this is an article about swedish parents who have chosen to keep their childs sex ambiguous to all but those who have changed diapers in attempt rid their child of subjection to predefined socially constructed gender roles.

upon reading this article im mixed on my feelings toward the situation.

for one, i think it is wonderful to give pop the attempted opportunity to grow up in a gender neutral context. pop will be able to develop a full range of emotions, those appropriated for women and men, and be able to display feelings according to the given situation rather than the predetermined socially acceptable gender response. pop will not be locked into certain gender roles and identity; toys will be toys and it wont matter if those choices comply with socially constructed gender roles.

on the other hand there are certain biological and chemical differences between males and females that affect the way that people interact with and the world around them. in addition as individuals grow and puberty hits leading to adolescence, it is helpful to have others going through similar changes and feelings to better cope with these changes. should a girl never identify as a girl how is she to cope with the growth of breasts and the beginning of menstruation at the fragile age of twelve.

speaking of this sex identity, this is among the first things children become aware of. in the two year old classroom i hear, "me big boy" or the correct use of pronouns in conversation. these identifications and attention to diversity are crucial to the child's cognitive development. this is also the age where potty training begins; the bathroom becomes a large part of the the child's day and soon children recognize the physical differences in the bodies of boys and girls. while in the bathroom with the children, i had about four kids taking turns to use two toilets and then washing their hands and another two to three children waiting as i changed their diapers. one girl commented as she saw one of the boys with his pants down "(insert name here) has a tail". these are natural tendencies and observations that are important for children to make. in addition to their own identities they apply those same identities on the adults in their life. a three year old looks to me and says "are you a girl or a boy?" as much as i have come to be hurt by this question, i can not be angry at my children for such curiosity. they are in a development point in their lives where they are working through schemes to understand the environment they live in. another time at a park after asking the same question, a girl asked me where my long hair was if i was a girl.

working with children, i watch the acceptance and rejection of gender roles and stereotypes at play. i have boys as young as 18 months and as old as four years that run to the dress up chest to grab their favorite dress to wear around the classroom. on the contrary i hear "(insert name here) is wearing girls shoes" which is followed teachers witty contradictions to those kinds of statements.

there is a difference between the observable sex of an individual and the gender of an individual. this is where the line gets blurry as it becomes difficult to identify as a biological sex but not conform to gender binary standards. it seems that the attempt of pops parents is to help pop develop into an individual based on pops experiences as opposed to societys construction of who pop schould be based on pops biology. moreover it is ashame, there is no way to separate this biological identity from the gender identity at this early age.

more than a statement to pop, it seems pops parents decision speaks more to society stating that gender is a social construct that is not necessary in ones development. a child can wear dresses or pants, play with cars or dolls, grow long hair or short hair and it doesnt make that person any less of who he/she is.


on a side note, midawy through the article there is a mention of another story discussing david/brenda. this story disturbed me on so many levels.