Luckiest Little Boy in the World

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/04/11/jcrew-ad-showing-boy-pink-nail-polish-sparks-debate-gender-identity/

J.Crew Ad Showing Boy With Pink Nail Polish Sparks Debate on Gender Identity
By Diane Macedo
Published April 11, 2011

A J.Crew ad that shows a top designer painting her young son’s toenails neon pink has some parents and doctors seeing red.
The image appeared in a feature called "Saturday With Jenna," which was emailed to customers last week and highlights a few of J.Crew president and creative director Jenna Lyons’ favorite products -- including the hot pink Essie nail polish seen on her son, Beckett.
The caption below the picture reads, “Lucky for me I ended up with a boy whose favorite color is pink. Toenail painting is way more fun in neon.”



Thanks, Mom.
You have no idea what a grand favor you are doing for me.

OK, I wouldn't paint my sons' toenails. However, I work at an elementary school, and several of the boys I work with have pink as their favorite color. They are in the primary grades, and I doubt they will all decide they are gay as they age. Now my sons think of pink as gay - horrified that dad has a pink shirt to go with his gray suit and paisley tie. We just laugh and ask, "homophobic much?"

How well was the boy paid? Everyone has a price.

Yeah . Well my question is why this is viewed as important or controversial?



The kid looks happy and looks like he is enjoying himself. I guess I don't see what the issue is... the kid is only 7 years old. If he wants to wear nail polish, who cares?

I may be able to be convinced that there is something wrong with all of this, but I find the op-ed writer's argument that "J.CREW, known for its tasteful and modest clothing, apparently does not mind exploiting Beckett behind the facade of liberal, transgendered identity politics" totally unconvincing.

happy jack wrote:

Scorpion wrote:

Yeah . Well my question is why this is viewed as important or controversial?



The kid looks happy and looks like he is enjoying himself. I guess I don't see what the issue is... the kid is only 7 years old. If he wants to wear nail polish, who cares?

I may be able to be convinced that there is something wrong with all of this, but I find the op-ed writer's argument that "J.CREW, known for its tasteful and modest clothing, apparently does not mind exploiting Beckett behind the facade of liberal, transgendered identity politics" totally unconvincing.

I don't care for the writer's argument, either. But if you don't see something wrong with this, no amount of explanation will convince you otherwise.

Just for the record, I was mistaken. "Beckett" is only 5 years old, not 7. What I see is a clever ad that's getting a whole lot of attention. I just honestly don't see how this is somehow harmful to the kid.

Scorpion wrote:

Just for the record, I was mistaken. "Beckett" is only 5 years old, not 7. What I see is a clever ad that's getting a whole lot of attention. I just honestly don't see how this is somehow harmful to the kid.

Neither does Alice Dreger, professor of clinical medical humanities and bioethics at Northwestern University.

Quote :

Alice Dreger, professor of clinical medical humanities and bioethics at Northwestern University, said it is "ridiculous" to suggest that painting a little boy's toes pink or any other color might somehow influence his sexuality or sexual identity. "Lots of boys love toenail polish; tons of boys do," Dreger said. "All kids like things that are sparkly and bright. And as far as I can tell, it doesn't lead to anything like the end of civilization."

Quote :

"All kids like things that are sparkly and bright. And as far as I can tell, it doesn't lead to anything like the end of civilization."

Now there's a learned opinion.

I'm equally perplexed.



In order to see this as a "OH NOES! NEWS FLASH!!!", you'd a) have to worry that your child might be a homosexual, and b) believe that the color pink (or painted toenails) will magically cause it.

Laughable nonsense from the start, and had any of these "journalists" actually had any journalistic integrity, they wouldn't have wasted their time or the publics time on yet another non-story.

happy jack wrote:

Or, to put it another way: Would you do this to your own son?

You wouldn't?

happy jack wrote:

Scorpion wrote:

I just honestly don't see how this is somehow harmful to the kid.

As stated earlier:

happy jack wrote:

... if you don't see something wrong with this, no amount of explanation will convince you otherwise.

Or, to put it another way: Would you do this to your own son?

No, of course I wouldn't. That's not how I roll. It's not something that would even occur to me.

But I'm not a Mom. and IMHO, a lot of young boys are "Momma's boys," at least until they enter school and have more interaction with their peers.

This still looks like much ado about nothing to me.

Son read this online: 97% of women don't like men in pink shirts. That's OK, because 97% of men in pink shirts don't like women - teehee!

Here I thought the baddest thing my little, big brother, Kenny and I did was make fun of "Nigger Bust". In Missouri. He was well-respected, and his name, "Nigger Bust" was well-respected.

We didn't know anything about black and white people, except ole'Nigger Bust was working for streets and in them days, -de-santized the streets. Blow the bugs away with the harmful vapors, we didn't know were harmful back then.

He was the only head of the only black family, with ole' Charlie sitting on the church steps everyday, while attending school...

I was best friends with his niece, Brenda.

The day my brother, Kenny and I thought we were just acknowledging him, he was out in 100 degree weather, and we just kept chanting, Nigger Bust..."Nigger Bust!!"


He took it upon himself to spray us with black tar he was using to black-top the street. Never forgot his words: "Now you're a Nigger!"

(Meaning, we disrespected him, despite out age).

Never forget that COMET bath! Ole Charlie kept telling me...ya never disrespect my UNCLE! I think back then, we didn't see color; we just knew respect. If you used it the wrong way...you got what you dished out. He taught us more than we ever would learn in a lifetime....which is part of this topic...it doesn't matter what color you wear...or are born with.

I really wish these self-centered assholes would perform their 'progressive' experiments on themselves rather than on their poor children.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110524/ts_yblog_thelookout/parents-keep-childs-gender-under-wraps

Tue May 24, 1:08 pm ET
Parents keep child’s gender under wraps

By Zachary Roth zachary Roth – Tue May 24, 1:08 pm ET

When many couples have a baby, they send out an email to family and friends that fills them in on the key details: name, gender, birth weight, that sort of thing. (You know the drill: "Both Mom and little Ethan are doing great!")
But the email sent recently by Kathy Witterick and David Stocker of Toronto, Canada to announce the birth of their baby, Storm, was missing one important piece of information. "We've decided not to share Storm's sex for now--a tribute to freedom and choice in place of limitation, a stand up to what the world could become in Storm's lifetime (a more progressive place? ...)," it said.
That's right. They're not saying whether Storm is a boy or a girl.
There's nothing ambiguous about the baby's genitals. But as Stocker puts it: "If you really want to get to know someone, you don't ask what's between their legs." So only the parents, their two other children (both boys), a close friend, and the two midwives who helped deliver the now 4-month-old baby know its gender. Even the grandparents have been left in the dark.
Stocker and Witterick say the decision gives Storm the freedom to choose who he or she wants to be. "What we noticed is that parents make so many choices for their children. It's obnoxious," adds Stocker, a teacher at an alternative school.
They say that kids receive messages from society that encourage them to fit into existing boxes, including with regard to gender. "We thought that if we delayed sharing that information, in this case hopefully, we might knock off a couple million of those messages by the time that Storm decides Storm would like to share," says Witterick.
"In fact, in not telling the gender of my precious baby, I am saying to the world, 'Please can you just let Storm discover for him/herself what s (he) wants to be?!." she wrote in an email.
How did Stocker and Witterick decide to keep Storm's gender under wraps? During Witterick's pregnancy, her son Jazz was having "intense" experiences with his own gender. "I was feeling like I needed some good parenting skills to support him through that," Witterick said.
Stocker came across a book from 1978, titled X: A Fabulous Child's Story by Lois Gould. X is raised as neither a boy or girl, and grows up to be a happy and well-adjusted child.
"It became so compelling it was almost like, How could we not?" Witterick said.
The couple's other two children, Jazz and Kio, haven't escaped their parents' unconventional approach to parenting. Though they're only 5 and 2, they're allowed to pick out their own clothes in the boys and girls sections of stores and decide whether to cut their hair or let it grow.
Both boys are "unschooled," a version of homeschooling, which promotes putting a child's curiosity at the center of his or her education. As Witterick puts it, it's "not something that happens by rote from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. weekdays in a building with a group of same-age people, planned, implemented and assessed by someone else."
Because Jazz and Kio wear pink and have long hair, they're frequently assumed to be girls, according to Stocker. He said he and Witterick don't correct people--they leave it to the kids to do it if they want to.
But Stocker and Witterick's choices haven't always made life easy for their kids. Though Jazz likes dressing as a girl, he doesn't seem to want to be mistaken for one. He recently asked his mother to let the leaders of a nature center know that he's a boy. And he chose not to attend a conventional school because of the questions about his gender. Asked whether that upsets him, Jazz nodded.
As for his mother, she's not giving up the crusade against the tyranny of assigned gender roles. "Everyone keeps asking us, 'When will this end?'" she said. "And we always turn the question back. Yeah, when will this end? When will we live in a world where people can make choices to be whoever they are?"

God assigns genders. I think the kids aren't in school because they would be labeled - according to their birthcertificate! I don't believe the kids chose not to attend school - that was the parents' doing.

Curiouser and curiouser.



http://www.advocate.com/youth/2015/11/15/boy-stars-new-barbie-commercial

Boy Stars in New Barbie Commercial

The new Moschino Barbie is a huge hit (currently sold-out!), and its commercial is breaking boundaries by featuring a young boy in it.
"Moschino Barbie is so fierce!" the boy screams as he and two female friends laud the doll, done up in designer Jeremy Scott's sleek glamour. Barbie's cellphone goes off and the male child says, "It's for you, Moschino Barbie," before winking at the camera. Watch the ad below.
The strict gender lines of toys and children's accessories have slowly been breaking down, with Target moving to make its signage more gender-neutral.



"Moschino Barbie is so fierce!", the boy screams as his head is shoved into a toilet.