Softpedia
 

NEWS CATEGORIES:



NEWS ARCHIVE >>
SOFTPEDIA REVIEWS >>
MEET THE EDITORS >>
Home > News > Life and Style > Learn to know your body

May 24th, 2011, 20:01 GMT · By

Canadian Parents Raise ‘Genderless’ Baby Until It Can Decide on Its Own

SHARE:

Adjust text size:


Genderless 4-month Storm will decide whether to be a boy or a girl later in life, parents believe
Enlarge picture
Two parents from Canada are raising a “genderless” baby. Storm is 4 months old, but Kathy Witterick and husband David Stocker refuse to tell anyone whether Storm is a boy or a girl so that he or she can decide on his/her own when older.

The couple already have two children, Jazz and Kio, boys who look and dress like girls, but who define themselves as males.

Kathy and David believe that society has a way of imposing gender stereotypes on babies the moment they’re born, so not telling anyone whether Storm is a boy or a girl is their way of preventing that from happening in his case, they say in an interview cited by the Daily Mail.

They believe that children can make a decision about their gender at a very tender age so, right now, their only struggle is to keep the secret about Storm until he/she can decide what he/she wants to be.

“If you really want to get to know someone, you don’t ask what’s between their legs,” Stocker says in the interview.

On that note, people should get to know and love Storm without knowing a thing about his or her gender.

Of course, the parents and the two brothers know the truth about Storm, but they’re the only ones who do.

Friends and family members received the following email when Storm was born:

“We’ve decided not to share Storm’s sex for now — a tribute to freedom and choice in place of limitation, a stand up to what the world could become in Storm’s lifetime (a more progressive place?…).”

“When the baby comes out, even the people who love you the most and know you so intimately, the first question they ask is, ‘Is it a girl or a boy?’” the mother says.

She and her husband have made that impossible, by choosing to raise a “genderless” baby, at least for now.

The Star reports that initial reaction to the interview and the couple’s revelations about Storm was very virulent: this is irresponsible parenting and very damaging for the child, readers and other concerned parents say.

In response, Witterick and Stocker have announced they will no longer be giving out interviews. 

TELL US WHAT YOU THINK:

2,940 hits · 11 comments · Link to this article · Print article · Send to friend · Subscribe to news

MUST-READ RELATED ARTICLES:


Angelina Jolie Is Upset at Chaz Bono’s Comments About Shiloh

Barnes & Noble Censors Cover of Male Androgynous Model Andrej Pejic

Chaz Bono Wants to Talk to Angelina Jolie About Shiloh’s Possible Gender Confusion

J.Crew Ad with Boy with Pink Toenails Sparks Outrage, Intense Debate

First Transgender Supermodel Lea T Does Oprah

READER COMMENTS:


Comment #1 by: Xboy on 24 May 2011, 20:12 UTC reply to this comment

wow, looks like not a good idea to the boys. what's going on when they grow up? Will they know what a boy or girl?


Comment #2 by: pwned on 25 May 2011, 01:37 UTC reply to this comment

this sounds troubling.


Comment #3 by: Pipermac on 25 May 2011, 04:24 UTC reply to this comment

I think the parents rightly understand that society has placed certain "limits" on people based on their gender that are actually quite unrealistic. Boys that would rather do "girl things" get categorized as "fags" or "queers" and girls that would rather do "boy things" are categorized as tomboys or dykes. How cruel can that be? Why can't a child be a child and decide for themselves what kind of things they want to do and the rest of us just accept it. I recently saw a photo album of a biologically boy child that much prefers to do girl things and dress as a girl. What a beautiful child... a real doll regardless of what is between his legs, and very obviously a very happy child. Why do we as a society try to force our gender related limits on every child that comes into the world? As long as their kids are happy, healthy and well adjusted, society needs to keep its nose out of their business.

Comment #3.1 by: wild child on 26 May 2011, 10:17 GMT

Couldn't have said it better

Comment #3.2 by: Howie on 30 May 2011, 11:17 GMT

Thanks Pipermac. I've often wondered that with reproductive technologies slowly heading Humanity towards possibilities to reproduce outside of a binary sex model, the meanings of sex (male, female, intersex) and corresponding categories of gender could well be up for re-invention one day. The debate that Witterick & Stocker's action has stimulated is one that needs to be had, and heard. On a practical level, baby Storm (unless raised in absolute isolation from other people and media) will all too soon realise their own sexual identity and probably grow up just fine; infants model what they see, and what we see is society bound in a two-gender expression. For me as a lad growing up 'different' in a world where I had no role models, my sense of self was certain all the same. The 'different' for me was sexuality - I'm gay. But I had no problems at all knowing I was male. By the time this couple's kids hit puberty, those kids will know themselves. The couple don't seem to have any agenda to push a particular identity on their children, and the nay-sayers needn't fear that the kids will be mal-adjusted. I doubt the kids will even notice their early-life 'genderlessness'. Listen carefully to the arguments presented against what Witterick & Stocker are doing - they will be largely based on fear and ignorance, and a (false) extrapolation that 'genderlessness' will be forced on the kids into adulthood. Clearly the parents won't be doing that.


Comment #4 by: BITEME100 on 26 May 2011, 20:31 UTC reply to this comment

MORONS


Comment #5 by: TrueColorsWithinMe on 27 May 2011, 03:06 UTC reply to this comment

I believe that anyone whom has a problem with the idea of allowing someone to grow up and be whom they believe themselves to be without the constraints of this Bi-Polar, Duel-Sexed, Gender-Defined world have themselves fallen victim to the very constraints and disillusionment they seem to support. Xboy, pawned - you and others like you are what is troubling...


Comment #6 by: bibbybubbles on 30 May 2011, 02:12 UTC reply to this comment

It's a hard topic. I agree with the whole freedom idea.... I have two boys and a girl. My boys are 5 and 3, they have a lot of girl cousins so it's not uncommon to see them in a dress with make up on pushing a pram with a baby doll in it, but that doesnt mean they want or think they are girls..... they have a penis and know they are boys. kids are kids its what they do! However i think raising a child as genderless is wrong.... lets say Storm is a boy (i think it looks like a boy) what happens if he decides to be a girl? are the parents then going to push for him to have surgery to remove his penis???? there is freedom of choice and then theres damaging for the children..... if the child was a hamaphrodite than what they are doing would be a fantastic thing because many who have their sex chosen get older and wish they had been the other. there is nothing wrong with this childs genitalia so it is either a boy or girl!!!!


Comment #7 by: Unique on 31 May 2011, 20:17 UTC reply to this comment

stupid stupid stupid


Comment #8 by: lovie on 03 Jun 2011, 20:35 UTC reply to this comment

that is absolutely ridiculous.
They can still share the gender while letting the child decide his or her own sexuality.


Comment #9 by: Publicitystunt on 30 Jun 2011, 17:59 UTC reply to this comment

Never send it to daycare cause when it's diapers r changed ur secret is out!

Copyright © 2001-2012 Softpedia. Contact/Tip us at

WindowsGamesDriversMacLinuxScriptsMobileHandheldNews

SUBMIT PROGRAM   |   ADVERTISE   |   GET HELP   |   SEND US FEEDBACK   |   RSS FEEDS   |   UPDATE YOUR SOFTWARE   |   ROMANIAN FORUM