The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

'Boy or girl?' Parents raising 'theybies' let kids decide

peeonme said:
Do you have any children? The gender of a new born is big news. The whole thought of 'the baby has a penis or a vagina, but we will let the baby decide what gender the baby is' is nutty.
Click to expand...
No. Although my sibling had a kid last year and finding out the sex of the baby really didn't mean anything to me.

Can you please define gender? Because it really seems to me like you're using it as a synonym for biological sex and that's definitively not what the article is talking about when it uses that term.

And to be completely honest, I'm also getting a bit frustrated. I'm not asking those questions rhetorically. I genuinely want to know what your response is and ignoring them makes it seem like you're monologing to me rather than dialoging.
 
peeonme said:
Do you have any children? The gender of a new born is big news. The whole thought of 'the baby has a penis or a vagina, but we will let the baby decide what gender the baby is' is nutty.
Click to expand...

Wait, letting a child live their own life is batty but grown adults fawning over what kind of genitilia the baby will have is normal AND healthy? This is what happens when you don't teach critical thinking in schools.
 
As long as we are a species that needs two sexes to reproduce but live in a society it is normal to have a range of gender norms as a small part of social behavior.
 
nyctopgam said:
As long as we are a species that needs two sexes to reproduce but live in a society it is normal to have a range of gender norms as a small part of social behavior.
Click to expand...

That makes no sense whatsosever. Are you saying that if we didn't have these social gender rules then, what.... our genitilia would fall off? We'd all become infertile? People would stop reproducing if they don't have society telling them whether they should wear blue or pink? Try critical thinking. I promise it doesn't hurt. :gogirl:
 
I'm willing to accept that this may be the case. If it is the case I'd like to see it as minimally present as possible. Which seems to be the approach the parents in the article are taking.
 
1. "Theybies" is comical on the face of it. "Babies" wasn't even a gendered noun in the first place, so they're still raising babies.

2. It poses no real danger to society. Sure, there may be a few kids whose parents opt for it, but it will be a tiny minority, a fraction of a fraction, so will have no larger societal impact. It won't drive any change in pronouns or anything like the attempts to control language associated with so-called trans empowerment.

3. Children need role models and expectations. It doesn't apply only to gender, but to just about every aspect. Children can and do speak up when dad wants them to be a musician or teacher or engineer, but they do not want that for themselves. That is not the same as having no expectations. Gender isn't some big bugaboo as misstated by our resident shit-stirrers. Societies are evolving to recognize diversity -- that doesn't require demonizing male and female gender roles. It won't fly either, so it's truly a moot point.
 
I'm not so sure you're right about it not impacting society at all. If I recall Sweden has made an active decision to deemphasis gender roles. If it can be shown to be beneficial to well-being we may end up seeing other countries follow suit. Granted I agree that the method being employed in the article is less likely to proliferate
 
SeaCore said:
I'm not so sure you're right about it not impacting society at all. If I recall Sweden has made an active decision to deemphasis gender roles. If it can be shown to be beneficial to well-being we may end up seeing other countries follow suit. Granted I agree that the method being employed in the article is less likely to proliferate
Click to expand...

American logic: We don't quit just because we're wrong. We just keep doing the wrong thing until it turns out right!

gender roles are, at best useless, at worst a form of controlling women and justifying men as slaves to their most carnal inclinations.
 
SeaCore said:
No. Although my sibling had a kid last year and finding out the sex of the baby really didn't mean anything to me.

Can you please define gender? Because it really seems to me like you're using it as a synonym for biological sex and that's definitively not what the article is talking about when it uses that term.

And to be completely honest, I'm also getting a bit frustrated. I'm not asking those questions rhetorically. I genuinely want to know what your response is and ignoring them makes it seem like you're monologing to me rather than dialoging.
Click to expand...

I have used sex and gender interchangeably and will continue to do so. As for the article, it is just another crazy idea to challenge what need not be challenged.
 
peeonme said:
I have used sex and gender interchangeably and will continue to do so. As for the article, it is just another crazy idea to challenge what need not be challenged.
Click to expand...
I disagree. I'm not in support of sex roles. We don't need them and it seems demonstrable that when we reduce them well-being increases.
 
SeaCore said:
I disagree. I'm not in support of sex roles. We don't need them and it seems demonstrable that when we reduce them well-being increases.
Click to expand...

As I posted earlier, I am not in favor of teaching a boy that he should be John Wayne. An exposure to life in general without thought to gender roles is good. Shielding children from terms such as 'he' or 'she' is bizarre to me.
 
peeonme said:
As I posted earlier, I am not in favor of teaching a boy that he should be John Wayne. An exposure to life in general without thought to gender roles is good. Shielding children from terms such as 'he' or 'she' is bizarre to me.
Click to expand...
Then you don't understand the purpose.

If people know that a kid is a male or female then they're more likely to try instill that child with their respective sex role. To disrupt people's ability to do this the parents are making it impossible for them to tell which sex role to use.
They're not so much shielding the kids from 'he' or 'she' as these parents are using 'they' as a tool to aid in shielding their kids from sex roles.
 
SeaCore said:
Then you don't understand the purpose.

If people know that a kid is a male or female then they're more likely to try instill that child with their respective sex role. To disrupt people's ability to do this the parents are making it impossible for them to tell which sex role to use.
They're not so much shielding the kids from 'he' or 'she' as these parents are using 'they' as a tool to aid in shielding their kids from sex roles.
Click to expand...

Well, that clears that up.
 
Why shield them from gender roles? Is there something wrong with being a man? A woman? Instead of attacking their gender, why not attack the roles? Neuter the roles, not the people.
 
mikey3000 said:
Why shield them from gender roles? Is there something wrong with being a man? A woman? Instead of attacking their gender, why not attack the roles? Neuter the roles, not the people.
Click to expand...
Mikey can you please define gender for me.
 
/\ Didn't the article's author establish a definition for the purpose of that article?

Perhaps you could quote it here.


BTW, are you the former pat grimshaw (spl?)?
 
Kahaih said:
/\ Didn't the article's author establish a definition for the purpose of that article?

Perhaps you could quote it here.


BTW, are you the former pat grimshaw (spl?)?
Click to expand...
Nope! I didn't recall a definition and I just did a quick skim without finding one.

Like I said on the first page, gender is a really unhelpful term because it's too bloated with definitions. You practically have to ask people to define it every time you try to talk about it. The definitions are close enough in concept that it can seem like you're talking about the same thing when you're actually talking about something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. It is JUST—ARGHSDFSDF!

In the end it's probably for the best if I just know what Mikey means for future reference. I'm used to adopting people's definitions for the sake of a conversation anyways.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top