Canadian Parents Raising "Genderless" Baby

[Zaune]

Link (No, I don't trust the source that far either, but it'll have to do until I find a better one.)

For most of us, as soon as a pregnancy is announced, the gender guessing game begins. And while some like to keep the sex of their baby a secret until the child is born, one couple has taken a decidedly different approach on revealing the sex of their offspring.

A Canadian couple from Toronto have decided to keep the gender of their four-month-old baby a secret in order to raise what they call a 'genderless' child. Storm will be raised as neither a boy nor girl and will choose a sex when he or she grows up.

Kathy Witterick and David Stocker have only revealed Storm’s gender to close members of the family, including their two young sons, one friend and the midwives who delivered the child.

After Storm was born on New Year’s Day, the parents sent out an email to the rest of their friends and loved ones, writing: “We’ve decided not to share Storm’s sex - a tribute to choice in a place of limitation, a stand up to what the world could become in Storm’s lifetime ( a more progressive place?...).”

The couple told the Toronto Star about the flood of unsupportive comments they have received. Friends expressed their fears of how Storm’s genderless nature would make the child vulnerable to bullying in the future. Another concern was that they thought the couple were actually taking away the newborn’s right to choice, by forcing their own ideology on the tot.

Defending their decision, Kathy said, “With the baby, even the people who love the most and know you intimately, the first question they ask is, ‘“Is it a girl or a boy?”’ David added, “If you really want to get to know someone, you don’t ask what’s between their legs.’


Kathy and David feel strongly about releasing their children from the constraints that society poses on males and females and want them to make their own decisions about how they act and look.

Their sons Jazz, five, and Kio, two, have the freedom to dress themselves and decide when they want to cut their hair. Kio’s favourite colour is purple and older sibling Jazz has long hair, he likes pink.

After being mistaken for a girl and home schooled because of how people would, “immediately react with Jazz over his gender” the couple decided to raise Storm genderless.

Mixed feelings about this. Whilst I commend any attempt to raise one's child without any preconceived notions about who and what they should be when they grow up, I'm pretty sure gender and sexual identity aren't something you can simply choose the way you decide on a career path.

[Anguirus]

This has already been done. The same exact thing. And as I recall, it didn't exactly turn out like the parents hoped. The kid went straight for the gender that matched her(IIRC) sex and stayed there.

A Canadian couple from Toronto have decided to keep the gender of their four-month-old baby a secret in order to raise what they call a 'genderless' child. Storm will be raised as neither a boy nor girl and will choose a sex when he or she grows up.

Kathy Witterick and David Stocker have only revealed Storm’s gender to close members of the family, including their two young sons, one friend and the midwives who delivered the child.

These two sentences egregiously misuse the word "gender."

Friends expressed their fears of how Storm’s genderless nature would make the child vulnerable to bullying in the future.

You got that right. As if naming the poor child "Storm" wasn't bad enough.

[Molyneux]

That...could almost certainly cause serious psychological harm, if they try to force Storm to remain genderless.

[Akhlut]

Ahem: David Reimer.

Human brains are wired very strongly for gender identity. My wife and I didn't set out to raise a child like this family, but we have never been shy about letting him play with whatever he wants, yet he still has this uncanny and strange devotion to very stereotypically male things even though we didn't really encourage it in the beginning. He is absolutely obsessed with cars and trains and dinosaurs and Godzilla and even making the occasional play gun out of things that aren't remotely shaped like guns (that last thing he did without us ever really showing him anything about guns).

So, I think that unless they force the child to conform to their own ideas when the child is 2 or whatever, the child will start to gravitate toward one gender or another regardless.

Further: kids aren't nearly as ignorant as some people suppose. The child will probably start favoring one parent or another once it finds out that the organs between its legs are more similar to mommy's or daddy's, I should imagine.

[Serafina]

To be fair, David Reimer was FORCED to assume a gender identity contrary to his own.

As long as they do not force remaining "genderless" on the child, i do not see any problems with it. If they just don't force any gender behavior on the child, i'd actually see it as a good thing.

Their notion that their child will pick any gender identity or sexual orientation is however most likely wrong. We have some pretty strong evidence that both are very hard-wired * and can not be changed by personal choice or external influence - only suppressed causing severe psychological harm.


*Note that it might be possible that the degree of hard-wiring varies from individual to individual, and that there might be people with very little or very mixed hard-wiring that could be genuinely described as gender-less or gender-mixed/third gender. We have strong evidence of hard-wiring in some individuals (transsexual&intersexual people as well as cases such as David Reimer), but we have not yet discerned the exact mechanism and causes - and there are people who seem to be most comfortable with a genderless/gendermixed identity. We can either conclude that they are hardwired to be so, or that gender is not actually hardwired - the evidence is, in my opinion, pointing to the former rather than the latter.

At best, this will give us some information about this. But it's very hard to raise a child genderless in our society (because other people tend to assign you a gender when you interact with them), so i doubt the results will be concise.

[Guardsman Bass]

"Storm" is an okay, if unusual name, for a girl. Not so much for a guy.

I think this should be rather interesting. Even aside from Anguirus mentioned, the kid would probably encounter gender differences once he started going to school, except that the parents are home-schooling.

[aieeegrunt]

What are the odds that this kid won't be completely fucked up by his loony parent's beliefs given that he or she is being home schooled?

[Bakustra]

What are the odds that this kid won't be completely fucked up by his loony parent's beliefs given that he or she is being home schooled?

What exactly are the "loony" beliefs that would fuck the kid up? A looser sense of gender roles?

[sciguy]

Defending their decision, Kathy said, “With the baby, even the people who love the most and know you intimately, the first question they ask is, ‘“Is it a girl or a boy?”’ David added, “If you really want to get to know someone, you don’t ask what’s between their legs.’

Yeah. If you really want to get to know the baby, you should ask about its favorite movie, or its opinion on a flat income tax.

[SCRawl]

"Storm" is an okay, if unusual name, for a girl. Not so much for a guy.

There was a professional baseball player, Storm Davis, who played in the '80s and '90s. He was so named because, well, it was stormy when he was born. I don't know if he suffered any extra bullying because of it.

But yeah, it's still pretty unusual. Not like, say, "Jazz" or "Kio", those sound completely vanilla.

[Guardsman Bass]

"Jazz" sounds pretty strange. "Kio", on the other hand, sounds like a Japanese name ("Kyo" or "Kiyo").

[Bakustra]

Defending their decision, Kathy said, “With the baby, even the people who love the most and know you intimately, the first question they ask is, ‘“Is it a girl or a boy?”’ David added, “If you really want to get to know someone, you don’t ask what’s between their legs.’

Yeah. If you really want to get to know the baby, you should ask about its favorite movie, or its opinion on a flat income tax.

Thanks for being deliberately dumb! The point they're trying to make just sailed over your head. See, the problem that they see is that if Storm's sex is known, then Storm will be treated differently depending on Storm's sex, and they don't want Storm to be coerced into gender roles based on that treatment. In other words, if kids knew that Storm was a girl, she'd be pressured into not playing with masculine toys and get the full barrage of institutional women-oriented sexism. Similarly, if kids knew that Storm was a boy, he'd be pressured into not playing with feminine toys and get the full barrage of institutional men-oriented sexism.

So, what the parents want to do is to enable Storm to grow up enough that he/she becomes set in his/her ways enough that when Storm reveals his/her sex/gender, these pressures will be less powerful and Storm will have a life freer from the constraints of gender roles. People, mildly uncomfortable with this, convert it into an effort to induce gender dysphoria and bring out the specter of evopsych biotruths. Well, shame on them for doing so.

[Simon_Jester]

Thanks for being deliberately dumb! The point they're trying to make just sailed over your head. See, the problem that they see is that if Storm's sex is known, then Storm will be treated differently depending on Storm's sex, and they don't want Storm to be coerced into gender roles based on that treatment. In other words, if kids knew that Storm was a girl, she'd be pressured into not playing with masculine toys and get the full barrage of institutional women-oriented sexism. Similarly, if kids knew that Storm was a boy, he'd be pressured into not playing with feminine toys and get the full barrage of institutional men-oriented sexism.

So, what the parents want to do is to enable Storm to grow up enough that he/she becomes set in his/her ways enough that when Storm reveals his/her sex/gender, these pressures will be less powerful and Storm will have a life freer from the constraints of gender roles. People, mildly uncomfortable with this, convert it into an effort to induce gender dysphoria and bring out the specter of evopsych biotruths. Well, shame on them for doing so.

So, Bakustra.

Your argument then is that gender is a matter of conditioning, and Storm in all probability doesn't come with a hardwired gender identity that would drive the child towards a set of activities classically favored by members of one sex, rather than members of the other?

Or have I misunderstood you?

[Bakustra]

You misunderstand me incredibly. The point is that while gender is most likely hardwired, gender roles are not. The goal is to try and free Storm from the two being conflated, so that Storm can be as masculine or effeminate or androgynous as he or she wants in his/her likes and desires, regardless of his/her sex and gender without the early-childhood severe social consequences of doing so, allowing him/her time to develop his/her own identity outside those constraints, and have it solidify somewhat to prevent it from being erased by society.

It's frankly disturbing the extent to which people conflate gender and gender roles, as though playing with cars was somehow hardwired into the male psyche tens or hundreds of thousands of years ago. That then leads naturally into the assumption that any circumvention of gender roles is an attempt to induce gender dysphoria. I mean, you do it yourself. You assume that playing with dolls is hardwired into female gender identity. You know what that, and the breadth of evolutionary psychology that spawned it, is? A god-damned just-so story, just dressed up with jargon to make it seem somehow inherently more reasonable than hippos being wrinkly because the first monkey left crumbs in the skin of the first hippo while he was bathing.

[someone_else]

A pointless experiment. For it to be worthwile it would have required raising him in a place without any access to info about gender. No tv, no computer, no books, no whatever. I don't fucking care of his gender, they will cripple this poor soul. Or simply not work beyond the age of uhm... 6? What's the age where a children can operate a computer and be flooded by cheap porn? I see 6 year olds operating computers with skill.

And all for what? I hate people like them. If you want to do serious social engineering make a sect and go to live in a god-forsaken place like anyone else.
Otherwise you are just crippling your child and then releasing it in a Bad World he will maybe never adapt to.
You don't live in a vacuum, and he/she will have to live in a world with different rules.

I wonder what they plan to do about sex education.

I'm pretty sure gender and sexual identity aren't something you can simply choose the way you decide on a career path.

Gender is scientific fact. You either have a dong or not (and all associated hormones and stuff). This theoretically goes on your ID card no matter how strongly you may oppose it.
Sexual identity is likely hardwired somehow (I've yet to know of any case of genuinely "converted" homosexuals), but in a civil world should be irrelevant beyond your social sphere.

[Serafina]

Gender is scientific fact. You either have a dong or not (and all associated hormones and stuff). This theoretically goes on your ID card no matter how strongly you may oppose it.

Actually, that is not gender - that's sex. And it's nowhere near as clear-cut as you think it is.

Gender is a word that has a lot of meanings. It can mean hardwired gender identity, in that case it essentially refers to the biology of ones brain. Or it can refer to behavior that is associated with either men or women and thus part of a gender role, in which case there are a lot of options for mix&match and it's definitely something acquired and subject to choice.

So sex=condition of the body, gender=behavior. It's really not that hard to differentiate between the two.

[Akhlut]

You misunderstand me incredibly. The point is that while gender is most likely hardwired, gender roles are not. The goal is to try and free Storm from the two being conflated, so that Storm can be as masculine or effeminate or androgynous as he or she wants in his/her likes and desires, regardless of his/her sex and gender without the early-childhood severe social consequences of doing so, allowing him/her time to develop his/her own identity outside those constraints, and have it solidify somewhat to prevent it from being erased by society.

I'm extremely doubtful of this. I can almost guarantee that Storm will learn about genders and some form of gender roles before s/he is 5 years old. All it will take is a single glance at his/her parents' genitals and Storm will glance at his/her own and Storm will start to make generalizations and start to work out gender roles from there. Humans are pattern finders par excellence and I doubt Storm will be an exception.

Since it is highly likely Storm will start to make these deductions (unless completely isolated from the greater world, which is itself harmful) at a young age, it is doubtful indeed that this little experiment will actually produce much in the way of lasting adults. Especially since children will modify their social behavior fairly strongly to try and fit in with their peer groups.

It's frankly disturbing the extent to which people conflate gender and gender roles, as though playing with cars was somehow hardwired into the male psyche tens or hundreds of thousands of years ago.

You mean humans didn't evolve with cars? Fucking mindblowing.

Anyway, even though certain behaviors didn't arise due to evolution, that does not mean that humans don't have specific wiring for adapting to certain behaviors. That is to say, no human has any specific adaptation toward preferences for playing with any specific toy, however, humans in general need to fit in with the larger society around them and thus are going to be very strongly disposed towards picking up how to work within a society.

Thus, Storm is going to learn how gender roles work regardless of her parents' actions and will attempt to use them for himself. Children also pick up on how lies work and try to use them to further their goals and it takes an enormous effort to diminish children from lieing.

That then leads naturally into the assumption that any circumvention of gender roles is an attempt to induce gender dysphoria. I mean, you do it yourself. You assume that playing with dolls is hardwired into female gender identity. You know what that, and the breadth of evolutionary psychology that spawned it, is?

While some evopsych is undoubtedly shit (such as that fellow suggesting black women are objectively ugly and objectively think they look better than they do), I think that impugning the whole study is rather a rash stance to take. Steven Pinker's work, for instance, is rather good.

[Eleas]

A pointless experiment. For it to be worthwile it would have required raising him in a place without any access to info about gender. No tv, no computer, no books, no whatever. I don't fucking care of his gender, they will cripple this poor soul. Or simply not work beyond the age of uhm... 6? What's the age where a children can operate a computer and be flooded by cheap porn? I see 6 year olds operating computers with skill.

And all for what? I hate people like them. If you want to do serious social engineering make a sect and go to live in a god-forsaken place like anyone else.

Yeah. For fuck's sake, these are the same kind of scum that would raise a child with two mothers. How dare they inflict their obvious contempt for societal norms on an innocent child?

Otherwise you are just crippling your child and then releasing it in a Bad World he will maybe never adapt to.
You don't live in a vacuum, and he/she will have to live in a world with different rules.

I tell you, it's been heading that way since the those ghastly abolitionists first started transgressing against the boundaries of God and Nature.

I wonder what they plan to do about sex education.

Probably child molesters, too.

[Akhlut]

Since it is highly likely Storm will start to make these deductions (unless completely isolated from the greater world, which is itself harmful) at a young age, it is doubtful indeed that this little experiment will actually produce much in the way of lasting adults.

Whoops! My bad, I mean "much in the way of lasting adult behavior." Serves me right for not re-reading my post and only checking the formatting.

[Broomstick]

In other words, if kids knew that Storm was a girl, she'd be pressured into not playing with masculine toys and get the full barrage of institutional women-oriented sexism.

Yeah, yeah, yeah - I got that treatment myself, including not one but two trips to "charm school", and it didn't take. I'm not some delicate flower working in an elegant office wearing a fashionable skirt and heels, I'm a delicate flower busting up concrete and hauling lumber in the heat and the rain wearing jeans and workboots.

While nurture has an effect (for example, I do know how to sit in a dress and walk in heels) I don't think it can alter the fundamental gender identity of a person. It may not be 100% hardwired in all people, but nuture doesn't seem to have very much effect on it.

In other words, I think these people are engaging in an experiment with their child while having a poor understanding of what gender identity is - unless Storm is actually intersexed, in which case their approach may have some merit.

[Bakustra]

In other words, if kids knew that Storm was a girl, she'd be pressured into not playing with masculine toys and get the full barrage of institutional women-oriented sexism.

Yeah, yeah, yeah - I got that treatment myself, including not one but two trips to "charm school", and it didn't take. I'm not some delicate flower working in an elegant office wearing a fashionable skirt and heels, I'm a delicate flower busting up concrete and hauling lumber in the heat and the rain wearing jeans and workboots.

While nurture has an effect (for example, I do know how to sit in a dress and walk in heels) I don't think it can alter the fundamental gender identity of a person. It may not be 100% hardwired in all people, but nuture doesn't seem to have very much effect on it.

In other words, I think these people are engaging in an experiment with their child while having a poor understanding of what gender identity is - unless Storm is actually intersexed, in which case their approach may have some merit.

This isn't about gender identity, it's about gender roles. The two are not equivalent, and being intersexed is independent of gender. The term you're looking for is "genderqueer".

[Broomstick]

Thank you, but I can find my own terms.

Given that Storm has to live in society, and the specific society in question does have gender roles, the notion you can raise a child free of them is... bizarre. Unless you want to completely isolate the child from society until puberty or adulthood, which would make integrating into said society quite difficult.

My point was that Storm already had a gender at birth, and there is little if anything that can be done to alter that. Storm also has behavior preferences that may or may not conform to society's gender roles and, again, not a lot can be done to alter that. A girl with masculine preferences, or a boy with feminine preferences, can be raised with everyone knowing their sex without really altering those preferences.

And "genderqueer" is not as simplistic as pointing to a woman in construction work or a male nurse. "Genderqueer" is involved with gender identity, which is different than a career or hobby preference. Preferring to work outside rather than in an office does not make me genderqueer, nor would working in an office wearing extremely feminine attire rule out my being genderqueer.

And no, being intersexed is not independent of having gender. Most intersex people do have a specific gender identity, although it doesn't always fit with their physical genitalia.

Personally, I'd much rather work at getting society to accept the "non-traditional" types and the outliers rather than pretending that newborns and toddlers somehow don't have a gender.

[Bakustra]

That's not what this is about. The idea is to try and restrict the ability of society to influence Storm with its gender roles until such a time as Storm has a sufficiently developed personality as to resist society's ability to mold him or her. Again, you are conflating gender identity with gender roles, and also conflating sex. Intersexuality has no direct relationship to gender identity, which you yourself acknowledge without conceding. In addition, genderqueer is a recognized social-sciences term used to describe individuals who feel that they don't fit into either gender, which is what I thought you were hinting at with your comments on intersexuality.

Now, you're saying that society cannot influence the behaviors of people. I wonder if you recognize the impact of what you're saying? I'll leave it at that.

[Broomstick]

That's not what this is about. The idea is to try and restrict the ability of society to influence Storm with its gender roles until such a time as Storm has a sufficiently developed personality as to resist society's ability to mold him or her.

And when is that going to be? When Storm is 86? Are they going to lock the child in a room until the age of 30?

As soon as the kid starts going to school society is going to start attempting to impose a gender role.

Again, you are conflating gender identity with gender roles, and also conflating sex.

As much as people would like to pretend they aren't, those three actually are connected to a degree.

Intersexuality has no direct relationship to gender identity, which you yourself acknowledge without conceding.

I'm not sure why such a blatant statement of the obvious requires "conceding". I'm sorry, were you trying to start an argument or something? I was commenting on the stupidity of Storm's parents but I can widen the scope if that's desired.

In addition, genderqueer is a recognized social-sciences term used to describe individuals who feel that they don't fit into either gender, which is what I thought you were hinting at with your comments on intersexuality.

Why would a parent want to induce "genderqueerness" in a child? That's like saying you're raising your kid to be a transsexual. Given the level of discrimination and oppression in society it's nuts, even child abuse, to do such a thing - because of how society will react not because I think there is something wrong with either state of being. It's one thing for a family to be wholly accepting of a genderqueer, transsexual, or other not-typical child, it's a different matter to attempt to induce such a state.

Now, you're saying that society cannot influence the behaviors of people. I wonder if you recognize the impact of what you're saying? I'll leave it at that.

Oh, please, you're being deliberately obtuse.

Under threat of death societies in the past have induced homosexuals to either remain celibate for life or engage solely in heterosexual practices but they were still homosexuals. Society certainly can change your behavior, but it can't change your gender identity.

I can wear a dress and heels and act every bit the feminine lady if the situation calls for it, and I have, but that doesn't change the fact it feels uncomfortable and unnatural to me, as if I'm playing a part in a play. It's not the real me. Sure, society does affect my behavior, and I choose to modify my behavior when I feel it's to my advantage, but it doesn't change who I am inside my head.

[Bakustra]

Okay, time for a point-by-point.

That's not what this is about. The idea is to try and restrict the ability of society to influence Storm with its gender roles until such a time as Storm has a sufficiently developed personality as to resist society's ability to mold him or her.

And when is that going to be? When Storm is 86? Are they going to lock the child in a room until the age of 30?

As soon as the kid starts going to school society is going to start attempting to impose a gender role.

Interestingly enough, they are homeschooling Storm. If you had read the article, you would note that they had homeschooled their older son because he was getting bullied for liking pink.

Again, you are conflating gender identity with gender roles, and also conflating sex.

As much as people would like to pretend they aren't, those three actually are connected to a degree.

Ah, yes, biotruths. Can you point to the genetic or cognitive structures that cause women to like pink, then? Because that's what "gender roles are related to gender identity" comes down to in the end. Meanwhile, suggesting that there is a causative linkage between sex and gender identity is pretty repugnant in its consequences, so I will assume that you didn't know what you were saying.

Intersexuality has no direct relationship to gender identity, which you yourself acknowledge without conceding.

I'm not sure why such a blatant statement of the obvious requires "conceding". I'm sorry, were you trying to start an argument or something? I was commenting on the stupidity of Storm's parents but I can widen the scope if that's desired.

In other words, I think these people are engaging in an experiment with their child while having a poor understanding of what gender identity is - unless Storm is actually intersexed, in which case their approach may have some merit.

Maybe you should take it up with this lady. She also appears to be using your identity, the thief!

In addition, genderqueer is a recognized social-sciences term used to describe individuals who feel that they don't fit into either gender, which is what I thought you were hinting at with your comments on intersexuality.

Why would a parent want to induce "genderqueerness" in a child? That's like saying you're raising your kid to be a transsexual. Given the level of discrimination and oppression in society it's nuts, even child abuse, to do such a thing - because of how society will react not because I think there is something wrong with either state of being. It's one thing for a family to be wholly accepting of a genderqueer, transsexual, or other not-typical child, it's a different matter to attempt to induce such a state.

That's not what they're trying to do. Can you read, or are you just good at faking it?

Now, you're saying that society cannot influence the behaviors of people. I wonder if you recognize the impact of what you're saying? I'll leave it at that.

Oh, please, you're being deliberately obtuse.

Under threat of death societies in the past have induced homosexuals to either remain celibate for life or engage solely in heterosexual practices but they were still homosexuals. Society certainly can change your behavior, but it can't change your gender identity.

I can wear a dress and heels and act every bit the feminine lady if the situation calls for it, and I have, but that doesn't change the fact it feels uncomfortable and unnatural to me, as if I'm playing a part in a play. It's not the real me. Sure, society does affect my behavior, and I choose to modify my behavior when I feel it's to my advantage, but it doesn't change who I am inside my head.

So are gender roles ingrained genetically, or congenitally, such that there is no influence of society on how young children are able to express themselves? In other words, are you suggesting that tomboyishness is genetic/otherwise congenital? Really? This is really the road you're taking?