Damla Belemir Aydin
Central European University
Society is beset by gender oppression and discrimination, often perpetuated through compliance with unjustified gender norms. If we want a permanent change in this social order, I believe we can start from the very beginning, that is, from the family. Parenting can be a powerful arena for social change. In this talk, I will argue that parents have a moral duty to gender-open parenting practices, which can in consequence help with long-lasting societal change in gender oppression and discrimination.
Matthew Clayton’s independence view argues that parents should not impose comprehensive identities on children because it violates their future autonomy. In this talk, I extend Clayton’s argument to gender-open parenting. Gender-open parenting means raising a child with a refusal to assign a gender to them and not treating them with any unjustified gender norms. Common practices of gender-open parenting is using gender-neutral pronouns for the child (like using singular “they”) and give children many gendered and non-gendered options for their clothing, toys, games and activities. I will argue that assigning a gender to a child is a form of comprehensive enrolment that restricts a child’s ability to develop their identity freely. This practice can cause harm by forcing children into an identity they may later reject. Also, children raised with rigid gender expectations and norms may struggle to explore different roles, interests, and expressions without fear of judgment or exclusion. Therefore, I argue that parents have a duty to gender-open parenting as not practicing gender-open parenting is a risk for serious harm to their children.
I address two key objections and answer them. These are: the concern that gender-open parenting can also be a form of comprehensive identity and the concern that gender-open children may face social difficulties in a gendered world.
References:
Clayton, M. (2012). Debate: The Case against the Comprehensive Enrolment of Children*. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 20, 353-364. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9760.2011.00397.x
Gheaus, A. (2023). Feminism without “gender identity”. Politics, Philosophy & Economics, 22(1), 31–54. doi:10.1177/1470594X221130782
Jenkins, K. (2018). Toward an account of gender identity. Ergo, 5(27), 713–744.
Some Clarifications:
1. What I mean by gender identity in this discussion is about how a person experiences and relates to gender norms. It means feeling that certain gender expectations apply to you. It is how someone sees themselves in relation to sex or gender categories.
2. I have also mentioned unjustified gender norms a couple of times until now. But what are they? Are all gender norms unjustified? I believe not. Justified gender norms come from general moral rules, and they apply when biological differences matter, like offering cervical cancer tests to people with a cervix (Gheaus, 2023, p. 37). On the other hand, unjustified gender norms sort people into fixed roles based on sex and they set different rules, traits, and duties for men and women (Gheaus, 2023, pp. 37-38). These norms create double standards and limit personal freedom (Gheaus, 2023, pp. 37-38). They have also caused unfair treatment in history. Justified norms have clear reasons, but unjustified ones hold people back. Feminists argue that we should remove these unjustified gender norms.
3. What I refer to as “gendered” options are the options that evoke the relevant gender norms set by society while “non-gendered” options are the options that does not evoke any relevant gender norms set by society. To give an example, when parents choose clothes for their children, they usually choose colours based on the sex of the child. If the child is a girl (girl used as a sex term here), the society expects the child to wear pink clothes. This is a gendered practice based on an unjustified gender norm. However, if parents are gender-openly rearing their children, they should choose colours which are gender evoking, like both choosing clothes that are pink and blue, but also choosing non-gendered colours like yellow and green. This practice will give the child lots of options until they come to an age to choose from those options. These practices allow children to explore and define their own gender identity over time.
Chair: Sarah Köglsperger
Time: 03 September, 16:50 – 17:20
Location: SR 1.004
SOPhiA 2026 