Frank Sidney Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 Thats because they're idiots Complete idiots...They're playing games to impress other like minded pillocks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 For example a couple in Toronto are avoiding telling anyone the sex of their baby 'Storm' to avoid any stereotyping by other people and so influence on how the child develops due to sexual stereotyping:Weirdos. People like that shouldn't be allowed to have kids. Canadian society suffers quite badly from political correctness - and this is the sort of empty-headed liberal PC nonsense that comes from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tatman Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 the old kids-seen-not-heard, boy-are-hard, girls-are-giggly etc approach has been proven to not be up to the task anymore. other ways have to be tried out. Not a case of 'not up to th task anymore'. More like 'been replaced with more liberal and far less effective ways that have proven not to work and so a switch to the older method would be a good thing' i feel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaFoot Posted May 28, 2011 Author Share Posted May 28, 2011 I think sexuality is the wrong word yes it is. That's what happens when I post late at night after a bottle of red! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hennypenny Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 I can see the point of doing this. I read a lot of studies around gender when my children were small, and it was shown that people did behave quite differently towards babies based on their gender. When babies were dressed in blue babygrows, people interacted with them more physically, more bouncing them around etc, when they were dressed in pink babygrows (regardless of their actual gender), people interacted with them more gently. So as people do treat them differently even at the earliest of stages I can see the point of not telling them so they can't impose gender values onto the baby. I did a bit of this experiment with my own children, my son was allowed to choose his own clothes, and his own hairstyles, he went for skirts, pretty hairslides and his favourite colour was pink. He was always mistaken for a girl too, but he was happy. He has grown up into a 6' 2" straight male who trains at cage fighting for a hobby, so I don't think it has damaged his male identity - lol. My daughter was also allowed to choose her own and she too went for very girly, pink, frilly etc. and is a quite feminine girl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tatman Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 yes it is. That's what happens when I post late at night after a bottle of red! Show should i just ignore that pm you sent me last night:suspect: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 I can see the point of doing this. I read a lot of studies around gender when my children were small, and it was shown that people did behave quite differently towards babies based on their gender. When babies were dressed in blue babygrows, people interacted with them more physically, more bouncing them around etc, when they were dressed in pink babygrows (regardless of their actual gender), people interacted with them more gently. So as people do treat them differently even at the earliest of stages I can see the point of not telling them so they can't impose gender values onto the baby. I did a bit of this experiment with my own children, my son was allowed to choose his own clothes, and his own hairstyles, he went for skirts, pretty hairslides and his favourite colour was pink. He was always mistaken for a girl too, but he was happy. He has grown up into a 6' 2" straight male who trains at cage fighting for a hobby, so I don't think it has damaged his male identity - lol. My daughter was also allowed to choose her own and she too went for very girly, pink, frilly etc. and is a quite feminine girl. Dammit penny I so wanted you to say your daughter is a cage fighter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaimani Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 Not a case of 'not up to th task anymore'. More like 'been replaced with more liberal and far less effective ways that have proven not to work and so a switch to the older method would be a good thing' i feel. not sure i agree, T. it was obviously not working anymore. it had to be replaced. anything that replaces the old harsh patriarchal system is going to seem 'liberal'. 'older ways' worked, sort of, in the olden days. with technology, urbanization etc they just do not work. the current ways are not foll proof, but they're a damn site better than the 'old ways'. that said, some people take it too far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 Storm is definitely a girls name! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riche Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 It is fact you are a product of your own free will, the will of your parents and siblings. If you put a child with Gay parents you don't make that child gay be you do sensitise that child to accept gay relationship as normal. Gay relationships are not normal, thats not to sat they are wrong. A child should be shown the hetrosexual model as normal for bringing new life into the world and Homosexuality as a personal choice deviating from the norm. If it where normal we would be able to reproduce through autogamy. Or would have had to wait until the turkey baster had been invented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.