Baby Storm Raised Genderless, or Without a Gender.
One might disapprove. One might be disconcerted or befuddled maybe. But this, more than a dangerous experiment might as well be a brave one.
What does it mean that we have to be pinned down to our identities when we grow up? What does it mean that a lack of this pinning might engender bullying and marginalization?
These are most certainly not medical thoughts but moral ones, dangerous lines of thought that reveal the profoundly moralistic mandate of medicine.
"Keeping the child's gender a surprise is "not a good parenting choice because it's their identity," she said. "Whether you later choose to reject your identity -- which sex you are -- or not. You are born with a set of parts, and that's who you are.", this is how Dr Brown comments. But how much can we let a certain set of physical characteristic allow us to be defined from others, and from society? Why must we attach profoundly defining and determining characteristics to simple physical traits? Even if some might argue that these traits are profoundly influential because of hormones, why should someone be concerned of raising a gender less child? If we indeed were so deeply influenced by such traits there should be no concern on how we are raised: we would end up being what we are meant to be no matter what. But it is not as simple as that: in claims such as dr Brown's we see a fear of ambiguity that borderlines with catholic bigotism.
