Stupid Parenting Tricks – Feminist Gender Neutrality Edition
27. Jun, 2009 
2 Comments
A couple of parents in Sweden have decided to throw away anything to do with reality and human development in order to follow a particularly silly conceit of modern radical feminism.
“In an interview with newspaper Svenska Dagbladet in March, the parents were quoted saying their decision was rooted in the feminist philosophy that gender is a social construction.†– link
Many radical feminists believe this stuff because it goes a long way to giving them their much needed victimization feelings. Why not? They believe lots of other inconvenient realities must be social constructs, so why not this one? We can just add it to the list of things about human nature they find upsetting.
it is amazing to me that as science shows us more and how personality including gender is intertwined with our physical selves (hormonally, genetically and more) they want to ignore it all. This sort of silliness has been tried before, with horrible results.
“Both Nordenström and Pinker refer to a controversial case from 1967 when a circumcision left one of two twin brothers without a penis. Dr. John Money, who asserted that gender was learned rather than innate, convinced the parents to raise ‘David’ as ‘Brenda’ and the child had cosmetic genitalia reconstruction surgery.
She was raised as a female, with girls’ clothes, games and codes of behaviour. The parents never told Brenda the secret until she was a teenager and rebelled against femininity. She then started receiving testosterone injections and underwent another genetic reconstruction process to become David again. David Reimer denounced the experiment as a crushing failure before committing suicide at the age of 38.†– link
It is hard to underestimate the degree to which many of these people have to deny the world around them and deny human nature to keep their illusions alive. The more we see of the level of cognitive dissonance required however the clearer it gets.
What an amazingly incompetent blog post. How can you compare this to the David/Brenda-case as a similar case rather than an example of just how much damage gender-stamping can cause to a child. If they raised David/Brenda as in your referring article instead of applying made up "codes of behaviour" David/Brende would most likely end up less confused, and realize that the step between man and women is not that wide as people want it to be.
"She was raised as a female, with girls’ clothes, games and codes of behaviour."
Girls' clothes, games and codes of behaviour is indeed a social construction. It changes from year to year. It does not look the same today as it did only 30 years ago, or 200 years, 2000 years. How would you explain that with hormones and genetically differenses?
Clothing styles change, games change (in detail, rarely in form of course) codes of behaviour change of course – but not a single bit of any of that leads to the idea that the fundemental differences in gender are also social constructions.
Maybe the point is too subtle for you :: shrugs :: thats not really my problem.
Thanks for your input