I’m going to try to tread lightly on this one, but I will disclose for you up front that I’m mostly stuck in a what-the-fuck?! frame of reference at this point. In other words, prepare to watch me talk myself into circles of YEAH! But, well, I mean, yeah…that, too. AND, GOD, I DON’T KNOW. You see, a couple in Canada gave birth to their third child on New Year’s Day. (AWW!) This, in itself, is not significant. The news, you see, is that, aside from the mother, father, the midwives, one friend, and the baby’s two older brothers, no one knows if the young baby is a boy or a girl. And the parents plan to keep things this way for as long as possible. On purpose.
AHMAHGAH HE’S SO CUTE! I mean…ahem, it IS a boy, right?
Big deal, right?
Welllll…I dunno. Let’s get a little back story going here.
I’m sure you can guess the political ideology behind the parents’ decision to do this. Mom, Kathy Witterick, and Dad, David Stocker, have already been raising their older sons (Jazz, 5, and Kio, 2) to “challenge how they’re expected to look and act based on their sex.” The young boys have had the luxury of choosing when to cut their hair and what clothes they’d like to wear. Each have been shopping from both the girls and boys department since age one and a half. Jazz has taken to admire fashion and colors that are traditionally associated with girls. Because of this, he’s often referred to as a girl by strangers. Witterick explains that, when this happens–say at the park or something–she doesn’t correct the person. Instead, she lets her son speak up if he decides it’s bothersome.
But this is where I see how this can get…well, kind of sticky.
The boy is five. What if he’s too shy? What if someone calls him a girl, and he doesn’t like it, but he’s too embarrassed to speak up? I’ve got a nearly-five year-old and dude still clings to my legs on occasion if someone looks at him funny. That’s why five year-olds have moms, right? TO BUFFER. Well, when the family recently applied to a local nature center, Jazz asked his mother to mark his gender; he wanted the people to know he’s a boy. He wanted his mom to buffer. About a year prior, when they were looking into the option of public or private schooling, Jazz’s appearance was often the topic of conversation, and it was something that bothered the young boy. Witterick states that this is the main reason he is homeschooled. (Err, UNschooled, actually, but that’s an entirely different conversation).
THIS BOTHERS ME. I mean, I realize it’s kind of a circle of logic that has no “right” answer, but…OK. So, let’s say they’ve raised their son to be gender-neutral. I don’t have a problem with this. At all. The kid’s fucking FIVE, and I’m sure it’s a heck of a lot of fun. But, at the same time, the kid is fucking FIVE, and this very lifestyle has sentenced him (yes, sentenced) to an isolated existence, and one that is asking him to grow up very fast. All I’m saying is that I feel like he should have the option to either join society and compromise some of his non-traditional lifestyle choices, or to remain isolated from it in his home with just his parents. But, is there really an option here? If Jazz himself is being given that enormous responsibility–the task of making that decision–then I don’t see one. Because, REALLY. Should this baby–c’mon, five is still KINDA baby–be making such tough life choices at this age.? I don’t think he should have to. And even if he doesn’t realize that he is, those decisions are being made.
Jazz, 5, and his younger sibling, Storm
And that’s where most of the criticism lies. Friends of the family argued that the parents were forcing their political and ideological values on their young children. Which, um, YEAH. (But at the same time, don’t ALL of us do that in some fashion? This one is just more…intense. Or obvious. Or, something.) They also point out that the children are being set up for ridicule and bullying “in a world that can be so cruel to outsiders.” Again, well, yeah. (Grandma and Grandpa, on the other hand, are probably just annoyed as hell that they weren’t placed in the Circle of Trust. Because, no. They don’t know either.) Storm’s Mom and Dad say that, in getting to know someone, you don’t typically ask the person what’s between his or her legs. That the personality is what’s important. Well, YEAH, but that’s because you can usually discern the gender with simple observation. I suppose I’m of the mindset that gender is actually a part of your identity, guys. It’s part of your biology. I don’t think it should be taken out of the mix in the name of social experimentation. CALL ME CRAZY. Witterick and Stocker would, evidently, disagree.
My question is, how do we make that decision FOR our children? How do we say that this idea–this concept–is so important, that it’s worth the uphill climb? A climb that the CHILDREN themselves will have to make? I mean, it very well may BE worth it…but, my GOD, to take that risk? I’m too fucking paranoid & anxious to ever throw my child out on such a limb. (I will, however, let them watch Spongebob Squarepants on occasion, so maybe don’t take any of my advice.)
But back to Storm, the genderless baby. Learning from their first two children, Witterick and Stocker hoped that removing the gender label altogether would help to prevent some of society’s imposed gender-specific messages and give the child the freedom of choosing who he or she would like to be. In other words, in seeing some of Jazz’s struggles, they were hoping to make things EASIER for their third child. Says mom:
“What we noticed is that parents make so many choices for their children. It’s obnoxious…We thought that if we delayed sharing [Storm's gender], in this case hopefully, we might knock off a couple million of those messages by the time Storm decides Storm would like to share.”
Is it me, or does it feel like the opposite is happening? That they’re making it harder for Storm? Because, in this case, it seems like “those messages” are being replaced by The Inquisition. (Take, for example, this very post and all it’s accompanying photographs.) In fact, as Witterick is being interviewed for this story, a neighbor waves from her porch and asks the weekly question:
“So, it’s a boy, right?”
Witterick more or less ignores the question and comments on the weather. I assumes she also calls the neighbor an ignorant prick with her mind-powers, but whatever.
Later, when she’s asked when the secret will end, her response is again a deflection: “Yeah, when will this end? When will we live in a world where people can make choices to be whoever they are?”
Don’t we have that already? As I see it, there will be struggles with identity either way. If we resist gender norms, we struggle with the backlash of being an outcast. If we embrace them, we struggle with the restrictions that come with traditional labels. Are we really a world obsessed with gender, as they seem to believe? Are we just a bunch of simpletons that need a quick game of switcheroo?
A California psychologist, and author of Gender Born, Gender Made, has concerns as well. The very act of removing the “he” or “she” adds an identity issue in itself. Storm will be unable to fully grasp or create his or her own point-of-view if there is no frame of reference. And, of course, we should remember that the parents are not hiding the child’s gender from Storm; just the rest of the world. So, sure–this reference may very well be established at home. However, to then be denying it in public–or, at the very least ignoring it–surely sends a mixed message. The whole situation seems like it could be adding shame to the mix.
It’s almost as if the parents have created a bubble in their home, in which these children live. It seems loving and nurturing and supportive–and clearly the intentions are GOOD–but the reality is that this bubble will pop. It will cause problems for the children when they leave the home. It complicates their lives, and it seems unnecessary. We, as parents, can instill these values–those of freedom to be who we want to be, regardless of societal restrictions on gender–without such…extremism. It’s all a bit sensational for me, and the result feels…toxic.
But then again, I’m no fucking psychologist. Hell, I let my children have lollipops with their dinner last night. In other words, don’t listen to me. Instead, share with me YOUR viewpoint. Is this too idealistic? Is it being blown out of proportion? Is it harmful to the child? Or is our reaction the harming agent?
And, seriously, what the hell is WRONG with having lollipops for dinner anyway?
Ahem.
About Kristine
