Gender and Social Construction, or, My Sociology Degree Allows Me To B.S. With The Best of Them

I'm a liberal person.  I have a degree in sociology--a science where you pretty much have to truly believe that gender and sexuality fall on a continuum rather than in simple categories.  Still, I was annoyed when I read this article.

A couple in Sweden is keeping their two-year old child's gender a secret from everyone.  They refer to the kid only as "Pop".  They're doing this because it's "cruel to bring a child into the world with a blue or pink stamp on their forehead."

This is yet another example of a parent taking an idea and raising it to the power of crazy.

I dress my daughter in baby clothes from the Boy's section at times.  I see no reason that blue, puppies, and monsters should only be allowed on boy babies.  I don't freak out if people call her a boy, because she's just a baby.    She'll have toy cars and cranes, and if I have a baby boy he can play with baby dolls or tutus if he desires.  As she's growing up, I don't want people to only tell her she's pretty--she's also brilliant and funny and sweet and brave and strong.  No matter what she decides about her sexuality or even her gender, I'll always love her and support her. 

But do I think she's going be stunted and confused because people view her as a girl?  Um, no.

My issues/questions:

1) Why this extreme method?  It makes it seem more like a social experiment based on ideology.  The child does not live in a vacuum--he or she is going to hear about people wondering about his/her gender and going to wonder why it's such a big deal, and may result in feelings of shame and embarrassment.  I think that you can create a supportive environment for whatever preferences your child chooses without resorting to hiding gender completely.     

2) How long can this go on?  This is going to have to end before Pop goes to school.  I hope.

4) Are they reinforcing opposite gender expectations?  Are the parents going to be disappointed if Pop is a girl and loves pink dresses?  If he's a boy and loves trucks and sports?  I could totally see this kid disappointing his/her parents if he/she is a walking stereotype.  Maybe I'm not giving them enough credit.

5) Gender pronouns.  I sure hope the Swedish language is better equipped to handle a genderless person because it makes me sad to think about a child being called a dehumanizing "it".

Homeless American Girl Doll

You don't know what American Girl dolls are? Then you've been living in a child-free bubble, my friend.

American Girl dolls are extremely popular and expensive dolls with accompanying story books. You can buy them elaborate wardrobes. There's even an American Girl Place in New York where you can get your doll's hair done and eat lunch at a doll-friendly table for a mere 24 dollars a person.

I used to like the American Girl books. They're fun, nice pictures, and the girls have nice historically accurate adventures. I even had a Samantha doll (the Edwardian era one for those of you not in the know.)

The latest one is (drum roll please)....a homeless doll.

That's right, you heard me. This beautiful doll pictured above (in the oh-so-precious sundress) is homeless. And she costs $95.

Her "story"? Her dad abandons the family and she and her mother are forced for financial reasons to live in their car.

Here's my issue with this.

1) This trivializes homelessness. We do not introduce serious literary themes like gangs, drugs, and mental illness to children until they are at least in middle school. The 6-9 year old girls playing with these dolls will see homelessness as another "adventure". They'll more than likely pretend they are homeless and pretend to be living in a car.

2) It makes it so it seems that living in your car is the ONLY option. There are so many resources out there for people to utilize--I hope that no child ever gets the message that sleeping in your car is the only option.

3) None of the proceeds go towards helping homeless children. I would forgive the first two issues if the company was doing this to raise awareness and help children....but nope. No dice.

The Marshmellow Test

Oh, The Temptation from Steve V on Vimeo.

Cute video, huh?

And here's what it means for these kids in the future:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/05/18/090518fa_fact_lehrer

Sometimes psychology scares me.

Lactation Activation

I could talk for hours about the benefits of breastfeeding. I'm planning on breastfeeding Mo-mo for a year. I consider myself a "Lactivist". I get pissed off when I read stories such as these. (Really? Lactation is NOT a condition linked to pregnancy?) Breastfeeding is beautiful and natural and blah blah blah, you get the point.

And yet I am completely creeped out by this.

I think it's in part because of the reason he's doing it. "Anything that doesn't do any harm is worth trying out." Hmmm. That's pretty sketchy reasoning. I bet he used the same line to talk his girlfriend into a threesome.

It's not that he's committed to the idea of being a nurturer or wants to bond with his child better, he just can't think of a reason NOT to do it. The benefit to future fathers seems almost like an afterthought.

And he clearly is in it for the shock value. He has to pull out the pump during class? Breastfeeding women don't even do that. They do their best to find a quiet, private location and pump there. Women who adopt and want to breastfeed go through the same routine of constant pumping--but I bet none of them find it necessary to do it in class.

Oh, and I love how the quoted endocrinologist makes all dads sound like bumbling idiots who can't deal with a crying baby if there is no pacifier nearby. I know my husband's first reaction when Mo-mo's crying is to pull a Peter Griffin. Riiiiiiiiiiight.



Besides, would you really want to see this guy breastfeeding a baby?

Don't you want to suckle from my teat?

I shall leave you with that image. Happy nightmares.