Parenting a boy is a feminist minefield!

[MadameBoolala]

I am a feminist.

I have one child, a 4 year old boy, and mainly post in conception as we have been ttc number 2 for 2 years without success now. However I am venturing onto these boards as I feel negatively judged today by someone, and my parenting is being called into question.

I won't have time to post again until I come back from work tonight- but I'm wondering aloud today if it's easier to be a feminist and a parent of a girl...

As the others said, 4mad, if your DS is confident enough not to let any teasing bother him, then why not? Bless him, sounds like he's striking a blow for subverting gender stereotypes, hats off!

It annoys me that girls are expected/encouraged to like everything pink and princessy, but it equally annoys me that boys are equally expected/encouraged to dislike those things.

Children should be allowed to follow their own tastes with minimal interference from the outside world IMO. And it's great that not all boys look down on certain things because they are deemed to be for girls.

well we have been shopping and he has a new dress, a tutu and a fairy outfit! he loves them, i did a thread in aibu to buy my ds3 (7) a party dress, the responses are fairly positive actually! i am about to update it with his purchases :)

This has been a brilliant thread. Thanks for replying everyone.

I have been so busy at work that I haven't had time to reply. I'd like to talk specifically about toys. Do people think typically 'boys' toys promote aggressive play, and is this a feminist or a social issue?

I think unbridled masculine aggression is certainly a feminist issue as well as a social one. It's hard to know whether toy guns, swords (and shoot 'em up video games) actually "promote" violence or not, although hormonal studies suggest there's an argument to say they do.

Apparently, testosterone rises in response to an aggressive or competitive situation, rather than a rise in testosterone being the precurser to or cause of aggressive behaviour. And it rises further just after the aggressive/competitive situation has abated (even higher in the "winner" of the situation than in the "loser"). In fact, testosterone rises in men even if they are only a spectator of a competitive/aggressive situation (eg, watching a football match on TV). However, there's a bit of a chicken/egg argument here - if aggression causes testosterone to rise rather than the other way round, so what? Adrenalin may have a stronger role to play, or may work by interacting with testosterone.

In fact, if I remember rightly, the hormone found to have the greatest link with excess aggression is serotonin - a lack of it. In boys/men, apparently a shortfall of serotonin tends to cause aggression and in girls/women depression. But these different reactions are probably to do with the way the different sexes are pressured by society to act out or suppress certain emotions.

Aggression - in girls and boys - can be extremely anti-social and harmful, so both sexes need to learn to control their aggressive urges (whatever role hormones may play). I think part of the problem is that aggression is often regarded as part of the "boys will be boys" mentality and is left unchecked.

do females also experience increased levels of testosterone in those circumstances IC?

Hmm. Food for thought. I've typed out several posts and then deleted them again!

SaF apparently females don't experience a noticeable rise in androgens (eg testosterone - or indeed estrogen) in that sort of situation.

One theory is that the reason males do is to make them more inclined to mate after winning a competitive situation, a hangover from pre-civilisation if you like. So I suppose the thinking is the male that performed better is the one who would then have the best chance (and be best motivated) to pass on his genes. (I think similar effects have been recorded in males of other mammal species).

or maybe sex is imprinted as a competitive or aggressive act that increases testosterone and that is the cause of them experiencing a surge and that then maps onto other experiences of aggressive/competitive behaviour. because if you look at our closest ancestors mating is pretty much being the top thug amongst the males and guarding females to rape when they show oestrus. in fact it's THE source of aggression and competition amongst the males.

so surges of testosterone may not be after aggression so they have sex but because sex is the prime expression and organising centre of aggression. doesn't sound 'nice' of course but primatology would support it i think from what i saw in my anthropology studies. females had no need to have such a response, their survival depended on cooperation with a group of females who were the core of the group and found food, raised young, led the direction the group travelled in etc whilst the males just mapped onto them and followed them.

not sure that made much sense but the way you presented it fits with how we are nowadays - as in sex being something other than aggression and physical overpowering of both other males and the female mated with. but our instincts and those kind of biochemical patterns come from much earlier stages of our evolution when sex and aggression were synonymous really.

I think I'll bow to your superior anthropological knowledge there, SaF. That sounds like a credible theory to me. Albeit one that doesn't sit comfortably with our modern take on things.

not holding myself up as an expert btw!! just thinking it through and theorising.

realistically i don't think chimps had clitoris' or enjoyed sex - it was literally being grabbed by a very aggressive male and shagged for a few seconds from behind. not really comparable to our modern interpretation of sex and sexual relations.

(disclaimer - i don't know if chimps had clitoris'! i do know that there are a lot of theories about the development of breasts to emulate buttocks as epigamic markers that then encouraged ventro-ventro sex which is theorised to encourage eye contact and bonding leading to better input to infants from the male etc. most of the theories read like utter bs frankly. i don't remember any mention of when clitoris' developed or whether they were always there)

Thing - I love all the academic stuff and the anthropological debate but for me at the moment it is about what do I do? How do I know I'm getting it right with my 4 year old?

*Thing is

wondered who Thing was

my son is 5. i suppose the main thing i do is challenge stereotypes - re that's for girls/boys etc. i also intervened at school when i kept hearing he wasn't 'allowed' to play with girls anymore because boy X says so and it became apparent that boy X was having way too much sway over the boys in the class.

i spoke to the teacher the first time with little result and then i spoke to the teacher with ds and let him explain it in then 4yo terms of what was going on. then things did change and ds is happily playing with a range of children again rather than being dominated by this one boy. i gently made clear that the whole boys v girls, boys shouldn't play with girls or they're a wuss (sp?) etc culture was not inevitable and that school can and should challenge it as apart from anything else it is oppressive for those who don't fit into a fixed 'this is what boys/girls, do-play-think-feel' etc model (re: pretty much everyone if they aren't subjected to this oppressive policing).

i talk about feelings with him and i encourage the use of words to express emotional states like anger.

i exploit learning opportunities - e.g. watching mulan and talking about how brave she is and what a good soldier etc and how silly it is that she has to pretend to be a boy or she wouldn't be allowed to do anything because people think girls can't.... or boys can't.... etc etc.

i try to expose him to stories, films etc with positive and admirable heroines - the labyrinth is good.

i make a point of not going along with stupid treatment of him re: when he hurts himself it's perfectly ok to be upset and show you're hurt ffs.

i put together my own furniture and lift heavy objects and move things around etc solo and he sees how strong i am so he has a positive example that women are strong and capable and not weak and puny and have to get a man to do everything for them. when he does something that shows physical strength he says, 'look i'm strong like my mummy'

likewise i let him see me assert myself, enforce my boundaries, challenge sexist behaviour/comments.

i'm not in a relationship but if i was i'd want to model equality and not conforming to gender roles in the home. that is a key one for people raising children in two parent families imo - you can say all you like but if they're seeing you picking up everyone's shit and scurrying around working whilst your partner sits on his arse then clearly they learn from that and actions speak louder than words for forming expectations about reality.

swallowedAfly Applauding your point about putting together furniture and lifting heavy objects. Many threads here emphasise how important it is for boys to see men doing 'female' stuff such as cleaning, cooking etc. to undermine stereotypes. Not so many emphasise how important it is for boys (and girls) to see women doing 'male' stuff.

How often, for example, would posters' sons see Mum changing the wheel on her car, doing electrical stuff, using a chainsaw to prune trees for example?

it's not only for feminist reasons really because i hope the person i am and what he sees will mean that he will do well at choosing partners in his life - that he'll be attracted to strong independent women (if he's straight) who love him and want to be with him rather than 'need' and use him. i hope he'll have little tolerance for that stupid learned helplessness behaviour that some women exhibit in order to get everything done for them by men. i don't want to see him treated like my father was or thinking that is normal.

yes i want to raise a good feminist principled man who won't abuse women or his privilege but i also want to raise him to have really high standards for what kind of woman he'd want to be with and raise children with.

just hope that there will be plenty of those women out there so he doesn't end up like me as in single because there is a massive shortage of people worth having a relationship with.

Sportsfan My son doesn't get to see either of us changing a wheel... we're both mechanically challenged. And neither of us like DIY either. We both do the traditionally male stuff and get our next door neighbour in to do drliing etc - or the house will fall down. He's got his own handyman business but helps us out to be neighbourly. Thing is - I'm not going to get a woman in and pay her just because it challenges gender roles when we are struggling to keep our heads above water financially anyway.

Ditto clothing. Lots of stuff is hand-me-downs. I can't reject it on the basis of challenging gender because I can't bloody afford to.

BUT (pressed post too soon) I am frustrated because, given all that stuff, we are modelling behaviour I hope he will emulate when he's older. And that is why I get frustarted when someone judges me because he is allowed to play with a gun, when he's in the mood.

DS will see me changing car wheels and showing off about it, geeking out about carpentry, DIY and everything cos I'm a massive geek and he'll see both his parents in a (verbal) shoving match over putting together flatpack furniture cos it's so much fun.

It's like meccano for grownups!

But yes, he will see each parent doing jobs, as and when they come up, which an adult needs to do. The only thing I've done for DS that DH hasn't is breastfeed, really. And I do keep pointing out to DH how selfish he is for not lactating, but apparently he just can't, poor love

I don't really identify myself as a feminist as such... but I am quite confused by this issue. I have a DD of 3.5yrs, very headstrong, strong-willed, athletic and seems to play more with boys at preschool but is extremely sociable so will play with pretty much anyone. Her toys at home are predominantly gender neutral (no conscious deliberation, I just buy what I think she'll play with and thats how its ended up, lots of duplo, playdoh, loves cuddly animals, not so keen on dolls). She does go to ballet but its a 2 min walk away and I thought it'd be good to do a bit of extra-curricular.

Many of the parents of boys at DD's preschool seem less than happy to see my DD playing with their DS, one grandmother quipped, 'is that your girlfriend?' in a sarcastic, not very friendly way. Another mother I encountered at the park seemed to have an issue with her DS playing with DD saying rubbish like, 'girls are as bad as boys' to another mother but still within earshot and 'I'm glad sometimes I had boys instead of girls'. I'm really not sure what her problem is. My DD is strong and active, she's a match for any boy in terms of physical strength.

It troubles me that she'll be going to big school soon and will be in line for rejection if she continues to choose boys for her friends as their parents/grandparents have already brainwashed them not to play with girls.

My son loves to play with children of both genders butter, and is encouraged to do so at preschool too. How sad that your DD has had to face that attitude. Hopefully that sort of thing will be the exception and not the rule.

I also has a baby DS and to be honest I can't imagine ever buying him a princess dress in the pursuit of equality. The reason being is that I've never bought anything like that for my DD. She's never even watched a single Disney film (Disney is cultural imperialism, I find their films creepy and unnerving).

The sort of boys toys I will buy would probably be cars and trains and I can imagine they'd both love playing together with these as DD loves Thomas the tank engine... (and I secretly can't wait to buy some hornby trains).

i don't think it is the exception.

i remember being really irritated at a woman who has a dd who went to preschool with ds. we went to the park after preschool and the two of them were playing on equal terms very physically and having a lot of fun, climbing, racing etc etc. but the mother would not leave the poor girl alone, kept telling her off for nothing, eg. accidental bumping of ds when they were running for something (inevitable and he wasn't bothered by it becauset hat was the level they were playing at), interfering with her to pull her skirt down because her knickers might show (at 3 ffs), over worrying about everything she was doing and constantly interfering.

it struck me how commonplace it is for girls to be over policed and hassled constantly about social manners and appearance etc instead of just being allowed to play and run off steam with a friend.

there was no one else in the park and i kept saying don't worry about it she's fine, just playing, no one will see her knickers etc but she just couldn't let her be. i honestly don't think she would have been the same with a boy. she was praising a behaviour in ds whilst telling her dd off for the same thing

sorry that's a bit random - just an example of how people do treat genders differently inspired by what BF was saying about her dd.