Is Imposing Ideology on Children a Form of Child Abuse?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nobahar
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Children
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the implications of parents imposing their ideological beliefs on their children, particularly in the context of gender identity and expression. Participants explore the case of a couple who have chosen to keep their child's sex a secret and allow their children to choose their clothing and names, raising questions about the potential psychological impact on the children and the nature of parental influence.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that any form of naming or gender assignment imposes an ideology on children, suggesting that even traditional practices can be seen as ideological impositions.
  • Others express concern that the parents' approach may confuse their children, potentially leading to psychological harm, particularly when children face societal pressures and bullying.
  • A few participants highlight the irony in criticizing the parents for giving their child a choice while traditional gender roles are often imposed without question.
  • Some argue that children are not mentally competent to make decisions about their identity and that parental guidance is necessary, even if it contradicts the child's expressed preferences.
  • There are claims that raising children to be "freakishly different" could be considered cruel, though opinions vary on whether this should be legally addressed.
  • Participants discuss the nuances of parental influence, suggesting that even when allowing choice, parents may unconsciously convey their own biases through nonverbal cues.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no consensus among participants. While some agree on the potential harms of imposing ideologies on children, others defend the parents' right to allow their children to express themselves freely. Disagreements persist regarding the implications of choice and the nature of parental responsibility.

Contextual Notes

Participants express various assumptions about the psychological development of children and the societal implications of gender roles, which remain unresolved. The discussion reflects differing perspectives on the balance between parental guidance and child autonomy.

  • #31
Jack21222 said:
From what I understood, Russ was saying that dressing your kids in the wrong clothes IS cruelty to children.
That's part of it, but this is about much more than just clothing.
Societal convention is really hard to legislate.
In some cases, maybe, but not in this one. You have two choices as to which bathroom to use and which box to check when you are filling out forms.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
russ_watters said:
That's part of it, but this is about much more than just clothing. In some cases, maybe, but not in this one. You have two choices as to which bathroom to use and which box to check when you are filling out forms.

You have thousands of choices of clothing, and not all of them fit neatly into "boys" or "girls" clothing.

I maintain it would be almost impossible to draft a law to make sure parents make their child's gender match their sex. You'd have to codify into law social conventions, which change over time.
 
  • #33
ideasrule said:
That's similar to saying that because I like basketball but allow my children to play soccer instead, I'm being inconsistent. Tolerating another person's preferences doesn't mean changing your own.
This does apply to the case being discussed. One's like for a sport vs one's children is irrelevant. This is not about tolerating personal preferences.

Jack21222 said:
You have thousands of choices of clothing, and not all of them fit neatly into "boys" or "girls" clothing.

I maintain it would be almost impossible to draft a law to make sure parents make their child's gender match their sex. You'd have to codify into law social conventions, which change over time.
The cruelty aspect comes in where the parents knowingly use their 'children' as a means to challenge societal norms. The children would likely be criticized or tormented because of their clothing (that's the cruel part). It's certainly not fair - people shouldn't mean - but many are. If the parents want to challenge societal norms/conventions, then they themselves can exchange clothing and go out in public, or otherwise engage in civil disobedience. They should not be 'using' their children as experimental equipment.

The parents have the knowledge about societal conventions, the children do not. The children are at the mercy of their parents. I don't think the parents are acting in the interest of the children. Instead, the parents are being selfish and are merely interested in their own agenda to the potential detriment of the children.
 
  • #34
Astronuc:

Would you like to make an attempt to write that into an enforceable law that will:

1) be upheld in court
2) be broad enough to target the people you want to target
3) be narrow enough to not target innocent parents

I don't think it can be done.
 
  • #35
There are already laws in place to protect children. You'd simply have to show that the parents actions are causing (or potentially causing) mental / physical damage.