Isn’t it weird how little we still know about gender in 2010? And how so many issues related to gender identity make us feel awkward even when we think we are evolved? We watch “Mad Men” and marvel at how far we’ve come from the oppressive and rigidly defined gender roles of the early 1960s. But have we? I guess…up to a point.
I remember when Leah was born all the cool parents were
trying to be totally gender neutral regarding toys and how we treated our kids.
It didn’t work. No matter what we thought we were doing, there are countless
daily subtleties that place boys and girls into separate camps from the day
they are born. When my young daughter gravitated towards frilly dresses, the endless
gulag of Disney princesses, and, horror of horrors, the dreaded Barbie dolls, I
stood by, confused. Why didn’t she want to play with the “boy” toys we made
available to her? Did being a girl make her inherently different? Or did we
treat her differently despite our best attempts to be neutral?
Today these questions seem a bit
simple-minded to me. Of course boys and girls are different. Of course Leah was
treated differently every day of her life than she would have been had she been
a boy. Maybe not as noticeably or as hideously as in generations past, or even
in my childhood when my brother and I were judged based on how smart we
supposedly were while my sister mostly heard comments about how pretty she was.
Boys needed to be smart and powerful to be successful, girls needed to be
pretty. Message received.
I pray that programming isn’t as prevalent today but let’s not pretend it’s been eliminated from our culture. Just stop for a second and visualize Donald Trump and Kim Kardashian if you want a quick hit of a 2010 gender-stereotype bad dream. Still, I do think most intelligent people now understand that gender roles are more fluid than we used to think. We all have a range of behaviors, interests, and preferences, even when we’re brought up in the same culture with the same messages. Some girls would have chosen the so-called “boy” toys I set out for Leah. Leah herself might choose them today. Some young boys like to play with dolls, some girls like to play with trucks, and neither behavior signifies a whole hell of a lot.
Which brings me to a crazy little experiment that started here in Los Angeles. Have you ever heard of the Feminine Boy Project? No, that's not the latest post-punk band to come out of England. It’s the name of a clinic that existed at UCLA during the 1970s that was funded by the National Institute of Mental Health. The stated mission of the Feminine Boy Project was to “treat pre-homosexuality among children,” assuming that any child who stepped outside of stereotypical gender roles was on his or her way to a homosexual lifestyle. Not that there’d be anything wrong with that. Oh, but wait…there would be, according to the so-called experts involved in this appalling study.
Among the shocking behaviors that got children enrolled in this program were things as benign as boys helping in the kitchen or girls climbing trees. With such broad signs of “pathology,” I’m not sure I can think of a single kid I know who wouldn’t be shipped off to UCLA. And my own childhood? Forget about it. Instead of joining a Little League team, I was baking cookies and performing one-man shows of “The Wizard of Oz.” Hurry! Call the authorities!
Again, for all my liberal
poo-pooing of gender stereotypes, I can’t say I’m immune to the unease that a
lack of conformity can bring. I was appalled when President Reagan felt he had
to “defend” his ballet dancer son’s sexuality by stating in an interview: “He’s
ALL MAN. We made sure of that!” But I also remember the anxiety I felt several
years ago for a little boy I knew who liked to wear nail polish and his hair in
pigtails. “But you’re not going to let him go to school like that, are you?” I
asked his parents, my voice rising in a panic. I had visions of this little boy
being drawn and quartered by his classmates and I wished he would just practice
his preferences “behind closed doors.” Oy. Happily for the boy, his
parents didn’t make a big deal out of his behavior and it ran its course. Of course, for some boys, it's possible that such behavior wouldn't end, that they really do have issues with their gender identity.
Needless to say, one of the many problems of programs like the Feminine Boy Project is that they completely muddy up the distinctions between gender identity and sexuality. Yes, there ARE boys who know they are gay, there ARE boys who are transgendered, but looking at these absurd stereotypical behaviors does not always provide an accurate assessment of these possibilities. And, of course, if such assessments are made, the next step should NOT be to scare the shit out of these children in an attempt to change them to match societal norms and comfort levels. That's the ugly presumption in such programs, that there is a terrible sickness that can and must be cured by any means necessary.
I started reading about the Feminine Boy Project after I followed a link from muckraker extraordinaire, Sue Katz. She was writing about the current brouhaha involving one of the former heads of this project, George Rekers, who in those days was a developmental psychology professor at UCLA and today is the emeritus professor of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science at the University of South Carolina School of Medicine. Rekers is an anti-gay Christian fundamentalist who continues to testify as an “expert witness” in many court cases on the “destructive and sinful nature of homosexuality.” Among his achievements is helping to prevent gay people from being able to adopt children in several states. Way to go, George! Leave those kids in the orphanage…or worse. Anything’s better than placing them in those sinful homes!
Earlier this month it was widely
reported that anti-gay George Rekers had hired a male prostitute to “carry his luggage”
for him on a ten-day trip to Europe. He found his companion on a site called
rentboy.com (hello?) and the young man later admitted that among his
responsibilities was to provide daily one-hour nude massages. Whatever floats
your boat, you lying, hypocritical, tragically repressed and self-hating
gay-basher. The list of right-wing virulent homophobes who are secretly gay
themselves is growing by the minute. Ted Haggard, Mark Foley, Larry Craig,
David Dreier, Edward Schrock, Roy Ashburn, Bob Allen, Richard Curtis—all of
these guys campaigned furiously against gay rights until they were outed
themselves. Sigh. Of this group, I believe only one of them, California
Republican State Senator Roy Ashburn, has had the dignity to admit that yes, he
is gay, even though he voted against many gay rights measures during his 14
years in office.
But back to the Feminine Boy Project. It’s unbelievable to me that such a creepy program existed right here in Los Angeles. Rekers advertised for his subjects in magazines and newspapers and also called on therapists and school officials to send kids that did not conform to gender stereotypes. The clinic mostly treated so-called feminine boys, but there were also fair number of “masculine girls.” Rekers pioneered a range of gender tests that measured whether children acted like boys or girls “should.” Some of these tests are still being used today. If the children were labeled with “pathological gender development,” they’d receive aggressive therapy. Writer Stephanie Wilkinson described some of these treatments in an article in “Brain, Child: The Magazine for Thinking Mothers.”
In keeping with the behaviorist theories of the time, Rekers devised treatments that treated gender-atypical children with an intricate system of rewards and punishments. “Becky,” a seven-year-old girl brought to UCLA, was diagnosed with “female sexual identity disturbance.” She liked basketball and climbing and she refused to wear dresses. She liked “rough and tumble play.” In the clinic, Becky was watched through a one-way mirror as she played in a room equipped with two tables, one of dress-up clothes, the other of toys. Each table had boy-appropriate toys at one end (football helmet, army belt), girl-appropriate toys (lipstick, baby doll, Barbie) at the other. Becky wore monitoring equipment as she played, consisting of a wristwatch-like “counter” (similar to those worn to keep score at golf) and a “bug-in-the-ear” through which she could hear the voice of her therapist talking to her from behind the mirror.As Becky played, she was interrupted from time to time and told to press the wrist counter if she had only played with girls’ toys since the last time she heard the doctor’s voice. Becky grew anxious to accumulate points to please her doctor. In this way, Becky was supposed to be trained to develop an aversion to masculine playthings. Other parts of Becky’s therapy consisted of having a team of four therapists come into her bedroom at home to watch, take notes on a clipboard, and time her with a stopwatch as she played with her toys.
Rekers often cited one of his greatest success stories, a boy called Kraig, who was supposedly cured of his gender disorder:
In 1974, Rekers, was presented with a 4-year-old “effeminate boy” named Kraig, whose parents had enrolled him in the program. Rekers put Kraig in a “play-observation room” with his mother, who was equipped with a listening device. When the boy played with girly toys, the doctors instructed her to avert her eyes from the child. On one such occasion, his distress was such that he began to scream, but his mother just looked away. His anxiety increased, and he did whatever he could to get her to respond to him… Kraig became so hysterical, and his mother so uncomfortable, that one of the clinicians had to enter and take Kraig, screaming, from the room.Rekers’s research team continued the experiment in the family’s home. Kraig received red chips for feminine behavior and blue chips for masculine behavior. The blue chips could be cashed in for candy or television time. The red chips earned him a “swat” or spanking from his father. Researchers periodically entered the family’s home to ensure proper implementation of the reward-punishment system.
After two years, the boy supposedly manned up. Over the decades, Rekers, who ran countless similar experiments, held Kraig up as “the poster boy for behavioral treatment of boyhood effeminacy.”
At age 18, Rekers’ poster boy attempted suicide…
The sad part is that while the
Feminine Boy Project has been discredited (I still say it would be a killer
name for a rock band!), many programs like it still exist in 2010—aversion
therapies designed to scare the gay, transgender, or uniqueness out of young people. Children
who do not conform are still being terrorized, not just by the bullies on the
playground but by terrified parents and misguided “professionals” who believe that homosexuality and transgenderism are diseases that can be cured.
What if I had been dragged to Rekers’ clinic in the 1970s. Would I have “passed” his gender tests? Hmmm, I couldn’t throw a ball very well, but I did like toy trucks and had an extensive Matchbox car collection. I’m guessing that I’d never pass the test if I took it today. All Georgie would have had to do is ride in the car with Leah and me this morning on the way to school and heard the two of us belting out “Don’t Rain on My Parade.” I’d be locked up in UCLA in seconds.
Years ago, when my ex-wife was pregnant, I remember a few friends expressing great relief when they heard we were having a girl. That’s much more suitable for ME, they said. I found such comments incredibly offensive but said nothing. If I heard such remarks today (and I haven’t), I would respond by saying that a good, loving, productive father-son relationship is about a hell of a lot more than the dad being a model of male stereotypes. I am beyond thrilled to have a son and have never had a moment’s worry about my lack of gender-appropriate expertise. But, hell, I still want to teach Charlie to throw a ball, damn it. I just may need a little coaching from his lesbian aunties!
As for Charlie, I have a confession to make. The photo at the top of this post was completely staged. I shoved Leah’s Annie doll into his hands just to get the image. In truth, he had no interest in the doll and kept throwing it face down and trying to eat its leg. But he does like his striped pink onesie and, of course, is already a huge fan of Rodgers & Hammerstein. Take that, Dr. Rekers!
Love the argyle shirt on Charlie. Jordan used to behead Carmen's Barbie dolls. I worried about that a little bit.
Posted by: Maria Sosa | May 21, 2010 at 07:35 PM
Love love love LOVE this post. And, my goodness, look how much Charlie has grown! He's absolutely beautiful. xo
Posted by: Sarah | May 21, 2010 at 08:03 PM
Wow. I am stunned by how incredibly revolting the Feminine Boy Project is. I can't believe it is/was muddying up our fair city.
Posted by: Annika | May 21, 2010 at 08:04 PM
Hi Danny. A very feminine (and later very gay) male friend was in that project, or its predecessor, back in the late '60s. He's still a big ol' queen but sadly very distressed about it.
Posted by: deborah | May 21, 2010 at 08:22 PM
It's always fun to watch those hypocrites fall. I'm betting on Gary Bauer or Alan Keyes to be next.
Posted by: Mike Cohen | May 21, 2010 at 08:30 PM
To all those who spout all the homophobic hatred crap, I always want to say, "Can't fool me. I studied psychology, which you obviously didn't , because you seem to have no qualms about letting your reaction formation show." Unfortunately, as your post so clearly shows, they can sometimes do so much damage (since many have not studied psychology). I, most certainly, would not have passed the gender test as a child. I climbed trees, hated to wear dresses, went around without a shirt, played with my brother's trucks and matchbox cars (why did boys get to have all the "cool" toys?), and loved it when I was mistaken for a boy. However (and much to the college me's chagrine, who, after too many heterosexual heartbreaks wished she were physically attracted to women, because she naively believed those relationships MUST be better), once I hit puberty, it was quite evident that on the Kinsey scale, I fall way over on, like, the 98th percentile for heterosexuality.
Posted by: Emily Barton | May 21, 2010 at 09:38 PM
Dear Danny,
Thanks for another great blog installment.
Reading about those dreadful experiments done by so-called medical experts made me feel lucky that I was only ignored by my parents. LOL.
I didn't play with dolls, but I loved being in the kitchen with my grandmother, helping her cook and bake. I learned how to crochet, and I filled a large cardboard storage box with all kinds of doilies (and even a table cloth) that I had made.
Despite the die-hard radical right wing nut jobs, gay rights are progressing by leaps and bounds.
Thinking of the positive way you raised Leah, you were way ahead of your time, and a hell of a lot smarter than the "experts."
Leah and Charlie hit the jackpot when they got you for parents...
Posted by: Gordon | May 22, 2010 at 01:02 AM
Danny, you're such a great writer, in no small measure because you're such an honest writer. I'm so glad that my fluffy postings move you to take serious subjects in your teeth to dissect them. Your next assignment: why are all of hypocritical self-hating homophobes men? Are there any parallel cases of a repressed lesbian mucking with the lives of the queer community? And thanks for the generous mention.
Posted by: Sue Katz | May 22, 2010 at 04:46 AM
Great post, Danny!
I've noticed that today's youth are a lot more aware of homosexuality than the youth of my generation (the 70's). I can remember being twelve and reading Lilian Hellman's The Children's Hour, and I didn't quite understand the conflict, and my mom explained the term "lesbian" to me. Even then I don't think I quite understood why it was a problem. Perhaps it was the non-judgmental explanation of my very wise mother. I don't think I heard the word "gay" in relationship to homosexuality until I was in college. Now kids hear and use the word on a daily basis.
A while ago I saw a commercial using the song "I feel pretty" from West Side Story, and I noticed they changed the lyrics to buffer the word "gay" in the song. Hmmmmm....
Posted by: Mindy | May 22, 2010 at 06:36 AM
Great post. I do think that society is still uncomfortable with gender roles and that girls still get the subliminal message that it's most important to be pretty. Look at a show like "Law and Order" - it's a great show with average looking men and gorgeous women. The main female stars are all exceptionally beautiful, but the male stars? Not so much. Google just banned ads from websites that seek to match younger men with older women but sites that do the opposite (younger women with older men) are allowed to continue. On online dating sites, most men seek women who are younger than they are.
A few years ago, I did some volunteer work with children, and I watched the boys "act out" a lot. If you watch closely, you can actually see the redirection of emotion. The boys become upset, but they aren't "allowed" to cry. So, what happens? They become angry and violent. This begins to happen with a lot of boys at a very young age. I observed it even in 4 and 5-year-olds. With girls, there's no need for this redirection. They can just feel and cry because it's accepted by society. Their fathers won't look at them disapprovingly.
Our society's gender roles are evolving, as you say, but they're still pretty screwy.
Posted by: Melanie Votaw | May 22, 2010 at 09:37 AM
Danny, I'm teaching Intro to Gender & Women's Studies now and planning to use this post next time (along with the wonderful retrospective on feminine hygiene products).
Jan
Posted by: Jan | May 22, 2010 at 01:54 PM
In case you have not heard of it, I recommend the documentary Outrage. It is very interesting.
http://outragethemovie.com/
Thanks
Posted by: winnie | May 22, 2010 at 07:50 PM
Danny,
This post is really good. So important! This is really missing from my latest book - Perspectives on Gender in Early Childhood. I wish, I could have added this post to it!
Your son looks absolutely gorgeous all staged and all with that great dolly!
Smiles ...
Posted by: tamarika | May 23, 2010 at 03:12 AM
Critics are forever complaining about the stereotyping that goes on in books, plays, and movies, but is it any surprise? Look how much we stereotype each other in real life.
Posted by: Kirk | May 23, 2010 at 01:26 PM
Thank you for this Danny....it's wonderful! playnjane aka Greg B.
Posted by: Jane | May 26, 2010 at 01:42 PM
Donald Trump? Why pick on him? Well I mean there are a TON of reasons...his hair...his attitude. But gender sterotype bad dream??? Huh? One of the few props I can give the Donald is that he somehow seems to have raised absolutely lovely children, including his daughter who is charged equally with her brother with sitting in the "boardroom" disecting the Apprentice wannabe's. Although Ivanka is a beautiful woman, Donald emphasizes her brains and business ability. While he is surely not perfect in this regard he's hardly the person I'd pick to call on this one. What am I missing?
Posted by: J.A. | May 26, 2010 at 06:31 PM
Hey Charlie - real men wear pink! Dang, you're cute...
The hate behind the eyes of people like Reckers and Larry Craig (I live in Minneapolis, so I got to see his mugshot quite often) is both frightening and sad. They are probably very, very unhappy people and a little part of me feels bad for them. But then there is the other part that wants to yell "KARMA!!!!" I'm just happy that my sons will grow up with a lesbian cousin and "aunt" (my sister from another mister), the hope being that they will see their lives and relationships no differently that anyone else's. It is hard, however, when you send them off to daycare and they come home to tell you that only boys and girls can get married and it must be a fact because the oldest kid there said so. Ugh...
Posted by: Candi | June 02, 2010 at 12:24 PM
very good points. its a subject that's close to my heart, so i enjoyed reading it. i also refused wearing dresses when i was as young as three years old and the one time my parents bought me a doll, all i knew to do with it was cut her beautiful long hair off. i spend all my childhood 'wrestling in the dirt' with the boys, and even though my mother occasionally did express some sadness over the fact that i wasn't 'dependent enough', i guess i was lucky nobody really stopped my behavior. i wouldn't have let them, anyway ;)
Posted by: Anna | June 08, 2010 at 11:42 PM
I bought Brody a doll, too. He liked it for a while. Then he started trying to turn everything into guns.
Posted by: Lori Kirkland Baker | June 09, 2010 at 12:13 AM
There's nothing wrong with that. My girls play with toy trucks and my son plays with bratz dolls. but what do you expect of the children of a female construction worker?
Posted by: Boom Trucks | July 12, 2010 at 08:36 PM
Please help me find out more information on The Feminine Boy Project. I just found out that my brother was one of Reker's "patients", and he committed suicide at 38 in 2005. My other brother and I have often thought that his "therapy" was at the core of his isolation, sadness and burden but until yesterday I had no idea. Today, my heart breaks. My mother still has the poker chips that were used to "discipline" him.
Posted by: maris | October 19, 2010 at 01:40 PM