Genderless Baby - Parents Experiment With Child To Let It Determine Its Own "Sexual Identity"
    By Hank Campbell | May 29th 2011 08:30 PM | 7 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
    Boy or girl?  For most people - and all of science - that is a simple issue of biology.    Kathy Witterick and David Stocker disagree and say their baby's gender is no one's business - not even his.  Or hers.

    They're taking sexual politics to a whole new level and say their four-month-old baby "Storm" should be able to develop its own sexual identity without having to conform to social stereotypes or bow to predetermined expectations associated with gender.

    Most kooky progressives want weird decisions made for other people's children but this echoes a recent trend in health, where the anti-vaccine movement for youth skews as hard to the left as abstinence does on the right.   

    Obviously the baby has a gender so why they feel the need to enforce ambiguity on a child is unclear - and they are no less clear with the public, writing in an email to the Daily Mail; "the whole world must know what is between the baby's legs is unhealthy, unsafe and voyeuristic. We know – and we're keeping it clean, safe, healthy and private (not secret!)".

    They say it is about freedom and choice and if it confuses the entire world, well, maybe it's also a little about foisting off their worldview on the poor people who casually ask.   They instead speak in mumbo-jumbo about societal constraints and call parents who make choices for their children 'obnoxious'.

    Well, picking a name for him is heavy-handed in that light.  Older son Jazz wears his hair long, in three braids - two at the front and one at the back - and recently bought a pink dress because that was his choice.

    Jazz was not able to start attending school because his parents are worried how students will react to a boy who looks like a girl.    That doesn't really feel like a choice he is making.   

    Not surprisingly, Witterick and Stocker grew up in what they term very liberal families,  visiting revolutionaries in Mexico and spending time in Cuba learning about the Communist revolution.   Now, Stocker is a teacher at a school where lessons are framed by social justice issues but Witterick  - the wife - is a 1950s era stay-at-home mother, though she says she is practicing 'unschooling', which she calls home schooling driven by a child's curiosity rather than a schedule or tests.

    Which sounds like they get to stay at home and play all day - how very Stepford Wife!

    The older children have also been told to keep Storm's gender a secret - they can apparently choose to be cross-dressers if their parents buy them dresses, but apparently can't choose to talk about their youngest sibling.   That's a lot of pressure and confusion for children.

    Comments

    Low Budget Dave
    I know plenty of parents who have done pretty much the same, but not ever to this extent. I see parents in toy stores all the time that allow their children to ignore gender stereotypes in their toy choices, in their clothes, and in their relationships with others. It is surprising how often the kids pick their own stereotypes. It may turn out to be pretty easy to displace gender stereotypes. Many of them are cultureal, and have only been around for a few hundred years. Gender itself is biological, and has about a two million year head start. Suppose you let a child decide for themselves, and the boys immediately start playing games that demonstrate physical domination over their friends? You can't stop that behavior any more than you can argue with the tide. Suppose you encourage your girl to take karate lessons and play football, but she instead chooses to dress up dolls? Would you say that she has failed you culturally, or that she has followed a path of her choosing? As parents, we can help define the world for our children. Sometimes, in the process of protecting children from other people's stereotypes, we accidentally introduce our own.
    Hank
    Yes, it is one thing to let a child follow their own path - one daughter of mine played with dolls and one did not - and another to force chaos on a young mind and make them part of a parental culture war.    Now they have an older child they won't send to school because they are worried the rest of the world will ruin the kid. 

    In hindsight, I can remember being a young guy and wanting to wear black-and-white saddles shoes and purple bell bottoms and brightly-colored shirts.  My mother quietly discouraged my desire to dress like a pimp in the forced desegregation (another glaring example of where kooky progressives screwed up a lot more than they made better) south but it didn't turn me into a pimp, nor did it scar me in any severe way.  Buying the older boy a pair of pants even if he supposedly will only wear dresses would not harm most kids.  He can always wear dresses in college.
    Gerhard Adam
    This is just stupid.  Gender cannot be a stereotype, although behavior can be and these parents are sadly confused by these simple concepts. 

    Whether they like it or not, this has nothing to do with stereotypes and everything to do with understanding one's gender identity.  Certainly when children are very young then this is largely an academic exercise in which children readily cross over in their tastes and behaviors.  However, it isn't quite so easy when children reach puberty and these goofy notions about "choice" will have repercussions.  In the end this has nothing to do with "political correctness", it's just dumb.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Gerhard Adam
    Her husband chimed in: 'If you really want to get to know someone, you don’t ask what’s between their legs.'
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1389593/Kathy-Witterick-David-Stocker-raising-genderless-baby.html
    When I read this, I realized just how clueless the couple were.  It doesn't get much dumber than thinking that gender is solely about genitals.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Hank
    It's in the cool links section because there is no un-cool links section and it isn't science; I don't know what it is.  Maddening, confusing, and I think they are getting the response they deserve but they have plenty of apologist kooks on their side too.
    Gerhard Adam
    I'm reminded of a phrase a friend of mine used and that could be an appropriate section....
    "Stupid People Tricks".  :)
    Mundus vult decipi
    Hank
    It would have to be a separate site.  And then I would spend all my time over there, laughing.   That can't be good.