Welcome to Gaia! ::

i like the idea. it gives them the choice to be whatever the ******** they wanna be, without people looking down on them because they don't know what the ******** they were to begin with.

I'd have to agree. This doesn't seem like press type of thing. But I can kinda see why they'd cover it. It seems kinda like the type of thing that people should know how this turns out. But it does seem like this can be as unhealthy if not moreso than forcing gender roles. Your gender at least partially identifies who you are, and it's not like people have to follow gender roles or can't change it. It seems like this could be very dangerous and even though I hate to say it, could possibly be thought of as child abuse or something. I know they are trying to do what's best. But it seems like doing this type of thing is kinda like treating your child like an experiment. I'm sure it's done with good intentions, but like they say, the rode to hell is paved with good intentions. So I really don't know. Like the above person said, I'm not an expert.

This is great and the child will certainly thank the parents! .... If it turns out to be trans-gendered. And maybe not even then.

Otherwise they're not really helping it at all. These developing years will be the most important years of the child's life. But they want to make their child different than everybody else because they're trying to be so inclusive / accepting. If there's such a thing of being TOO accepting, this is it. Where's the foundation the child's supposed to lean on? Who can he relate to? The child might have some serious problems making friends and relating to other kids, but the parents just disregarded that. Or they realized this but decided to play things by year.

They're turning the child into a science experiment; that's exactly what this is in my opinion. They may be doing it out of love, but they don't know what's going to happen. The future's dim and unknown. This MAY benefit the child in some way, but it could also have drastic side effects. What kind of parent would risk their child in ANY WAY? More than likely it is (or was) going to end up being straight anyway. NOW it's more prone to self identification issues. And, judging by the nature of this experiment, I'm guessing the parents would accept and support their child no matter what sexuality the child chooses or turns out to be. They'll raise it in a loving supporting family that won't care if it's gay, bi, straight, trans, etc.

So what's the point of the experiment? It's not like raising the child this way will make it even MORE supported than what it was going to be originally. It's not like the bullying would magically go away if it does turn out to be GLBT. Sure, we as GLBT kids go through a lot because traditional families might not accept us. But if they're accepting, then what's wrong with the old fashioned way of raising children? Nothing.

Well, what I'm trying to say is that either way the child would be loved and accepted. So why throw all these uncertainties into the equation?

I say shame on them for jeopardizing the child's future.

To all of you who said "you have to let the kid choose, not the parents", did you fail to read the part that the kid is 4 months old, and can't make desicions for itself.

I think this is fantastic. Nobody said that the parents are forcing the child not to have a gender, they're giving the infant the freedom to choose the gender it wants to be when it's older.

They refur to the baby by their name, Storm. You can also reffur to a non gendered person by they them, or person, and in the baby's case, baby, child, and kid.

"That's Storm's toy." "Can you please change Storm's diaper?" "Where is Storm?"

It may seem odd, but that is the most gramatically correct way to reffur to a person is by their name. When translated from another language like spanish or French, it wouldactually say "Storm ate Storm's food."

There is nothing grammatically incorrect about using pronouns to refer to someone, at least in English.

And I'm not sure what you mean regarding translation from French. We use gender-specific pronouns in French, too. Il (he) est beau, elle (she) est belle, etc.

A sentence like "Storm ate Storm's food" would sound as redundant in French as it does in English. The difference is that in French, the possessive adjective ("his" or "her", in English) usually takes on the gender of the object, not the subject. We would say, "Storm a mangé sa nourriture" (nourriture is feminine) or "Storm a mangé son repas." (repas is masculine), not "Storm a mangé la nourriture de Storm."

Let me reiterate that the default pronoun in French and all Latin based languages is male.
Look at Storm= Regardez Storm.
It is hungry= Il a faim.
He is hungry= Il a faim
She is hungry= Elle a faim
c'est un bébé malheureux!!!

All objects have genders too. Sidewalk (le trottoir) and existentialism (l'existentialisme) are male where as nation (la nation) and reading (la lecture) are female.

It will not be just the parents and brother (all of whom conspicuously have genders) who will be in contact with this child. There will be doctors, nurses, and friends and relatives...all of who already speak an established language.

This is not let a child naturally develop and simply be what he, she, it or (unestablished bi-gendered pronoun) want to or is meant to be. This is a radical, irresponsible, poorly thought out media stunt /science experiment ON A BABY that goes against everything that that behavioral science, psychology, sociologist and anthropology can tell us about sentient beings, human, primates, mammals and the animal kingdom.