I know these two siblings (twins) that are almost 8 years old and they are very fond to each other, they play a lot, fight a lot but its because they enjoy physical contact and they like being next to each other. Examples are being on top of each other, hug and sleep together, grab each other's private parts.
On a side note they are troublemakers and spoiled so their mom is buying them dresses and accessories to both of them and make them wear the outfit if they continue with that behavior attitude.
She also said if they liked boys it was fine as long as it wasn't their brothers, but they had to stop that kind of playing or be open about their likings.
I am unrelated to them so I cant really do anything or influence that, but I would like this community opinion.
TL;DR - Is it appropriate to use cross-dressing as a punishment for little (7 year old) kids?
She takes their actions (which are relatively meaningless because they're 8) and assumes that they are gay. They could be, but those actions do not necessarily point to them being gay.
And I never understood what the purpose of that "punishment" is. Is it supposed to shame them? In what way does that even work to fix anything?
Punishments need to make sense. That "punishment" does not. I daresay the woman just wanted a daughter and is engaging in a stupid little fetish tbh.
Doesn't make sense at all. Most people at that age have "explored" their bodies with a member of the same gender.
I'm not sure what kind of behavior she is trying to curb.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Out of the blackness and stench of the engulfing swamp emerged a shimmering figure. Only the splattered armor and ichor-stained sword hinted at the unfathomable evil the knight had just laid waste.
Although I do like the "shame" tactic, this method doesn't sit right with me.
I like what some have done, making their kids stand in public wearing a sign that says "I stole $20" or what-have-you.
However, even that is almost unfortunately useless. I've already heard of some kids competing to see who could be "shamed harder".
With social media, and the trend of kids wanting to be their own "reality stars", almost nothing we do now is sure to work to correct bad behavior.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Xenphire @ Inkfox for the amazing new sig
“Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by slight ligaments
are we bound to prosperity and ruin.”
― Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
Most people at that age have "explored" their bodies with a member of the same gender.
What?...
Seen... yes
Took a piss with... sure
Compared equipment... of course
Explored.... pretty sick implication, unless you couldn't think of better words for what your talking about. I'm pretty confident that never happened among my siblings, unless there was some secret groping and exploring going on in the shared bedroom while I slept.
Maybe because we don't live in West Virginia or something?
Regardless of the behavior she's trying to curb, that punishment sends a very clear message about the value of women.
If it's apparently humiliating punishment to be made to dress like a woman, what do you suppose they'll conclude about women?
I think you are reading into it a little much... In a general sense making a boy dress like a girl is not necessarily any different from making someone wear a color they hate or a hat they dont like...
Wearing a dress as a punishment doesnt have to mean that dressing like a woman is bad in all cases... it just means that the boy doesnt want to dress like a woman.
So is it not acceptable for a coach to say things (to male athletes), "come on ladies my mom can run faster than you". et?
Challenging a guy's masculinity is a pretty common way to produce performance. (Of course we know that male athletes with equal training should run faster, hit harder et than women due to genetics).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Out of the blackness and stench of the engulfing swamp emerged a shimmering figure. Only the splattered armor and ichor-stained sword hinted at the unfathomable evil the knight had just laid waste.
Seriously, though, IIRC, Kinsey found that about half of all men had exclusively heterosexual lifetime histories. (Exclusive homosexuals were far rarer, at about one in 50.) Most of it was in childhood or adolescence. Note that the WEIRD disclaimer still somewhat applies: Kinsey's sample was still all WD, mostly I, and a moderate number of ER.
Which...sounds like what these boys were doing.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Card advantage is not the same thing as card draw. Something for 2B cannot be strictly worse than something for BBB or 3BB. If you're taking out Swords to Plowshares for Plummet, you're a fool. Stop doing these things!
Little kids grabbing each others private parts would have set off alarm bells in my head, screw the cross dressing. Children don't just think if perverted behavior like this in their own, it's taught. You need to tell someone these kids might not be in a safe family environment!
1. I don't think 7-year-old kids have cemented their view about gender. So they might just treat "crossdressing" as a curious journey of exploring aspects of the other gender, not a punishment.
2. In a logical view, if their mom hate homosexual behaviour, then turning both of her sons into daughters won't solve any problems - in the mom's eyes, girls still attracted to girls.
3. In a moral view, even if her sons are homosexual, she has no rights to force them to "come out". so "must be open about their likings" is morally incorrect.
Little kids grabbing each others private parts would have set off alarm bells in my head, screw the cross dressing. Children don't just think if perverted behavior like this in their own, it's taught. You need to tell someone these kids might not be in a safe family environment!
Except that there's no reason to assume "perverted behaviour" here. Hell, how would those kids even know that this was not acceptable according to this society's norms except for when told?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
We have laboured long to build a heaven, only to find it populated with horrors.
Little kids grabbing each others private parts would have set off alarm bells in my head, screw the cross dressing. Children don't just think if perverted behavior like this in their own, it's taught. You need to tell someone these kids might not be in a safe family environment!
So if little kids where touching each other's arms, it's not perverted. But if they, having no concept of sexuality, touch another boy's *****...that's perverted. Why is that again? I understand that naturally you'd tell him not to do that, and without shaming him. But why is curiosity in the same or oposite sex at that age "perverted".
What I would say to the "it's perverted" crowd is: you need to stop thinking about sex so much. Everything isn't about sex.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Our belief is not a belief. Our principles are not a faith. We do not rely solely upon science and reason, because these are necessary rather than sufficient factors, but we distrust anything that contradicts science or outrages reason. We may differ on many things, but what we respect is free inquiry, openmindedness, and the pursuit of ideas for their own sake.
― Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great
In a general sense making a boy dress like a girl is not necessarily any different from making someone wear a color they hate or a hat they dont like...
Except that forcing a boy to dress "like a woman" for the crime of being affectionate with another boy is not remotely the same as making them wear blue, on account of social attitudes about homosexuality and femininity that do not exist for the colour blue.
In your general sense, a rock is not necessarily any different from a pillow because they are both round.
Right, it is impossible that the mother was just viewing it as an alternative punishment clearly she had to be sending a message about how it's bad for anyone to be "like a woman". Just because you can make a connection between making a boy wear girls clothes and sexism, doesnt mean everyone else would.
Just because you can make a connection between making a boy wear girls clothes and sexism, doesnt mean everyone else would.
Here's the thing: the people who don't make that connection? Yeah, that's not because there isn't one but because they don't get it. Forcing a boy to wear clothes meant for girls as a punishment for being affectionate with another boy is not remotely gender neutral. It's so steeped in bad ideas about gender that it can't possibly avoid being sexist.
So you think this is just like making them wear blue? That isn't my problem. That you don't understand your society's attitudes towards gender is not a flaw of my analysis.
I am ignoring this specific case and I never brought it up. I am saying that in general making a male child wear women's clothing as punishment doesnt automatically represent sexism. If a boy was throwing tantrums every time his parent's took him to a store and they decided to punish him by making him wear girl's clothes that to me is not a representation of being anti-women. I would see no difference between that and making a teen wear a ridiculously stupid hat in public.
Why does a man being punished by wearing a dress have to have any more meaning than a man being punished by having to wear a donkey costume?
Because we live in a society that has a lot of bad ideas about masculinity and femininity and what they mean and who "should" and "should not" express them. This doesn't "have" to be like this but it IS like this. Think for a moment about your own question. You're wondering why it's sexist to hold being dressed like a woman as being no different to dressing like an animal popularly known to be particularly stupid and stubborn. That you accept being dressed "like a woman" as a punishment is by itself proof enough that the society you live in has a negative view of women.
In a society where a large majority of the people are trying to do nothing more than fit in and be like everyone else... it is not that dressing like a woman is bad it is dressing in an unusual way that is bad. I could have just as easily compared it to having to wear a hot dog costume. If anything you might argue that it is unfair to cross dressers that something they enjoy is looked down on. But a male simply not being comfortable being dressed like a female has nothing to do with sexism.
But a male simply not being comfortable being dressed like a female has nothing to do with sexism.
Why would a man dislike being dressed "as a woman"? Could it maybe be because masculinity is to a great part defined by not being feminine and that men who use make-up or like pretty things are overwhelmed with homophobic slurs? Maybe it could possibly have something to do with the way that gender is treated in society at large. Maybe it is because there is meaning attached to these acts that does not exist for other acts. Hrm...
Your claims are as wrong as they can be. Telling you this is all I can do for you. Since I have now done so more than is even necessary, the rest is up to you.
Oh I am sorry I dint know that everyone in society should be comfortable no matter what they are wearing. You are looking way too deeply into this. If you made a high school meat head jock put on a Star Trek t-shirt they might feel uncomfortable. If you make Miss Princess Cheerleader wear a $5 shirt from target she might feel uncomfortable and embarrassed. If you make a goth kid wear a letterman jacket around school that goth kid is not going to be comfortable. If you made almost anyone wear a pizza costume in public on any day other than Halloween they will feel uncomfortable. Similarly... if you make a guy, who has never before worn a dress, and has never had an intention of wearing a dress, go wear a dress in public... he is going to be uncomfortable.
I dont know how to spell it out any clearer than that. Cross dressing... is abnormal. That doesnt necessarily make it bad, but it draws inquisitive attention to the individual doing it. Most people are not comfortable with that kind of attention.
So is it not acceptable for a coach to say things (to male athletes), "come on ladies my mom can run faster than you". et?
Challenging a guy's masculinity is a pretty common way to produce performance. (Of course we know that male athletes with equal training should run faster, hit harder et than women due to genetics).
He's still using "ladies" as a pejorative. He's still sending the message that being feminine is being weak. Challenging a guy's masculinity only works because being non-masculine is perceived as being inferior. It's a problem.
(Note: "my mom" is a bit different - there's a gender challenge in there, but there's also an age challenge in there. I'm sure a geriatric-rights person would take exception to this, but the age challenge is more or less acceptable as far as I'm concerned)
I dont know how to spell it out any clearer than that.
You don't know anything about this topic. It doesn't matter how clearly you spell it out because you haven't failed at conveying what you think, you have failed at being correct. The existence of gender and the way it is treated means that there is a huge difference between transgressing gender norms and wearing a Halloween costume. Discomfort to the point of being punishment stems from men in dresses being thought of as unmanly, with all the scorn and slurs that follow due to this supposed lack of manliness being one of the most hated qualities in society.
Then why do men, and a lot of them, dress up as women on Halloween? If a man in a dress is soooooo much worse than a Halloween costume why do so many men voluntarily do so on the day that it is socially acceptable to dress in an abnormal way? If I see a man in a dress on a regular day I think "that guy is weird as all hell" I dont think "geez that guy is so girly looking", guess what? That is the same reaction I would have if he was wearing a full suit of armor because it's not a normal set of attire for a guy on a regular day of the week.
Halloween is like the big exception that proves the rule. It's a day about transgressing social norms. Guys dress up like girls on Halloween because it is a major taboo.
Halloween is like the big exception that proves the rule. It's a day about transgressing social norms. Guys dress up like girls on Halloween because it is a major taboo.
But why is it a major taboo? Is it really because people think being womanly is bad? Is it some sort of social commentary on how being a woman is less desirable than being a man?
If two guys make a bet and the loser has to dress up as a woman, that is a sexist statement where if the loser has to dress up like a clown it's just guys making a dumb bet?
I dont buy it. I think Tuss is just wanting to be offended.
Little kids grabbing each others private parts would have set off alarm bells in my head, screw the cross dressing. Children don't just think if perverted behavior like this in their own, it's taught. You need to tell someone these kids might not be in a safe family environment!
When I was four, my grandfather was driving me home, and as we went up and down hills, the centrifugal force gave me my first orgasm. I obviously didn't ejaculate, but the feelings were definitely an orgasm.
Such things can happen innocently enough. And once it does, you have learned that your ***** can feel good. And from there, it's only another step to replicating those feelings.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Card advantage is not the same thing as card draw. Something for 2B cannot be strictly worse than something for BBB or 3BB. If you're taking out Swords to Plowshares for Plummet, you're a fool. Stop doing these things!
So is it not acceptable for a coach to say things (to male athletes), "come on ladies my mom can run faster than you". et?
Challenging a guy's masculinity is a pretty common way to produce performance. (Of course we know that male athletes with equal training should run faster, hit harder et than women due to genetics).
He's still using "ladies" as a pejorative. He's still sending the message that being feminine is being weak. Challenging a guy's masculinity only works because being non-masculine is perceived as being inferior. It's a problem.
I don't think it's about men = good, women = bad at all. Both the coach example and the actual story we're discussing seem to be more about rigid gender rules.
So, taking the punishment story:
1. You are a "man."
2. "Manhood" is the core of your character.
3. I am taking away your manhood.
4. Therefore, I am taking away the core of your character.
So it is about gender roles, not about women being "bad." Who looks at a woman in a nice dress and has negative thoughts?
Anyway, this punishment is wrong on so many levels. It will be psychologically scarring for these kids. The mother is a loon.
Quote from Fluffy Bunny »
But why is it a major taboo? Is it really because people think being womanly is bad?
No.
Is it some sort of social commentary on how being a woman is less desirable than being a man?
No, it's saying "dressing like a woman is less desirable when you are a man."
If two guys make a bet and the loser has to dress up as a woman, that is a sexist statement where if the loser has to dress up like a clown it's just guys making a dumb bet?
Agreed, makes no sense.
I dont buy it. I think Tuss is just wanting to be offended.
I have never know Tuss to be offended by anything. /sarcasm.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
On a side note they are troublemakers and spoiled so their mom is buying them dresses and accessories to both of them and make them wear the outfit if they continue with that behavior attitude.
She also said if they liked boys it was fine as long as it wasn't their brothers, but they had to stop that kind of playing or be open about their likings.
I am unrelated to them so I cant really do anything or influence that, but I would like this community opinion.
TL;DR - Is it appropriate to use cross-dressing as a punishment for little (7 year old) kids?
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/trading-post/details/805-w-underground-sea-h-revised-lands
She takes their actions (which are relatively meaningless because they're 8) and assumes that they are gay. They could be, but those actions do not necessarily point to them being gay.
And I never understood what the purpose of that "punishment" is. Is it supposed to shame them? In what way does that even work to fix anything?
Punishments need to make sense. That "punishment" does not. I daresay the woman just wanted a daughter and is engaging in a stupid little fetish tbh.
I'm not sure what kind of behavior she is trying to curb.
If it's apparently humiliating punishment to be made to dress like a woman, what do you suppose they'll conclude about women?
I like what some have done, making their kids stand in public wearing a sign that says "I stole $20" or what-have-you.
However, even that is almost unfortunately useless. I've already heard of some kids competing to see who could be "shamed harder".
With social media, and the trend of kids wanting to be their own "reality stars", almost nothing we do now is sure to work to correct bad behavior.
Thanks to Xenphire @ Inkfox for the amazing new sig
“Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by slight ligaments
are we bound to prosperity and ruin.”
― Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/trading-post/details/805-w-underground-sea-h-revised-lands
What?...
Seen... yes
Took a piss with... sure
Compared equipment... of course
Explored.... pretty sick implication, unless you couldn't think of better words for what your talking about. I'm pretty confident that never happened among my siblings, unless there was some secret groping and exploring going on in the shared bedroom while I slept.
Maybe because we don't live in West Virginia or something?
My Buying Thread
I think you are reading into it a little much... In a general sense making a boy dress like a girl is not necessarily any different from making someone wear a color they hate or a hat they dont like...
Wearing a dress as a punishment doesnt have to mean that dressing like a woman is bad in all cases... it just means that the boy doesnt want to dress like a woman.
Challenging a guy's masculinity is a pretty common way to produce performance. (Of course we know that male athletes with equal training should run faster, hit harder et than women due to genetics).
Seriously, though, IIRC, Kinsey found that about half of all men had exclusively heterosexual lifetime histories. (Exclusive homosexuals were far rarer, at about one in 50.) Most of it was in childhood or adolescence. Note that the WEIRD disclaimer still somewhat applies: Kinsey's sample was still all WD, mostly I, and a moderate number of ER.
Which...sounds like what these boys were doing.
On phasing:
2. In a logical view, if their mom hate homosexual behaviour, then turning both of her sons into daughters won't solve any problems - in the mom's eyes, girls still attracted to girls.
3. In a moral view, even if her sons are homosexual, she has no rights to force them to "come out". so "must be open about their likings" is morally incorrect.
Except that there's no reason to assume "perverted behaviour" here. Hell, how would those kids even know that this was not acceptable according to this society's norms except for when told?
So if little kids where touching each other's arms, it's not perverted. But if they, having no concept of sexuality, touch another boy's *****...that's perverted. Why is that again? I understand that naturally you'd tell him not to do that, and without shaming him. But why is curiosity in the same or oposite sex at that age "perverted".
What I would say to the "it's perverted" crowd is: you need to stop thinking about sex so much. Everything isn't about sex.
― Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great
Right, it is impossible that the mother was just viewing it as an alternative punishment clearly she had to be sending a message about how it's bad for anyone to be "like a woman". Just because you can make a connection between making a boy wear girls clothes and sexism, doesnt mean everyone else would.
I am ignoring this specific case and I never brought it up. I am saying that in general making a male child wear women's clothing as punishment doesnt automatically represent sexism. If a boy was throwing tantrums every time his parent's took him to a store and they decided to punish him by making him wear girl's clothes that to me is not a representation of being anti-women. I would see no difference between that and making a teen wear a ridiculously stupid hat in public.
In what context?
Why does a man being punished by wearing a dress have to have any more meaning than a man being punished by having to wear a donkey costume?
In a society where a large majority of the people are trying to do nothing more than fit in and be like everyone else... it is not that dressing like a woman is bad it is dressing in an unusual way that is bad. I could have just as easily compared it to having to wear a hot dog costume. If anything you might argue that it is unfair to cross dressers that something they enjoy is looked down on. But a male simply not being comfortable being dressed like a female has nothing to do with sexism.
Oh I am sorry I dint know that everyone in society should be comfortable no matter what they are wearing. You are looking way too deeply into this. If you made a high school meat head jock put on a Star Trek t-shirt they might feel uncomfortable. If you make Miss Princess Cheerleader wear a $5 shirt from target she might feel uncomfortable and embarrassed. If you make a goth kid wear a letterman jacket around school that goth kid is not going to be comfortable. If you made almost anyone wear a pizza costume in public on any day other than Halloween they will feel uncomfortable. Similarly... if you make a guy, who has never before worn a dress, and has never had an intention of wearing a dress, go wear a dress in public... he is going to be uncomfortable.
I dont know how to spell it out any clearer than that. Cross dressing... is abnormal. That doesnt necessarily make it bad, but it draws inquisitive attention to the individual doing it. Most people are not comfortable with that kind of attention.
He's still using "ladies" as a pejorative. He's still sending the message that being feminine is being weak. Challenging a guy's masculinity only works because being non-masculine is perceived as being inferior. It's a problem.
(Note: "my mom" is a bit different - there's a gender challenge in there, but there's also an age challenge in there. I'm sure a geriatric-rights person would take exception to this, but the age challenge is more or less acceptable as far as I'm concerned)
Then why do men, and a lot of them, dress up as women on Halloween? If a man in a dress is soooooo much worse than a Halloween costume why do so many men voluntarily do so on the day that it is socially acceptable to dress in an abnormal way? If I see a man in a dress on a regular day I think "that guy is weird as all hell" I dont think "geez that guy is so girly looking", guess what? That is the same reaction I would have if he was wearing a full suit of armor because it's not a normal set of attire for a guy on a regular day of the week.
But why is it a major taboo? Is it really because people think being womanly is bad? Is it some sort of social commentary on how being a woman is less desirable than being a man?
If two guys make a bet and the loser has to dress up as a woman, that is a sexist statement where if the loser has to dress up like a clown it's just guys making a dumb bet?
I dont buy it. I think Tuss is just wanting to be offended.
When I was four, my grandfather was driving me home, and as we went up and down hills, the centrifugal force gave me my first orgasm. I obviously didn't ejaculate, but the feelings were definitely an orgasm.
Such things can happen innocently enough. And once it does, you have learned that your ***** can feel good. And from there, it's only another step to replicating those feelings.
On phasing:
I don't think it's about men = good, women = bad at all. Both the coach example and the actual story we're discussing seem to be more about rigid gender rules.
So, taking the punishment story:
1. You are a "man."
2. "Manhood" is the core of your character.
3. I am taking away your manhood.
4. Therefore, I am taking away the core of your character.
So it is about gender roles, not about women being "bad." Who looks at a woman in a nice dress and has negative thoughts?
Anyway, this punishment is wrong on so many levels. It will be psychologically scarring for these kids. The mother is a loon.
No.
No, it's saying "dressing like a woman is less desirable when you are a man."
Agreed, makes no sense.
I have never know Tuss to be offended by anything. /sarcasm.