When was the last time you heard the phrase “be a man,” or “act like a lady?” How many times have you heard the reprimanding “girls don’t play with toy cars,” or “real boys don’t cry?” Our society is rife with gender stereotypes, with expectations of the appropriate behaviour and supposed “innate characteristics” of males and females. Boys are tough, boys are active; girls are their passive and polite counterparts. We live in a time when, from the moment we enter the world we have a pink or blue stamp emblazoned on our foreheads.
For two parents in Sweden, these stereotypes have not held true. Or rather, they may have if these gendered characteristics had a gender to attach to. In a highly controversial act of “sticking it to the patriarchy” by challenging common perceptions of gender, these parents have chosen not to disclose whether their two and a half year old child deserves a pink or a blue stamp. So far as anyone knows, Pop is genderless.
During an interview in March with newspaper Svenska Dagbladet, Pop’s parents explained that the reasoning behind this decision lies in the feminist philosophy that gender is socially constructed. In other words, rather than behaving according to genetic predispositions, males and females display different psychological traits based on the environmental factors in their upbringing.
“We want Pop to grow up more freely and avoid being forced into a specific gender mould from the outset,” commented Pop’s mother. “I believe that the self-confidence and personality that Pop has shaped will remain for a lifetime.”
According to the interview, Pop’s hairstyle changes on a regular basis, and Pop’s wardrobe ranges from dresses to trousers to all sorts of gender-neutral clothing. And although Pop understands that there are physical differences between males and females, Pop is never addressed by gender-specific pronouns.
Needless to say, this is a fascinating instance of child-rearing, which will certainly give Pop the creative license to shape his or her own individuality, without the preconceived notions of how people should behave and be treated on the basis of gender. Pop’s development will undoubtedly serve as an effective way of acknowledging and combating sexist stereotypes that we have accepted as the norm. However, there are some who believe that this course of actions will not yield a positive outcome.
Says Susan Pinker, a Toronto-based psychologist and newspaper columnist, “Child-rearing should not be about providing an op
Pinker poses an interesting moral dilemma: is it ethical to use a child as a tool to break down society’s conceptions of gender? Is this an extreme example of those crazy activists trying to push their sinister agendas onto their offspring? If the child remains “genderless” by the time Pop begins to attend school, Pop will certainly gain attention from his or her classmates. Which washroom will Pop use? Which gender will Pop gravitate towards during play-time? Pop’s growth will undoubtedly challenge the structure of our society, but it is hard to say if this experiment will ultimately lead to Pop’s feeling of liberty or resentment.
Pinker also states that males and females differ from birth, and that prenatal hormones developed in the second trimester of pregnancy alter the way the child behaves and feels. While I do not deny the differing hormone levels present in males and females, I believe that Pinker is missing the difference between sex and gender. Sex refers to a person’s reproductive organs, while gender is the social construct of male versus female. If males and females differ from birth, this is a solely sexual differentiation, gender is learned.
Regardless of the ethical dilemmas involved, this experiment is unquestionably intriguing. How many children have the chance to choose the traits that they connect with, while avoiding the all-powerful, ever-labelling hand of society?
I, for one, would have loved having had the option to let Barbie find her own way to the dentist while creating all kinds of destruction with my brother’s set of Tonka trucks. As children, we find it difficult to break free of patriarchy’s decisive view of what it means to be female or male. When it comes down to it, our behaviour and actions should mean more than a refutation of what lies between our legs.
As for Pop’s future, all we have now are bits and pieces of theories and educated guesses. This experiment has the potential to redefine society’s strict view of gender roles, and allow Pop to gain an irreplaceable sense of identity. Yet only time will tell how Pop’s gender and development will unfold.
