Canadian parent raising child as gender-neutral.

hatrickpatrick · 03-07-2017 11:26pm

gizmo81 wrote: »

Then you don't know what a PhD is lol

The Ph stands for . . .

Pretty huge.....? :pac:

Beanntraigheach · 03-07-2017 11:26pm

Ficheall wrote: »

Might we enquire as to what your phd is in?

Bollixology

mick.oleary · 03-07-2017 11:28pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I just don't understand the gender identity thing. What's the point of it? Why can't we just define gender as biological sex, and then get rid of gender roles so that beyond the physical aspects, it won't matter?

This whole pan-demi-fluid nonsense just seems an overly complex way of saying, "I'm a non-conformist". So why don't we just get rid of the roles to conform to altogether instead of coming up with all this illogical, counter-intuitive, pseudo-intellectual crap?

The really stupid thing is that I'd actually call my way of doing this more liberal than the ever-expanding web of labels way of doing it, and yet I'm sure there are some muppets who'll accuse of me of being a transphobe or something like that.

What is so wrong about having gender roles? I was in the car park in Tesco one day and there was a man with his son and they bought a TV and they were waiting to be picked up. Anyway, along came this butch looking bird in a Punto (short hair, collar shirt) and starts giving him guff over something or other (possibly wasn't waiting in the right place). He was this shy timid type and didn't do what most men would do and assert himself. Anyway, it didn't look right.

Beanntraigheach · 03-07-2017 11:28pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I just don't understand the gender identity thing. What's the point of it? Why can't we just define gender as biological sex, and then get rid of gender roles so that beyond the physical aspects, it won't matter?

This whole pan-demi-fluid nonsense just seems an overly complex way of saying, "I'm a non-conformist". So why don't we just get rid of the roles to conform to altogether instead of coming up with all this illogical, counter-intuitive, pseudo-intellectual crap?

The really stupid thing is that I'd actually call my way of doing this more liberal than the ever-expanding web of labels way of doing it, and yet I'm sure there are some muppets who'll accuse of me of being a transphobe or something like that.

Arachnophobe! :mad:

gizmo81 · 03-07-2017 11:33pm

Knowledge Base!!! Correct.

But if some of you want to measure d1cks be warned

One study analysing the self-reported Kinsey data set found that the average penis of a homosexual man was larger than the average penis of their heterosexual counterparts

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10410197

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Pretty huge.....? :pac:

Ficheall · 03-07-2017 11:33pm

gizmo81 wrote: »

How about you two divulge your highest educational achievement?

Might we enquire as to what your phd is in?

Is that directed at me? I have a phd. It's only in mathematics, so hardly relevant to the discussion. Though it did involve finding and studying holes in objects ("Typical male!" to quote one lass I went on a date with), so I guess at a push I could argue that the software package I designed could very theoretically, be used to determine the baby's gender :pac:

hatrickpatrick · 03-07-2017 11:33pm

mick.oleary wrote: »

What is so wrong about having gender roles? I was in the car park in Tesco one day and there was a man with his son and they bought a TV and they were waiting to be picked up. Anyway, along came this butch looking bird in a Punto (short hair, collar shirt) and starts giving him guff over something or other (possibly wasn't waiting in the right place). He was this shy timid type and didn't do what most men would do and assert himself. Anyway, it didn't look right.

I'm a social libertarian so my overall outlook on life is that there can be no such thing as a victimless 'wrong' - in other words, everybody should be encouraged to live however the f*ck they want as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. In that context, gender roles involve "rules", and I'm opposed to any and all cultural rules beyond "don't harm anyone".

iguana · 03-07-2017 11:34pm

mick.oleary wrote: »

I do. Western society is becoming too tolerant of this sort of bullsh**.

Do you think this is worse than all the parents who force their boys to play sports and won't let their daughters climb trees? Who refuse to get their daughter the Transformer's toys she has her heart set on or their son the Barbie he really wants? Who 'lose' the old handbag their toddler son has taken to carrying around? Or freaks out if he tries on his mother's/sister's lipstick.

Or even more extreme what about all the parents who disown their children for being gay, marrying into the wrong religion or race, getting pregnant outside of marriage, leaving their religion etc.

I don't agree that going to Doty's extreme in this regard are necessary or healthy but they are better parenting and come from a better place than all of the above. Doty just wants to leave the child decide for itself about it's likes and dislikes and figure out their own gender for themselves. That's really not the worst that a parent can do.

Will I Am Not · 03-07-2017 11:35pm

I dread to think what the world will be like 20 years from now.

hatrickpatrick · 03-07-2017 11:35pm

gizmo81 wrote: »

Knowledge Base!!! Correct.

But if some of you want to measure d1cks be warned

One study analysing the self-reported Kinsey data set found that the average penis of a homosexual man was larger than the average penis of their heterosexual counterparts

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10410197

Did they measure from the base, or from the balls?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHEF05mBG0Y

Summer wind · 03-07-2017 11:35pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5boZdINItXI

hatrickpatrick · 03-07-2017 11:38pm

iguana wrote: »

Do you think this is worse than all the parents who force their boys to play sports and won't let their daughters climb trees? Who refuse to get their daughter the Transformer's toys she has her heart set on or their son the Barbie he really wants? Who 'lose' the old handbag their toddler son has taken to carrying around? Or freaks out if he tries on his mother's/sister's lipstick.

Or even more extreme what about all the parents who disown their children for being gay, marrying into the wrong religion or race, getting pregnant outside of marriage, leaving their religion etc.

I don't agree that going to Doty's extreme in this regard are necessary or healthy but they are better parenting and come from a better place than all of the above. Doty just wants to leave the child decide for itself about it's likes and dislikes and figure out their own gender for themselves. That's really not the worst that a parent can do.

My argument would be that gender is a purely physical thing, and that "what the child likes and dislikes" should be completely and totally independent of and irrelevant to sex/gender. In other words, "gender" just shouldn't be a thing beyond whether you have a weiner or a vajayjay.

In that context, these people are doing more harm than good, in my view. They're unwittingly reinforcing the idea that gender, as a societal set of rules as opposed to merely a physical attribute, should continue to be a thing that exists.

Will I Am Not · 03-07-2017 11:39pm

iguana wrote: »

Do you think this is worse than all the parents who force their boys to play sports and won't let their daughters climb trees? Who refuse to get their daughter the Transformer's toys she has her heart set on or their son the Barbie he really wants? Who 'lose' the old handbag their toddler son has taken to carrying around? Or freaks out if he tries on his mother's/sister's lipstick.

Or even more extreme what about all the parents who disown their children for being gay, marrying into the wrong religion or race, getting pregnant outside of marriage, leaving their religion etc.

I don't agree that going to Doty's extreme in this regard are necessary or healthy but they are better parenting and come from a better place than all of the above. Doty just wants to leave the child decide for itself about it's likes and dislikes and figure out their own gender for themselves. That's really not the worst that a parent can do.

I'd consider it worse than anything you mentioned in your first paragraph.

Why list a load of stuff you think bad to try make it sound better anyway?

mick.oleary · 03-07-2017 11:41pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I'm a social libertarian so my overall outlook on life is that there can be no such thing as a victimless 'wrong' - in other words, everybody should be encouraged to live however the f*ck they want as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. In that context, gender roles involve "rules", and I'm opposed to any and all cultural rules beyond "don't harm anyone".

Great. What brand of Tampons do you use?

Nermal · 03-07-2017 11:42pm

iguana wrote: »

Doty just wants to leave the child decide for itself about it's likes and dislikes and figure out their own gender for themselves.

Children aren't supposed 'figure out their own gender'. That's not parenting.

mick.oleary · 03-07-2017 11:43pm

iguana wrote: »

Do you think this is worse than all the parents who force their boys to play sports and won't let their daughters climb trees? Who refuse to get their daughter the Transformer's toys she has her heart set on or their son the Barbie he really wants? Who 'lose' the old handbag their toddler son has taken to carrying around? Or freaks out if he tries on his mother's/sister's lipstick.

Or even more extreme what about all the parents who disown their children for being gay, marrying into the wrong religion or race, getting pregnant outside of marriage, leaving their religion etc.

I don't agree that going to Doty's extreme in this regard are necessary or healthy but they are better parenting and come from a better place than all of the above. Doty just wants to leave the child decide for itself about it's likes and dislikes and figure out their own gender for themselves. That's really not the worst that a parent can do.

Boys should not be playing with Barbie dolls. If you want to raise your kid to be some sissy then go ahead but I won't be giving out to my son for laughing at yours and his Barbie.

gizmo81 · 03-07-2017 11:44pm

Dig beneath the homophobia and transphobia and voila, Misogyny.

mick.oleary wrote: »

Great. What brand of Tampons do you use?

mick.oleary · 03-07-2017 11:45pm

gizmo81 wrote: »

Dig beneath the homophobia and transphobia and voila, Misogyny.

You don't seem to know what misogyny means.

Noveight · 03-07-2017 11:49pm

This story is pure nonsense from start to finish. There is no justifying it, the child will suffer later in life because the parent is using it as a pawn in his/her fight.

What a selfish thing to do.

Nermal · 03-07-2017 11:50pm

gizmo81 wrote: »

Dig beneath the homophobia and transphobia and voila, Misogyny.

Dig beneath the verbiage and voila, pomposity.

Dig beneath the pseudo-intellectualism and voila, meaninglessness.

Dig beneath the PhD in man-spreading and voila, nothing.

gizmo81 · 03-07-2017 11:50pm

You are trying to demean a poster you perceive to be male by emasculating him and equating him with a menstruating woman.

Text book misogyny. Remember women can be misogynists too . . .

mick.oleary wrote: »

You don't seem to know what misogyny means.

iguana · 03-07-2017 11:50pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

My argument would be that gender is a purely physical thing, and that "what the child likes and dislikes" should be completely and totally independent of and irrelevant to sex/gender. In other words, "gender" just shouldn't be a thing beyond whether you have a weiner or a vajayjay.

In that context, these people are doing more harm than good, in my view. They're unwittingly reinforcing the idea that gender, as a societal set of rules as opposed to merely a physical attribute, should continue to be a thing that exists.

I don't disagree with any of that. I just don't think that what this parent is doing, going to the absolute extremes of gender neutral, is as bad as parents who push their children into certain categories based on their sex. And few people fervently hope that the latter type of parent have their children taken from them. But denying your daughter boxing lessons or making your son feel like shít for dressing up in his sister's Elsa dress is still pretty commonplace and often done by otherwise good parents.

03-07-2017 11:51pm

LadyMacBeth_ wrote: »

No bother with transgender people but this child is not old enough to tell anyone that it is trans. How about you just assign the child the gender that is associated with its genitals and if the child expresses an issue with it in the future then deal with it then! Christ. I wouldn't be advocating taking the child away either, though the parent does sound like a bit of an idiot alright.

I'm not picking on your post in particular, but it's fairly representative of a lot of the narrative here: I don't have a problem with transgender people, but for God's sake assign this child the a gender associated with their sex, or else you're damaging them.

That position appears to assume there is something harmful about not being raised in a particular gender.

Why should that be harmful? It seems just as spurious, to my mind, as the argument that every child needs a male and a female parent.

I wouldn't be surprised if children who are raised without gender constraints actually end up happier, more well-rounded, and more open-minded as individuals, without feeling any of the gender constraints that most of us (male or female, but especially female) have felt at some stage.

I don't see any evidence of harm. I do see a great positive potential here. No child should be reared in a gender strait-jacket in this day and age.

mick.oleary · 03-07-2017 11:55pm

gizmo81 wrote: »

You are trying to demean a poster you perceive to be male by emasculating him and equating him with a menstruating woman.

Text book misogyny. Remember women can be misogynists too . . .

Actually I am not equating him to anything or demeaning him. I am using reductio ad absurdum to demonstrate that men and women have gender specific roles.

Ficheall · 03-07-2017 11:56pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I'm not picking on your post in particular, but it's fairly representative of a lot of the narrative here: I don't have a problem with transgender people, but for God's sake assign this child the a gender associated with their sex, or else you're damaging them.

That position appears to assume there is something harmful about not being raised in a particular gender.

Why should that be harmful? It seems just as spurious, to my mind, as the argument that every child needs a male and a female parent.

I wouldn't be surprised if children who are raised without gender constraints actually end up happier, more well-rounded, and more open-minded as individuals, without feeling any of the gender constraints that most of us (male or female, but especially female) have felt at some stage.

I don't see any evidence of harm. I do see a great positive potential here. No child should be reared in a gender strait-jacket in this day and age.

In an ideal world, perhaps, but kids are horrible. What does this child say when Little Timmy asks zem "Are you a boy or a girl?"
How happy do you think their schooldays will be?

Will I Am Not · 03-07-2017 11:58pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I'm not picking on your post in particular, but it's fairly representative of a lot of the narrative here: I don't have a problem with transgender people, but for God's sake assign this child the a gender associated with their sex, or else you're damaging them.

That position appears to assume there is something harmful about not being raised in a particular gender.

Why should that be harmful? It seems just as spurious, to my mind, as the argument that every child needs a male and a female parent.

I wouldn't be surprised if children who are raised without gender constraints actually end up happier, more well-rounded, and more open-minded as individuals, without feeling any of the gender constraints that most of us (male or female, but especially female) have felt at some stage.

I don't see any evidence of harm. I do see a great positive potential here. No child should be reared in a gender strait-jacket in this day and age.

Red hair, glasses, fat...
Kids will use anything to get at other kids. There will be other red heads, bespectacled and fat kids.
You will be different from everyone if you've no gender.

Nermal · 03-07-2017 11:58pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

No child should be reared in a gender strait-jacket in this day and age.

"O Lord, please remove me from this gender strait-jacket".

"Yes the same one that we've had since we became multi-cellular organisms, that one".

The Backwards Man · 04-07-2017 12:00am

There's people who are arseholes and there are people that are a bit of an arsehole.

After that, who gives a fcuk?

take everything · 04-07-2017 12:00am

Jordan Peterson, a psychology professor in Toronto got into trouble with slow-minded SJWs over this stuff.
Peterson is a rock of sense and a beautiful searing intellect who nearly lost his job from the fallout from shrieking leftists about this issue.

Ballstein · 04-07-2017 12:00am

gizmo81 wrote: »

Dig beneath the homophobia and transphobia and voila, Misogyny.

I was reading your posts and was sure you were a really good troll.

04-07-2017 12:03am

Ficheall wrote: »

In an ideal world, perhaps, but kids are horrible. What does this child say when Little Timmy asks zem "Are you a boy or a girl?"
How happy do you think their schooldays will be?

The Fake Sheikh wrote: »

You will be different from everyone if you've no gender.

This is why I conflated the issue to same-gender parents. Because the thought thats you guys have expressed, is exactly the same which is stated by those who oppose same-gender parents.

"But they'll be bullied!"

Anyone can be bullied, for even the most spurious of reasons.

You don't raise kids to be the kind of people that bullies would like everyone to be. You raise your kids to be good, open-minded, compassionate people; not to be 'popular'. To do otherwise is actually bad parenting.

AnGaelach · 04-07-2017 12:04am

DontThankMe wrote: »

Bill Nye explains it well.

Correct, he does it quite splendidly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCR6gS8QQjk

mdwexford · 04-07-2017 12:07am

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I wouldn't be surprised if children who are raised without gender constraints actually end up happier, more well-rounded, and more open-minded as individuals, without feeling any of the gender constraints that most of us (male or female, but especially female) have felt at some stage.

I don't see any evidence of harm. I do see a great positive potential here. No child should be reared in a gender strait-jacket in this day and age.

Gender constraints.

Gender strait-jacket.

What planet are we living on at this stage.

04-07-2017 12:10am

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

This is why I conflated the issue to same-gender parents. Because the thought thats you guys have expressed, is exactly the same which is stated by those who oppose same-gender parents.

"But they'll be bullied!"

Anyone can be bullied, for even the most spurious of reasons.

You don't raise kids to be the kind of people that bullies would like everyone to be. You raise your kids to be good, open-minded, compassionate people; not to be 'popular'. To do otherwise is actually bad parenting.

aren't you the one wondering why it beastiallity was illegal or what the issue with it was

Ficheall · 04-07-2017 12:11am

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

This is why I conflated the issue to same-gender parents. Because the thought thats you guys have expressed, is exactly the same which is stated by those who oppose same-gender parents.

"But they'll be bullied!"

Anyone can be bullied, for even the most spurious of reasons.

You don't raise kids to be the kind of people that bullies would like everyone to be. That is quite obviously ridiculous.

I think there's a paper on this by Cash - he studied the effects of assigning a male child a female name, expecting initial hardships to lead to a strength of character which his son would value. However, while the son acknowledged the benefits of the harsh upbringing, he asserted that he would not adopt the same strategy with his own offspring.

Your children are, to some extent, your experiments. Some experiments are unnecessarily cruel, even if you have good intentions.

Will I Am Not · 04-07-2017 12:11am

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

This is why I conflated the issue to same-gender parents. Because the thought thats you guys have expressed, is exactly the same which is stated by those who oppose same-gender parents.

"But they'll be bullied!"

Anyone can be bullied, for even the most spurious of reasons.

You don't raise kids to be the kind of people that bullies would like everyone to be. You raise your kids to be good, open-minded, compassionate people; not to be 'popular'. To do otherwise is actually bad parenting.

Anyone can be bullied but you may as well stick a sandwich board with 'bully me' written on it as do this.

iguana · 04-07-2017 12:11am

The Fake Sheikh wrote: »

I'd consider it worse than anything you mentioned in your first paragraph.

You really consider not letting your child do something they love because they are the "wrong" gender worse than being over-zealous in your quest to let them choose their likes and identity for themselves. Really? Maybe even denying them something that could be their passion and lucrative career because it doesn't fit your idea of what boys or girls should do. Forbidding Baryshnikov from dancing or Katy Taylor from boxing would be better than just being really, really extreme about letting the child choose for themselves?

Why list a load of stuff you think bad to try make it sound better anyway?

Because posters are choosing this example of questionable parenting to wish the child be removed from it's parent and that's a bit messed up considering all of the other equally shíte parenting decisions that are accepted as normal.

mick.oleary wrote: »

Boys should not be playing with Barbie dolls. If you want to raise your kid to be some sissy then go ahead but I won't be giving out to my son for laughing at yours and his Barbie.

Any kid that comes into my son's room, where he does keep his Barbie - and his My Little Ponies, tend to be mostly just blown away by the epic collection of superhero, Star Wars, Transformer, dinosaur and space toys he has. That's after they finish drooling over the automated Hot Wheels tracks mounted on the walls. And when they realise that he has 'girl's' toys in amongst what has to be the coolest toy collection owned by a non-professional youtube toy reviewer, (because that's just his bedroom - he also has a playroom and an outbuilding stuffed with toys) they start to resent the idiot parents that have denied them access to half the toyshop.:P

gizmo81 · 04-07-2017 12:15am

+100

Why only play with half the box of toys . . .

iguana wrote: »

they start to resent the idiot parents that have denied them access to half the toyshop.:P

04-07-2017 12:15am

mdwexford wrote: »

Gender constraints.

Gender strait-jacket.

What planet are we living on at this stage.

I'm not sure if you ever look around you, or read the statistics on gender inequality; but yes, gender constraints do exist, especially when it comes to incomes and family obligations.

And by gender strait-jackets, I'm talking about people imposing gender-based rules upon their children or their pupils ... most five-year-olds have learned that dolls are for girls and tractors are for boys. Thankfully, this trend is now diminishing, and cases like that stated in the OP are at the vanguard of that trend.

bubbles o hara · 04-07-2017 12:18am

gizmo81 wrote: »

You are confusing sex and gender.

You completely miss the point of compulsory heterosexuality.

Parents make lots of decisions on behalf that they have no right to. Sexuality, Gender Identity, Religion etc

Oh sweetie, make yourself a cuppa' and dunk a Jaffa cake in the mug. You must be a barrel of laughs on a night out.

Yourself isit · 04-07-2017 12:18am

The Fake Sheikh wrote: »

Red hair, glasses, fat...
Kids will use anything to get at other kids. There will be other red heads, bespectacled and fat kids.
You will be different from everyone if you've no gender.

The minute the child goes to school she will more than likely self declare as her sex (or his - I don't know the actual sex) .

That's because sex and gender are largely the same.

Every so often theres a blank slate hysteria. Particularly on gender. Then it dies off and people feel embarrassed.

LLMMLL · 04-07-2017 12:18am

I don't see how sex/gender is relevant on a birth cert. I'd happily get rid of it. The child will be fine.

Yourself isit · 04-07-2017 12:19am

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I'm not sure if you ever look around you, or read the statistics on gender inequality; but yes, gender constraints do exist, especially when it comes to incomes and family obligations.

And by gender strait-jackets, I'm talking about people imposing gender-based rules upon their children or their pupils ... most five-year-olds have learned that dolls are for girls and tractors are for boys. Thankfully, this trend is now diminishing, and cases like that stated in the OP are at the vanguard of that trend.

Most children in fact will adopt gender rolls without parental influence.

04-07-2017 12:20am

Winston Hissing Racism wrote: »

aren't you the one wondering why it beastiallity was illegal or what the issue with it was

I was yeah.

I know why I have problems with bestiality, it churns my stomach. But my gastric fragility is hardly a reason to ban something.

Why are you digging that up here? Do you have no logical point to advance, or is that thread somehow relevant here?

Yourself isit wrote: »

Most children in fact will adopt gender rolls without parental influence.

Grand. Lets assume you're correct: what's the problem here, so?

Professor Moriarty · 04-07-2017 12:21am

The Fake Sheikh wrote: »

Anyone can be bullied but you may as well stick a sandwich board with 'bully me' written on it as do this.

So he/she should raise their kids to be bad, narrow-minded and insensitive people who compromise themselves in order to be liked?

mdwexford · 04-07-2017 12:22am

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I'm not sure if you ever look around you, or read the statistics on gender inequality; but yes, gender constraints do exist, especially when it comes to incomes and family obligations.

And by gender strait-jackets, I'm talking about people imposing gender-based rules upon their children or their pupils ... most five-year-olds have learned that dolls are for girls and tractors are for boys. Thankfully, this trend is now diminishing, and cases like that stated in the OP are at the vanguard of that trend.

So you are talking nonsense. Thanked by a person talking absolute tripe.

The case in the OP is of a deranged human using their child. With a lawyer who doesn't use capital fcuking letters to boot.

How Soon Is Now · 04-07-2017 12:23am

God I miss the days when men where men and women where women....

Now I dunno what the **** is going on half the time!

Simpler times I guess.

SterlingArcher · 04-07-2017 12:23am

gizmo81 wrote: »

What's wrong with allowing a child discover their own language to describe their gender identity? What's wrong with allowing a child to choose their path to gender expression?

Is that a rabbit hole you would go down?

Ok so now the child gets to decide what path it takes to its gender expression. Goody goody. When the child is 13-15 and full of this knowledge of you have bestowed upon it. The child tells you it does not fit their biological body and wants to be a male or female. it wants an operation to correct that. How do you proceed gizmo81? I mean you did say a child gets to choose right?

Hotei · 04-07-2017 12:23am

Ficheall wrote: »

I think there's a paper on this by Cash - he studied the effects of assigning a male child a female name, expecting initial hardships to lead to a strength of character which his son would value. However, while the son acknowledged the benefits of the harsh upbringing, he asserted that he would not adopt the same strategy with his own offspring.

Your children are, to some extent, your experiments. Some experiments are unnecessarily cruel, even if you have good intentions.

Noveight · 04-07-2017 12:24am

LLMMLL wrote: »

I don't see how sex/gender is relevant on a birth cert. I'd happily get rid of it. The child will be fine.

It's one of the most fundamental parameters by which someone can be identified. It's completely relevant on a birth certificate.

Canadian parent raising child as gender-neutral.

Comments