Ah, but you labeled her loony liberal in your... post... ages ago... ****, I really am harping on, amn't I? Sorry! Seriously, she's a journalist reporting a cutesy child story. That's about it. It's a bloody blog, for heaven's sake!
I said she didn't make an issue to the child. He seems quite happy the way things were handled. Certainly no shame or guilt and i doubt he's going to be reading the blog!
Probably true. But if you can get someone to pay you for writing about your child in a harmless unintrusive way, wouldn't you?
Seriously, it's like the plush pieces you read about in womens mags all the time.
i think you actually answered your own question further down in your own post PP, or was that meant to be a rhetorical question?
there are no such things as "tell tale" anything that will allow you to determine a person's sexual orientation, that is something only the person themselves can determine for themselves, unless of course as i alluded to earlier, an observer uses stereotyping to determine another person's sexual orientation so they can label and assign them a specific category that makes the observer feel more comfortable within themselves-
"ok, he has flimsy wrists, classic tell tale sign, he must be the ghey, and check out that salmon colored shirt, no straight man would wear THAT! ahh, category assigned, i can sleep easier now at night assuming that".
you see where im coming from? as i said, you really answered your own question in your own post- in an ideal world we would assume nothing, as it only serves to cloud and prejudice our judgement, but, we're all human, we all do it, as hard as we try not to.
Let me point this out, for a parent to say "my 7 y/o son is straight" is wholly premature as well, in my opinion. Given the fact that apparently around 10% of males are gay and another 20% of males vary from bisexual to bicurious, statistically, the parent could never be 100% sure that her prepubescent child was totally straight.
i did label her a loony liberal because this is the way she wants to be perceived, ok not as a loony, but certainly as a liberal, taken from the word liberated, which would imply that she perceives herself to be non-judgemental. but, as i also pointed out in that post, she feels the need to explain herself in the "im not racist, but..." fashion.
you are absolutely not harping on either Ikky, you are making some interesting and valid points, and normally i would dismiss this as a harmless and cutesy child story, if i was told it by my next door neighbour. yes, their attitude would raise an eyebrow, but i'd think no more of it as they are not exposing the child to the world's media to be foisted upon some sort of imaginary liberated revolutionary thinker's pedestal.
it IS a blog Ikky, and that was my point, as a journalist, her blog garners her an already captive audience over which she would have considerable influence for her cutesy child stories. i just dont see her putting up there how he came home from school today with an A in maths, no, more important to her is the fact he now identifies himself as gay.
and that might be fine for her, but when her little boy goes into school and announces to his classmates that he is gay (and chances are he will, you wouldn't believe the embarrassing stuff my child writes in his news copy that HE doesnt see as embarrassing!), chances are that some of his classmates may not take so kindly to his newly discovered sexual identity, and will we then see the same blog author write a cutesy story about how her son "suffered his first gay-bashing today!".
she didnt make an issue to the child simply because she's a loony toon, and before you accuse me of labelling her, i never said i was immune from the practice either, in fact i admitted that as i am merely a human being, it's in my nature to label and assume, based on the facts presented before me, and i think it's pretty safe to say that her twisted sense of what it is to be a tolerant and liberated thinker, falls way short of general societies standards.
the child seems quite happy with the way things were handled simply because as another poster said- he received positive reinforcement for his attention seeking. he now sees that the way to get his mother's attention and affection is to announce every so often that he wants a character on a tv show to be his boyfriend. other people though that he might seek such positive reinforcement from though, may not share the same sentiments as his mother. all she said to him was "i love you too son", as she rubbed his nose.
i wanted pamela anderson to be my girlfriend back in the days of baywatch. i was rather abrubtly and rightly so told that she is just an actress in a role, playing a tv character, it's not real. its simply meant for entertainment.
as for feeling shame or guilt- why would he feel any shame or guilt if its not pointed out to him that such behaviour is not appropriate, neither is it appropriate for a child of his age and mental development to be watching a show that in an attempt to turn stereotyping on it's head, has done nothing but tried to tick every one of society's stereotypical "minority groups"-
we have the jock, we have the bad girl who feels like an outcast, we have the kid in the wheelchair (who can actually walk in real life, but best not to spoil the child's enjoyment of the show by explaining he is only acting in a role), we have the chinese girl, and of course the two-in-one combo, the overweight black girl.
as for the chances of the child reading the blog, do you remember a band called "the offspring" that had a comeback in the mid 90's with that song "pretty fly for a white guy"? i happened to be friendly with the lead singers ex-wife for a while, and their daughter, now in her 20's, has her own solo career as a singer. their daughter will still be able to read about her father's exploits on blogs, vlogs, hell, pretty much any medium you can think of, even print media.
to be perfectly honest, even as i write this now, i am more than acutely aware that i have violated my child's right to privacy by posting about his personal life on an internet forum. once you reference another person, you are immediately invading their right to privacy. you have not asked their permission, and certainly if this woman can make the proud boast to the world that her child has the maturity or is at the mentally developed stage to be able to "identify himself as gay", then surely she should assume that he also has the mental capacity to grant or deny her permission to proclaim said claim to the world.
ps. you hardly think im going to see a penny from boards.ie or daft media for writing this now, do you? so the answer to that question is no, i would not take payment for invading my child's right to privacy, because to me that'd be like pimping out my child so i could collect a fat cheque to go buy myself a new laptop, enabling me to write even more cutesy child stories, thereby invading his privacy even more so i had something to write about, and if i was a journalist and getting paid by the word, hell, i'd be minted with this post alone!
seriously, hard to believe and all as it may be, this is the very reason i avoid most womens magazines (i say most, because the odd time i will find an interesting piece in cosmo, which my wife buys). consider this post as a futile attempt to vent my frustration at exactly these types of "vacuous bumf" attention seeking opinion pieces masquerading as articles, unworthy of any sort of recognition and devoid of any journalistic integrity. this woman has let her profession down, she has let herself down, and worst of all, she has let her son down.
absolutely agree with you here PP, without even giving any regard to your statistics, but my point is that "my 7 y/o son is straight" will never catch on as a headline, unless we were a predominantly quiltbag or other sexuality society and cisgender persons were in the minority.
my issue here is not with the child's sexuality, and i would prefer if the discussion didnt descend into a terminology session, i am merely an average intelligence observer of a person who i deem to have behaved in a completely inappropriate manner who forgot that she is a mother first and foremost, with a duty of care towards the safety, welfare, and well being of her child, before she is ever a journalist.
she knew what she was doing, you don't get to be a journalist without some level of academic intelligence and knowledge of privacy laws and a journalistic code of ethics. she blurred the line between her role as a mother, and her role as a journalist, knowing full well the potential consequences her sensationalist actions would cause.
but she chose to take an action that would gain her popularity among her peers and friends, and not to mention website traffic so the world's media could indulge in yet more of her inane ramblings. she chose to be selfish, and in doing so has created an environment now where the child as i said, has been so cruelly "outed" on the internet, and even for now, without his knowledge, just so mommy dearest could collect a fat cheque, and pats on the back all round. good for her. idiot.
hmm, I wouldn't even take my son saying that at seven until he reached the age where "the talk" has to come up and Id be more observant then. A seven year old is innocent and open to anything, they believe anything and are more accepting to society and oddities than adults are.
as for the mother, just a quick observation, but she seems almost proud of her "project" they way her reaction is described. I'm not exactly sure how credible that is to be honest.
thank you, every word of this, puts it far more succinctly than my rather long winded attempts.
i went back to the OP last night, clicked on the link, saw that she writes for the gay huffington post, read a few more of her blog posts, and was actually disgusted with myself for having bothered taking this so seriously in the first place.
it made me want to bathe my eyes in bleach so saccharine sweet was its content and oh boy how it smacked of self importance and 'how great am i people? eh? eh? let me know in the comments, and on twitter too!'.
her embarrassing musings she calls her blog should actually carry the headline 'mother willing to pimp out her son, seeks validation and approval from "the gheys"'.
i think any individual, regardless of their sexuality or orientation, should regard this woman and her motivations for blogging about her 6 year old 'might be gay son' to 'outing' him, with an incredibly high degree of scepticism.
i still didnt see any sign of a maths report for her son though, only more verbal diahorrea about her sons assumed "crush" on said tv character, which, even now i would call under suspicion, given the fact that she is obviously is trying to push her own 'idiots agenda'- 'its oh-kay to be ghey'...
yeah, we've known that since the sixties and early seventies sweetheart, when better and far more intelligent people than yourself fought for equality and the rights of gay men and women all over america, and lived and breathed their cause, sacrificing themselves for it, and not their innocent offspring!
people that it was far easier to believe in and admire, people like harvey milk to name but one.
I wasn't posing a question, it was merely rhetorical.
By tell tail signs, I wasn't talking about the stereotypes that I was alluding to in my previous post.
The tell tail signs I alluded to were, looking back now, probably an indication of greater attraction to the male figure rather than the female figure - nothing to do with my disposition; how I carried myself. Again, this is looking back at childhood memories, it would have been impossible for me to quantitatively understand these feelings then and I imagine they would have been hard for anyone else to record or quantify because they were so slight. I am the only person who can wholly reflect on these memories, and given the fact that I am a lot older now and still posses these memories, it is possible for me to quantify them a little now.
Referring to my first point about not being able to define a 7 year old's sexuality (straight/gay or other), this is true. You would not really be able to define these things because (a) the child wouldn't be able to understand his/her feelings at that point and (b) would not have been able to act on those feelings.
I agree with you though. I think it's highly inappropriate for the mother to represent her child's sexual orientation at such a young age. He might not turn out to be gay, then what?
In hindsight, it'd be a bit like what gay people have to deal with when they come out to their parents, who initially thought that they were straight; most parents would initially suspect their child to be straight.
Parents have their expectations, they'd natural expect their child to be straight, to get married (non same-sex) and have kids of their own; they'd advocate this before their child had the ability to reason. I'm sure if you ask an average parent of a 7/8 y/o child if they thought their child was gay, more often than not they would say they thought their child wasn't gay. I would say that that's also an inappropriate position as, again, I don't think a parent can represent their child's sexual orientation at that age.
I think parents should be completely ambivalent and non-representative of their child's sexual orientation until the child reaches maturity, perhaps. Let the child figure it out for themselves whether it be straight or gay.
The woman who wrote that article seems to me to be using her child and putting him on the spot. Quite worrying come to think of it. I don't know if it was her career or the welfare of her child she had more in mind.
was just organising some stuff here and i came across this post i made a while back in a thread about parents who were purporting to raise their child as genderless, or "gender neutral" if you will, i just thought i'd post it here as it seems relevant to the topic of parents nowadays who seem to foist their children on pedestals as role models for society, as opposed to the parents themselves being role models for their children-
from here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=72432323&postcount=210
I thanked your post just for this bit. You should have drop-kicked her on her forehead, that'll learn her not to be calling adults names..........
[quote=xsiborg;77241343 but i'd think no more of it as they are not exposing the child to the world's media to be foisted upon some sort of imaginary liberated revolutionary thinker's pedestal.
But in a candid and upbeat way. She's just commenting on one of her life experiences, she's not puttin gthe child up ona pedestal or using him for a politcal stance or anything.
Because that would bore the pants off people! The situation heer is both intersting and an unsual angle.
That may or may not happen, but the chances of it happening are not going to change because she wrote about it in her blog.
Wow, dangerous ground here. "General societies standards" -- which are what exactly? And dictated by whom? If Society dictates that she NOT be tolerant and liberal, something's gone wrong with society. That or you're in Oklahoma.
Also, sre you suggesting, from the first sentence, that makign an issue would be the non "loony toon" way of dealign with it?
I'm getting the impression here that you want everyone to fit into little orles and little boxes and anyone who doesn;t should be treaeted as a "loony toon" to use your phrase. Life doesn't work like that.
ikky do you read my posts at all or even the posts of others here to see the efforts that have been made not to make this a classic "i wins the internet" debate?
you are picking and poking and then taking broadstrokes at my posts while i have attempted to address each of your points individually, which, to be honest IS an effort with all the quoting, copying to new window, refer back to your post, address your next point, etc.
at least i am making some attempt to see eye to eye with you so that we all could have a better understanding of where each other is coming from, so if you will bear with me as i certainly will attempt to address each of your points and explain myself better with each one.
unfortunately my brain has switched off for the night so i lack the focus and concentration at the moment to be able to formulate a coherent reply to each of the points you made there in your last post, so if you will bear with me, i will come back to this thread in the morning and do my best to give you a better understanding of where im coming from.
Quick comment -More like seven year old announces he'd like to be gay so much that he claims he is gay. Is traditional masculinity failing to capture the imagination of this young boy for some reason?
I've only made one point - it's hamrless and tolerant. Beyoind that, what's the problem? Should I not read everything? Is "I wins the internet" some sort of attempt at claiming the moral high-ground?
ikky honestly now, i respectfully suggest you take that chip off your shoulder, nobody is claiming any "moral high-ground" here, only a discussion of whether this woman showed any common sense, decency, or respect for her son's privacy and his welfare.
this is not just some one off cutesy filler story, i went and read her blog, several entries in fact, i made the effort to try and attain a better understanding of this woman's mindset that she would think it's ok to violate her son's right to his privacy first off, and then use him to actively promote only her one sided view of sexuality, therefore focussing the childs mind on their sexuality above the many other things she COULD be and actually SHOULD be teaching him, like perhaps sitting down with him when he's doing his maths homework and questioning does he understand the concepts of basic mathematics, or geography, rather than actively engaging him to focus and hone in on his sexuality at this stageof his mental development.
knowledge and informing your child ikky and bettering their understanding of their world around them should be a parents primary concern at the age her child is at. what she is doing is placing an unjustifiable emphasis on the child's sexuality, and almost pushing and pressuring him- "if you want to please mommy, and you want mommy to be happy, and you want mommy's affections, you'll be a good little gay".
to my understanding at least, the only time his sexuality will ever be relevant is if he decides he wants a career in the porn industry, although if the child is straight- gay for pay certainly pays more.
i would hope this childs parents have higher aspirations for their child than a very short lived career as a porn star.
have a read of this and see what you make of it: