Originally Posted by Ligeia
Kind of silly thinking on their part, although I admittedly did not read the article in any real detail.
I would say that a proper understanding of modern biology shows that there is not much of a nature/nurture divide. Rather, we are always embedded in an environment that always has some degree of effect on us, right from embryonic development and onwards. That sort of thinking produces the unwarranted view that gender is strictly a social construct.
Also, the parents overrate their ability to guide their child. The idea that they can protect them from gender associations in a society that is full of this sort of thinking is honestly laughable.
I think there is something to be said for gender-neutral parenting, ie. you look at everything through the lens of a person parenting an individual, not a gender. I also think certain arguments intended to prove that something is the "natural" behaviour for things of type x are completely silly. So I'm at least somewhat sympathetic with the parents' desires. It's just not clear to me how to accomplish those desires in a practical and meaningful way.
I get what you mean but i go back to my question.. What's wrong with a gender in itself? Maybe i misunderstand what you're saying but even saying there's not much biological divide meaans to me there's a biological difference, trying to negate this difference means in itself one gives more or less value to a gender against the other. Are not his/her parents of different genders? So they're saying all their life is been a mess because they were labeled a male and a female? It's all too philosophical considering we're talking about a baby