The Evolution Of American Families, And Now Their Children, Too, By Progressives Continues To Grow Across The Country. They've Even Created A Name For It; Theybies
Tucker Carlson Asks For A Definition Of "Theybies."
Some liberal parents now want their babies under four years old to be known as "Theybies." Tucker asks Cathy Areu to explain, who is delighted to educate him on progressive parenting.- TuckerCarlson / FOXNews
Oxford Study Finds Conservatives Right To Be Skeptical Of "Impact" Scientists. -CampusReform
"Make Men Masculine Again . . . "
. . . like from WWII when men were male, women were female, others were others and every American child's civil rights was protected in what used to be the safest place, the womb.
"Rape, murder, war – all have one thing in common: Men. The solution seems simple: make men less toxic – make men less masculine. In this video, Allie Stuckey, Host of 'Allie' on CRTV & 'Relatable' podcast, explains why demonizing masculinity is not the solution, but the problem."- PragerU
What Happens When Planned Parenthood, Liberal Democrat Politicians And Their Supporters Do EverythingTo Protect Their Progressive Beliefs AT ALL COSTS? People Die! - Webmaster
You will finally learn from the horse's mouth the true motivation of same-sex marriage, as not presented to the Supreme Court. It was not to marry each other but instead to destroy the act of marriage. Leftists had seen the act of a man and a woman in marriage as only "breeders," humans who huff and puff to create a child.
Statist same-sex Marriage Activist Masha Gessen is arguing that marriage should not exist. Marriage approved by the Supreme Court was used by some in the movement to destroy marriage, proving America's Supreme court has been no more valuable in protecting a society's tradition than those judges who were protecting the Germany Democracy in 1932.
Gessen was interviewed at the Sydney Writers' Festival on May 19, 2012. So six years later it should be no surprise that Alabama law makers move to eliminate marriage licenses, throwing up their hands in culture wars. - Let'sTalkAboutIt
"Alabama lawmakers may be waving the white flag in the culture wars – advancing a bill that would eliminate marriage licenses entirely, in turn helping judges avoid the marriage debate in the conservative state. 'No one particularly likes changing our law, I’ll tell you that,' the bill’s sponsor, Republican state Sen. Greg Albritton, said in an interview with Fox News. 'However, under the circumstances, it’s the best thing we can do.'
Albritton denies any attempt at 'denigrating marriage,' as some social conservative critics charge. The Republican said his bill is a practical solution for the state in response to the Supreme Court striking down marriage bans in the 2014 Obergefell v. Hodges decision."- FOXNews
___________________________________________
From Across The Pond: Glasgow Caledonian University In Scotland Has Fired a Catholic Chaplain For Holding A Prayer Service At His Parish "In Reparation" For The City's Pride Parade. - DailyWire
"The knowledge fields around transgender, gender-creative, and these children are rapidly shifting and growing. While gender non-conforming, 'queer' (in the non-normative sense of the word) and even transgender children have existed before, in my work I argue that the particular ways that we are responding to and naming queer and trans children in the 21st century is unique.
As increasing numbers of children declare these identities and openly express their genders and desires, they are living different childhoods than generations before.
We are watching knowledge evolve in real time, as researchers produce more nuanced information and data, and families pioneer different ways of parenting.
Recently I have become fascinated with two new categories, or ways, of naming children who are being raised in a gender conscious way, and/or children who are expressing their gender and sexuality creatively, theybies and drag kids.
In many ways, these are merely new labels to describe things that have happened before, as I will explore more below, and yet, the visibility of these kids on various internet platforms also points to increasing societal acceptance around children’s expansive gender expression.
Theybies is an instagram account, as well as a hashtag used by other parents on Instagram. It refers to babies and toddlers whose parents/care-givers are raising them in a gender-neutral way. These parents don’t dress their children according to the gender binary, give their children freedom to explore a wide variety of toys, clothes, and colors, and refer to the kids with the pronoun 'they' until they are old enough to declare their own gender.
I am particularly interested in these parenting accounts because my research began almost a decade ago because of a 'theyby,' although Storm’s parents did not use that particular word. Storm made international news when their parents declared that they would not reveal the sex of their baby in an interview with the Toronto Star.
The article quickly went viral, prompting passionate responses, and often anger from readers around the world, including accusations that this was child abuse. Kathy Witterick and David Stocker, Storm’s parents, believe in democratic parenting and they wanted Storm to grow up with more options and fewer limitations in regards to gender. Their story, and the anxiety that it stirred up in the media fascinated me, and provided the seeds for my PhD research.
Storm’s story also pointed to the ways that we confuse sex/gender, as headlines declared the couple were raising a 'gender-less baby' when in fact they were not making Storm’s sex/genitals public. Other headlines claimed they were keeping Storm’s gender a secret, even though they believe that no-one but Storm can determine Storm’s gender.
Stories about the family also showed a misunderstanding of what 'gender-neutral parenting' is. It is not, in fact, about erasing gender and raising children 'genderless,' but is about expanding gender options for kids, and giving them gender self-determination, as Jane Ward neatly explains here andhere, and Arwyn Daemyr explores in her book on gender-diverse parenting.
Over the years, I have kept tabs on little Storm, and have read with interest the stories of other babies being raised without a gender designation, like Pop of Swedenand 5 year old Sasha in the UK. There are many families who support giving their children options in regards to toys/clothing, but fewer who will keep their sex assigned at birth private. And fewer still who publicize their decision.
When Storm was three, a follow-up story was released, 'Remember Storm?' I was fascinated to learn that Storm was calling themselves a boy sometimes, and a girl at other times. And then, in 2016, right as I was finishing my PhD, another update came out, 'Baby Storm Five Years Later.'
Aha, I thought, Storm was a girl. It was satisfying to have an answer to something I had been curious about for many years. But then I realized, No, Storm is a girl. I still have no idea what Storm was (assigned at birth), and frankly it is odd that I should want to know what is between her legs.
In the article Baby Storm Now, her Dad reflects on the last few years, and how things have changed in society. He thinks that their story would be less sensationalized today, but also points out that there are still few people who would make the same decision that they did, and that society continues to limit children’s abilities to make decisions for themselves.
Still, in 2018 it seems that there are at least a few more families visibly raising 'theybies' and posting about it on social media. Along with Theybies, there is also Raising Zoomer, and others that can be found through the hashtag #theybies. (Not all of those accounts are public, so I am not linking them here).
At a very basic level these social media accounts show how the singular pronoun 'they' is becoming used more as a gender-neutral signifier. They also provide evidence that some parents choose gender-creative parenting, not just as a reaction to a child’s gender non-conformity, but as the fundamental basis of their parenting philosophy from (before) birth and beyond.
Zoomer’s parents also have a blogthat is dedicated to teaching other folks about gender-creative parenting (GCP), and includes articles about how they navigate strangers’ questions about Zoomer’s gender, commentary on society’s interest in babies’ genitals, and responses to the idea that GCP is a social experiment (spoiler: why yes, it is–all parenting is a bit of an experiment). They also write about how their own parenting decisions were shaped by the story of Storm and Sasha.
I am excited to watch Zoomer and these other theybies grow. The numbers of parents making this parenting decisionsmay still be small, but I am eager to follow their journeys. Many in society are still invested in the gender binary (look at how popular gender-reveal parties have become in the last few years!) and yet these parents, and the parents of many gender-creative kiddos, are choosing different paths for their children.
As someone who deeply cares about the way that we think about children’s gender, I am fascinated with these families’ stories, and the ways that children’s gender options are being expanded through their parenting choices.
Beyond matters of gender, my research has shown that decisions made by parents of transgender, gender-creative children are influenced by their understandings of children’s autonomy and independence. Ultimately they believe that children have the ability to know themselves, and should be given the right to make their own decisions about their body and gender. Their parenting choices are also shaped by what I call 'anticipation work' and particular investments in their children’s futures.
I would love to do an ethnographic study and interview parents of theybies one day, to see how their philosophies may be related to and differ from the parents’ of trans/gender-creative kids that I interviewed. Until then, I appreciate the opportunity to watch via social media as these little ones grow up and explore their world. Some of them are so dang cute! and they are changing society one baby step at a time.
[Stay tuned for my thoughts on drag kids in my next post, this has gotten quite long already!]"
The U.S. Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage put the agenda on steroids.
"This Couple Already Had One Deaf Child."
A lesbian couple in the U.S. have provoked strong criticism by deliberately choosing to have a deaf baby.
Sharon Duchesneau and Candy McCullough, who have both been deaf since birth, were turned down by a series of sperm banks they approached looking for a donor suffering from congenital deafness.
The couple, who have been together for eight years, then approached a family friend who was totally deaf, and had five generations of deafness in his family. He donated sperm which was used to impregnate Sharon Duchesneau.
Baby Gauvin McCullough is now four-months-old, and has a slight amount of hearing in one ear. The couple have said they will let him decide when he is older if he wants to wear a hearing aid.
The man has already donated sperm for the couple's five-year-old daughter Johanne, who is profoundly deaf and can communicate only through sign language.
Bonding . . .
The women, both in their 30s, are part of a growing movement in the US which sees deafness as a cultural identity, not as a disability.
Many oppose surgery to correct deafness.
While she was pregnant, Ms Duchesneau said: "It would be nice to have a deaf child who is the same as us."
"I think that would be a wonderful experience. You know, if we can have that chance, why not take it? A hearing baby would be a blessing. A deaf baby would be a special blessing."
The women, from Bethesda, Maryland, are both mental health therapists and deaf therapists. They told the Washington Post they believed they would make better parents to a deaf child, because they would be better able to guide them.They say their choice is no different from choosing what gender the child would be.
Ms McCullough added: "Some people look at it like 'Oh my gosh, you shouldn't have a child who has a disability'."
"But you know, black people have harder lives. Why shouldn't people be able to go ahead and pick a black donor if that's what they want? They should have that option. They can feel related to that culture, still bonded with that culture."
Reaction . . .
Stephen Rooney, spokesman for the British Deaf Association, told BBC News Online: "The real issue is not whether people are trying to design deaf babies, but how society currently denies deaf children to enjoy the same rights, responsibilities, opportunities and quality of life as everyone."
But the couple's decision has attracted fierce criticism. Peter Garrett, research director for LIFE, told BBC News Online: "This is another example of reproductive technology running riot.""To deprive a baby of a natural faculty is unethical behaviour." He said the principle could be extended to deliberately having a baby which was blind, or a dwarf.
"We are saying no to deselecting a baby because it is deaf, and no to deliberately choosing to have a deaf baby."
But Dr Richard Nicholson, editor of the Bulletin of Medical Ethics, said: "This is an inevitable result of deciding that we allow people to have a choice over what sort of child they are going to produce."
Dr Vivienne Nathanson, head of science and ethics at the British Medical Association, said: "There are two sides. In general, is this a good or a bad thing.? I think most people would say it was a bad thing.
"But in this individual case, I think this is on the borderline of concern about the 'slippery slope' of designer babies."
Nancy Rarus, a member of staff at the U.S. National Association for the Deaf said: "I can't understand why anybody would want to bring a disabled child into the world."
Webmaster: But the couple did what they wanted to do anyway, screwing the morals of the rest of the world.
