity more like. ??

Well, they may be able to "avoid preconceived notions of how people should be treated if male or female" but they are leaving Pop open to a huge amount of preconceived ideas about how people should be treated if they have weirdos for parents!

I suspect once Pop is spending a lot of time with other children, he/she will want to know which category he/she is in. That doesn't automatically mean playing only with cars, or always wearing pink - believe it or not, it is possible to raise a child in ways that are not that stereotyped.

The problem with this for me is that, as EleanorHandbasket says, the parents are using their child as a guinea pig for their beliefs. As far as I can see, they have no way of knowing what effects this will have on Pop as Pop grows up. They believe that it will have very positive effects, but belief is not the same as knowledge, and to me, the risk that it could backfire horribly seems too great to risk a child's wellbeing on.

The parents might be committed to this idea but what's the betting there isn't 'granny' in the background somewhere saying 'go on dear, here's a lovely dolly/motor car for you'? LOL

I would imagine that, living with his/her own parents, Pop will already have seen that there is a difference physically. Pop won't be interested in that difference yet, but will develop an interest quite soon. At this point, Pop will, presumably, become of his/her own genitalia and identify with whichever parent has a dangly thing (or doesn't have one).

They're really only going to be able to keep it a secret from others; Pop will work it out for him/her self soon enough.

WTF is a 'manshape'?

If it is simply a question of giving the child a gender-neutral name and an ungendered choice of clothing/activities/toys, and not telling others the childs gender it seems like quite an interesting and positive thing to do. I hope that it would involve answering all Pop's questions honestly and unmanipulatively, so that the experiment (or its first phase) would end when Pop is old enough to talk about Pop's gender or about Pop's genitals.

Apart from witholding info from others it seems only like a mild extension of what many families aim at.

Hmm, but Pop almost certainly does spend a lot of time with other children, since almost all Swedish children are at nursery by 2.

It surprises me that Pop's not got interested in this. DS was busy dividing the world up into male and female around 2nd birthday - rather flatteringly pointing at a poster of a glamorous couple on holiday and crowing "mummy! pappa!". Lots of questions about who's a boy and who's a girl and why boys only grow up to be men and not women during that year.

We've always minimized the gender stereotyping for DS - not dressing him in girls' clothes but often in neutral ones, making sure he has dolls, playing caring role games with him etc. He nonetheless has a preference for fire engines, cars etc. He does take care of his doll sometimes, and much more than boys who haven't had this encouragement, but has much less interest in it than the little girls who visit us do.

The thing is - the parents (and indeed any other primary carer, since they will end up changing Pop's nappy) do know his/her sex. Whatever they do, however gender 'value free' they think they're being, Pop's parents can't get around the fact that the people who spend most time with him/her, do know his/her sex and this knowledge will influence their attitude toward Pop (even if, as Eleanor suggests, it just makes them overcompensate).
So, while it may be an interesting experiment, it's nothing like as radical as the article seems to suggest.

You should read the case of David Reimer A baby boy born in 1965 who, due to an accident that destroyed his penis during a circumcision operation age 6 months, was subsequently put into an experimental programme to re-align his gender by treating him from that point as a girl. The doctor in charge believed that gender was learned rather than innate. David Reimer went on to live a very unhappy life culminating in depression and suicide.

Many gay people will tell you that they did not conform to their gender stereotype growing up, despite their parents' best efforts to steer them in a particular direction. Many straight people will tell you exactly the same thing.

The point learned from all this being.... that however you raise a child, whether consciously as one gender or another or neither, they will find their own gender identity and sexual orientation regardless. What they make of both will be largely dictated by the society they find themselves in. So the Pop experiment is likely to not result in anything either positive or negative. Pop will be what Pop will be.

Interesting social experiment. But that is what it is; an experiment, which raises plenty of ethical questions about bringing up your child as an experiment.

I agree, belgo. It seems like an awfully big gamble to take with your child's mental health, when there appears to be little or no evidence on the long term effects of doing this.

maltesers - I tried to put my DS in a dress last year at a festival where everyone wears dresses on ladies day and he absolutely had a fit. He was 2 at the time and I have never ever banged on about him being a boy - I am an LP and didn't even buy him any 'boys' toys until he clamoured for vehicles at the age of 18m. So he had quite a strong sense of gender identity long before he turned 3

I agree with belgo - I dislike the idea of parents raising their child as an experiment

But don't we all do that to a greater or lesser degree? Experimenting with our children's lives? Moulding & shaping their behaviour according to our own values? Usually the rationale is pretty benign and for the best intentions We might be trying to correct something we felt didn't go right in our own childhoods or we have some strongly held belief that we want to pass on and make happen. The people that deny their children junk food or frog-march them to violin lessons against their will have the best intentions but aren't they both a form of experiment?