|
Post by itachirumon on Dec 23, 2011 10:59:16 GMT -5
That was essentially my life. I would never want that for my kid, so look, I GET where you're coming from. To an extent. But when its that age, they aren't going to remember for more than maybe a year. Its not gonna follow the kid like it would in high school. I still feel like it should be up to them. I'm not my hypothetical kid, so I dunno what level of confidance he or she has. Maybe they're the shy Rolo or the Genki Girl, and that dictates how brave they want to be. But again, the OPTION needs to be there, and I need to be OPEN to it.
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Dec 23, 2011 11:04:33 GMT -5
why are you equating one little incident when the child is in kindergarten to traumatic experiences for life? Most kids don't have the memory span to even remember what the hell they ate for breakfast the day before when they're in that age bracket we're talking about. Hell, I'm not even sure I remember much of my preschool-kindergarten days other than I wasn't the only one with physical abnormalities there.
to make it clear I'm not talking about something like 5th grade or 8-14 years of age. I'm talking about preschool-1st grade. kids about 4-5. They're hyper, they're curious, they obviously are able to think about gender norms as shown in the story. But I really have doubts those 4-5 year olds are going to remember something that happened once. A 9 year old probably. But with my experience with children in the 4-5 year old age bracket I don't see it happening that they remember it and hold it over Timmy's head.
You also ignored my point about how it depends on the environment. As well as how it depends on the parent's personal experiences to make them feel the way they do. As well as my point about finding a middle ground that makes Timmy feel good and the parent feel safe.
Also, really? Are you serious about the menu thing? That's not even in the realm of arguing a proper point. Letting a child pick something that affects the entire family's eating habits does not equate to a bit of experimentation wearing a dress that 60 years ago was the norm for boys!
Also, didn't I mention my experiences throughout school how nobody gave a shit how I dressed or the fact that I was quiet? I had a bully in high school but other than that things went well throughout my entire school career. My problem was the crippling dysphoria that comes with the territory of being physically disabled. But this does not come into play when it comes to talking about letting a child barely out of toddlerdom being able to wear a dress.
|
|
|
Post by cestlefun17 on Dec 23, 2011 11:10:55 GMT -5
This is why I liked the part of the article where the teacher put the "boy" and "girl" activities on the board. This is where "Be yourself" should be encouraged: I don't believe certain hobbies or activities should be cast as only for boys or only for girls. A child's personal interests should be encouraged and nurtured, and who knows? maybe develop into a successful career.
On the other hand, personal appearance is purely about how others perceive you. It is is the first thing that people see and forms people's first impression, which is why I lean more towards fitting in in this department. Wearing a dress or a costume in public might say "I'm not afraid to be myself!" but it also says "I don't care at all what other people think about me or how I look to others." (Perhaps this is considered a positive thing to many people here; I am saying that in some degree it is, but not entirely.)
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Dec 23, 2011 11:15:32 GMT -5
The problem, Cestle, is that it's wrong for society to form a negative opinion of a boy simply because he's wearing a dress.
|
|
|
Post by Kit Walker on Dec 23, 2011 11:19:03 GMT -5
I still got picked on at 5-6. Not nearly as bad as it would later get, but I was still "the weird kid". It doesn't matter that they don't remember the specific incident, it matters that gets labeled as "weird". Once that has happened, you may as well consider changing schools. Kids are cruel, from the time they start talking until they discover better things to do (drugs, alcohol, sex, serious sports...high school is when I stopped being bullied). I do love what this teacher did. She handled the situation beautifully. But I doubt most teachers will be so accommodating and accepting, and we know most parents won't be. Allie from the story was already having the seeds of a shitty elementary school experience planted. And the food thing wasn't intended as an equivalent, it was meant to demonstrate that it is a parent's job to create rules and boundaries to protect the kid. Saying "no dresses at school" can (though it doesn't seem to in Cestle's case) come from the same place as "don't try to take apart the electronics" (my cousin's six year old tried that once). The problem, Cestle, is that it's wrong for society to form a negative opinion of a boy simply because he's wearing a dress. Yes it is. However, unnecessarily subjecting your child to the slings and arrows of the world won't do a lick to change that.
|
|
|
Post by Smurfette Principle on Dec 23, 2011 12:42:22 GMT -5
I can remember flashes of kindergarten and first grade. Mostly I remember vague good memories of friends, with some very sharp memories of feeling alone. I'd hate for my kid to be bullied. I'd also hate for them to be oppressed by society. I think I'd let my kid wear a dress in public, like to a mall or something - "public" is usually anonymous enough that you can do that, and young kids are androgynous enough that it wouldn't really matter. At school, probably not, but I'd explain to the kid before and after why it wasn't a good idea.
|
|
|
Post by The_L on Dec 23, 2011 12:48:47 GMT -5
That was essentially my life. I would never want that for my kid, so look, I GET where you're coming from. To an extent. But when its that age, they aren't going to remember for more than maybe a year. Its not gonna follow the kid like it would in high school. I still feel like it should be up to them. I'm not my hypothetical kid, so I dunno what level of confidance he or she has. Maybe they're the shy Rolo or the Genki Girl, and that dictates how brave they want to be. But again, the OPTION needs to be there, and I need to be OPEN to it. Seconding all of this. I had no friends between 2nd grade and my junior year in COLLEGE. Classmates either picked on me or ignored me, every day, and then wondered why I had poor social skills. I loved learning, but I quickly learned to hate school because those other kids would be there. I didn't have my little brother as a social crutch, the Internet wasn't mainstream enough for me to have heard of it yet, and I was young enough to be very obviously less mature than any of my classmates. After my 9th birthday, I gave up on parties, because nobody seemed to want to have fun with me at all, they just came for the free cake or because their moms had asked them to. I was, for more than half my life, the "weird girl." Weird for being accelerated, weird for being a tomboy, weird for liking books, weird for thinking oldies stations weren't horrible just because the songs were old. I was even ostracized at a school for gifted and talented teens. I was outcast from the outcastes! And you know what? It wouldn't have been any worse if I'd worn little boys' clothes, or if I'd been a little boy in a dress. Maybe they would have beaten me, sure. But even that's not as bad as being an unperson, like I was. Hel, I would have killed for that kind of attention. As for the menu thing...wow. There's a difference between authoritative parenting and authoritarian parenting. Children will understand that cake for dinner is a bad idea if you explain it to them. I understood at 4 why it's a bad idea for small children to cross the street without holding hands with an adult. But there is no satisfactory answer you can give a child for "why can't I wear dresses? Girls wear them all the time!" Even as a child, I was willing to accept rules that were explained to me, even if it kept me from doing what I wanted to do. The rules I rankled against were the ones that weren't explained, or worse, were explained by "if you do that again, you won't be able to sit down for a week." Kids do understand that "because that's the way things are done" is kind of a bullshit reason.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Dec 23, 2011 14:05:27 GMT -5
I kinda wanted to mention that if I had seen a kid wearing, say, an ironman costume, and walking around Walmart, I would probably think very kindly of the parents by default.
And I know I can't talk for most people, but I think they'd probably smile at that, too.
Unless they're the kinda people that are SO traditionalist that their girls ALWAYS wear dresses and their boys ALWAYS wear their Sunday Finest on going to church.
|
|
|
Post by the sandman on Dec 23, 2011 14:10:36 GMT -5
The problem, Cestle, is that it's wrong for society to form a negative opinion of a boy simply because he's wearing a dress. Absolutely. It is absolutely wrong. But that's also the reality of the world we live in. We can rail against that tragic fact or we can deal with it.
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Dec 23, 2011 18:08:53 GMT -5
Kit and Sandman: I was responding to this comment:
... which seems to carry the implication that there is some justification for society being scornful of a male in a dress, simply because he dares to disrupt the status quo.
I'm not saying that you should use your child to rebel against these gender ideals, nor am I commenting on the ethics of letting a young boy wear a dress in public.
|
|
|
Post by Smurfette Principle on Dec 23, 2011 18:16:23 GMT -5
I don't think we should force a kid to wear a dress if they don't want to, boy or girl, but if the boy wants to, why not?
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Dec 23, 2011 18:19:17 GMT -5
Again, I wasn't commenting on the ethics of letting a young boy wear a dress in public. That's a whole complicated, messy topic that I'd rather avoid getting dragged into discussing.
|
|
|
Post by Smurfette Principle on Dec 23, 2011 18:43:13 GMT -5
I know, it's not directed at you. It's directed at Cestle.
|
|
|
Post by ironbite on Dec 23, 2011 18:44:05 GMT -5
Not outside of dress-up playtime. Perhaps if I lived in Scotland and that was what was considered acceptable to wear. In the United States and France, people don't wear kilts. Maybe in France but here in the States and where I used to live, I saw kilts on kids all the time. Ironbite-and nobody made fun of them lest they get an ass kicking cause those motherfuckers were hardkore.
|
|
|
Post by cestlefun17 on Dec 23, 2011 19:12:23 GMT -5
When I go to work, I wear a shirt, tie, and pants. Not merely because I prefer wearing those things, but it's out of respect for my co-workers and superiors. I am not a woman; I do not look like a woman; I do not identify as a woman nor do I live as a woman. If I went to work in a sundress and a big floppy hat, with unshaved legs and underarms I would look silly, just like if I went to work with balloons taped to my head. It's unprofessional and unbefitting for my environment. Why is this? I don't know. Why is anything in or not in style? I don't know and I don't think there is any written manual that explains it. Similarly, it would be inappropriate for me to walk into the ladies' restroom. Why do we have separate restrooms? It's not like anybody is going to see my genitals if I'm in a stall, but it's just considered inappropriate for me to use a woman's restroom.
Every society develops customs and conventions, and you either follow them and fit in or you buck them and be outcast. I'm saying that there is an appropriate balance: in certain areas you shouldn't be afraid to buck trends. However, with personal hygiene and clothing I think one should lean more towards fitting in. This is my personal opinion and how I would raise my children.
Men and women have different bodies and I do not see it as oppressing any sex over another to have certain grooming and fashion habits for one sex, and certain grooming and fashion habits for the other. Women have much more freedom than men when it comes to clothing options, but then again they have more requirements with their grooming. It evens out.
I think the real societal problem is acceptance of transgender people. If you are biologically a man but mentally identify as a woman, this is a legitimate psychological issue and society should help, not hinder, you into your transition as a woman. If you genuinely identify as being of the opposite sex, then this is a legitimate reason to adopt that sex's conventions in regards to personal appearance because you would want to be perceived as being of that sex.
|
|