Parents keep child's gender secret (Toronto)

always_sunni_ · 05-25-2011, 03:55 AM

Link

Cliffs:

Parents: Witterick (wife, 38 yrs), Stocker (husband, 39 yrs)
Children: Jazz (boy, 5 yrs), Kio (boy, 2 yrs), Storm (??, baby)

Quote:

The neighbours know Witterick and her husband, David Stocker, are raising a genderless baby. But they don’t pretend to understand it.

While there’s nothing ambiguous about Storm’s genitalia, they aren’t telling anyone whether their third child is a boy or a girl.

The only people who know are Storm’s brothers, a close family friend and the two midwives who helped deliver the baby in a birthing pool at their Toronto home on New Year’s Day.

Quote:

Witterick and Stocker believe they are giving their children the freedom to choose who they want to be, unconstrained by social norms about males and females.

Quote:

Upstairs they co-sleep curled up on two mattresses pushed together on the floor of the master bedroom, under a heap of mismatched pillows and blankets.

Quote:

Witterick practices unschooling, an offshoot of home-schooling centred on the belief that learning should be driven by a child’s curiosity. There are no report cards, no textbooks and no tests. For unschoolers, learning is about exploring and asking questions, “not something that happens by rote from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. weekdays in a building with a group of same-age people, planned, implemented and assessed by someone else,” says Witterick.

Quote:

Jazz was old enough for school last September, but chose to stay home. “When we would go and visit programs, people — children and adults — would immediately react with Jazz over his gender,” says Witterick, adding the conversation would gravitate to his choice of pink or his hairstyle.

That’s mostly why he doesn’t want to go to school. When asked if it upsets him, he nods, but doesn’t say more.

Quote:

“We spend more time than we should providing explanations for why we do things this way,” says Witterick. “I regret that (Jazz) has to discuss his gender before people ask him meaningful questions about what he does and sees in this world, but I don't think I am responsible for that — the culture that narrowly defines what he should do, wear and look like is.”

durkadurka33 · 05-25-2011, 09:13 AM

Meh, good for them. Seems like they're doing it for a reason.

FBandit · 05-25-2011, 09:27 AM

Would be interesting to see what happens if you raise 100 of these on an isolated island.

jb9 · 05-25-2011, 10:16 AM

Way to give your kids no options under the pretext of giving them options...

The intentions may be good (emphasis on "may"...), but it seems cruel to use your children as a political statement or a social experiment.

madnak · 05-25-2011, 10:24 AM

Yeah, easy way to **** kids up. So much for them.

FBandit · 05-25-2011, 11:06 AM

Their parents let them to wear pink clothes and have long hair, if they want to. I don't see why we should be outraged.

jb9 · 05-25-2011, 11:19 AM

Who said anyone was outraged?

I think they are being mean to their kids, and I feel sorry for the kids, but a lot of parents screw their kids up. They could do worse.

AceMuncher · 05-25-2011, 11:21 AM

Seeing the picture within the article I would say Storm looks way more manly than his brother with braids.

Flip-Flop · 05-25-2011, 11:48 AM

Child molesters gonna child molest.

PtMx · 05-25-2011, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FBandit

Their parents let them to wear pink clothes and have long hair, if they want to. I don't see why we should be outraged.

To me, the following is more obviously concerning:

Quote:

Witterick practices unschooling, an offshoot of home-schooling centred on the belief that learning should be driven by a child’s curiosity. There are no report cards, no textbooks and no tests. For unschoolers, learning is about exploring and asking questions, “not something that happens by rote from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. weekdays in a building with a group of same-age people, planned, implemented and assessed by someone else,” says Witterick.

BadAtMeth · 05-25-2011, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jb9

The intentions may be good (emphasis on "may"...), but it seems cruel to use your children as a political statement or a social experiment.

Pretty much every parent who has a child these days uses it as a social experiment. It's kind of unavoidable the way we've structured society.

.TIA · 05-25-2011, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jb9

Who said anyone was outraged?

I think they are being mean to their kids, and I feel sorry for the kids, but a lot of parents screw their kids up. They could do worse.

^this

Quote:

Originally Posted by FBandit

Their parents let them to wear pink clothes and have long hair, if they want to. I don't see why we should be outraged.

the children don't understand the implications of gender roles and how that relates to fitting in society. They will probably never fit in and never know why

jb9 · 05-25-2011, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadAtMeth

Pretty much every parent who has a child these days uses it as a social experiment. It's kind of unavoidable the way we've structured society.

Because...

madnak · 05-25-2011, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FBandit

Their parents let them to wear pink clothes and have long hair, if they want to. I don't see why we should be outraged.

If a kid wants to wear pink clothes within a normal social context, that's one thing.

If a kid's parents deliberately isolate that kid from all outside social norms, and insert their own norms in place of them, then the kid's preferences can't be taken at face value. Healthy development as the kid learns to balance social expectations with personal preference can't happen.

Edit - Not to mention the failure of these kids to be inducted into the norms of a social group will leave them unable to participate in the observance of norms and rituals, and thus absent even the most basic social skills.

Dasq1306 · 05-25-2011, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by madnak

If a kid wants to wear pink clothes within a normal social context, that's one thing.

If a kid's parents deliberately isolate that kid from all outside social norms, and insert their own norms in place of them, then the kid's preferences can't be taken at face value. Healthy development as the kid learns to balance social expectations with personal preference can't happen.

Edit - Not to mention the failure of these kids to be inducted into the norms of a social group will leave them unable to participate in the observance of norms and rituals, and thus absent even the most basic social skills.

That this isnt obvious to everyone very much worries me