Five years after the birth of her child, a self-proclaimed radical feminist in the U.K. has revealed the gender of her child. Sasha, it turns out, is a boy. Cigars all around! But for the last five years and for the foreseeable future, this family is committed to erasing "overtly masculine" elements from their son's life, dressing him in pink swimsuits, flowery tops and apparently wings and tutus. Doesn't Sasha look positively thrilled in this 2010 family Christmas card?
These people are not alone. Remember baby Pop in Sweden? And what about baby Storm in Canada? (Pop! Storm! More on that in a minute.) These families are committed to keeping the gender of their babies private well into toddlerhood and beyond.
On the one hand, I get it. Sort of. What's between a person's legs is a private matter and certainly the unique functions of the vajay versus the peen aren't even relevant until much later. So fine, protect modesty.
But isn't there more to gender than the function at the junction? Like teaching little people how to be men and women? It's one thing if a child decides for himself that he's a fierce diva in a Daphne costume. If I ever had a son and he wanted to wear pink nail polish, I'd let him do whatever made him happy. But denying a little boy trucks and monsters seems kind of cruel as well.
Also, there is the matter of safeguarding kids against bullying based on confused gender roles. A new study reveals elementary kids base their taunts on gender non-conformity. So putting your unsuspecting son in a flowery top is a good idea because . . . ?
Maybe the real focus should be on these gender-neutral names. Storm has a sibling named Jazz. How festive! If you plan on not revealing the gender of your child, ever, you need to think beyond "Avery" and "Grayson". Go the way of the Pop.
Here are my baby name suggestions for parents concealing gender information:
You're welcome, four families out there who are considering this path.