Gender neutralization. Is the premise outlined in “X” and currently happening to Storm wrong or right?
There are a lot of problems arouse on the issue of Gender neutralization. People start commenting about it, they blog, post videos on Youtube etc. They all answered the question if gender neutralization is either right or wrong and if it’s appropriate to early new bourns?
In the case of the Canadian Parents raising gender-neutral babies by not revealing the sex of their baby to anyone outside like their friends even their relatives have brought criticism from experts and non-experts. Storms parents plan to keep his gender a secret for it likes he or a she. Storm’s parents believe that by having a neutral kids they promote freedom and giving their children the opportunity to be creative and be free from social norms to male and female behavior. Even if they have good intentions, people worry that parents might expose their kids to be social outcasts of the society just because they’re different.
In my understanding of gender neutralization it is the idea of a person having the free will to have either a manly or womanly behavior. An example of it was the article X: A Fabulous Child’s Story by Lois Gould. According to the article, x is a neutral baby because no one knows about whether it is a girl of a boy. So X’s parents have decided to by X a lot of everything, from blue clothes to pink clothes and to boy and girls toy. Also the Jones, x’s parents have to be careful about how they played with little x. They think that if they bounce it a lot it will be strong and active they’d be treating it as a boy, the same as cuddling X and kiss it and tell it how sweet it was they’d be likely treating it as a girl. The time X grew big enough they can’t distinguish it as neither a boy nor a girl. The idea of the article is telling people that gender doesn’t really matters. Gender Stereotypes should be stopped because people can be good at everything not...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document