Feminization of boys?!? Dangerous new trend...?

Question

I have a friend who has a seven year old son and they wanted to put him on meds because he pulled a girls' hair, kicked another girl when she called him a baby, and tore some girls notebook... I told him not to sign the diagnosis papers no matter what. The doctors and school officials were totally mad he would "refuse to act in his sons interests" but I was proud he saved his child from those b..ches. When boys are just being boys, women go... oh he's antisocial, he's a predator! Dont you think they are overreacting and hurting our boys?

Answer 1

Yes I do! I agree w/ Charles S. We are turning our kids in to sissies. We have become so enamored w/ over diagnosing and medicating for everything we think is not right. We will end up being a bunch of little robots that are drugged in to conforming w/ some limp-wristed, spineless, BS social norms.

Answer 2

No one but an idiot would call the boy "anti-social" since you can't even give a child that diagnosis. And to call him a "predator" is overstating the case in spades.

However, I think that you're the one short-changing boys by calling this "normal behavior" as if a seven year-old boy should not know better than to pull hair,hit and destroy property.

I work in a public school with kids in kindergarden to 3rd grade. Boys do go in for rough play with each other when they play tag, football etc but there is a world of difference between that and intentionally hurting other people.

I don't generally advocate medicating very young children but I think that some kind of behavioral therapy might be in order.

Answer 3

Well...they definitely need to do SOMETHING about the fact that he's messing with the girls in his class. Sorry, but "boys will be boys" is not a justifiable excuse to go around kicking girls and pulling their hair. What about how he's making the girls feel? They don't deserve to be treated that way just because he's being true to his boyishness.

All that being said...I think medication may be a little extreme. When you have a kid like this who's misbehaving, it's not necessarily because he has some sort of disorder, it's often because they never taught him manners and didn't spank him often enough (or perhaps hard enough). Now would be a good time to start making up for lost time, in terms of manners and spankings!

Answer 4

Of course their being feminised family courts and their feminist counterparts have made it virtually impossible for a father to be anything more than a visitor/atm machine. And a boy who is raised by a woman will certainly pick up feminine ideas. I am living proof once upon a time I actually considered my self to be a feminist I was raised by my mother who is a feminist. Had I not been put in a foster home away from my mother I probably never have had the seeds of my own worth as a male sown.. But what turned me away forever was my trip through the family court system. Which turned me into nothing more than a source of income for my ex. And am therefore unable to teach them to be men.

Answer 5

Worst - 2.) Mispelled Names (Ex: Elysabeth, Bayleigh, Alyksandrah etc) Most tolerable - 3.) Made up tacky names (Ex: La'Shaigh, Nevaeh, Breelee, Jazzilynda etc), but not those examples BQ: If you HAD to use one of the example names for a child, which would it be? 1.) Jayden, or Kodi (mispelled :-O) Unless Ashley can be a choise, not sure if it falls under this category or the unisex category. 2.) Miya 3.) Iyaisha BQ2: Any other terrible trends for names you can think of? Nope sorry EDIT* I stole 'thoroughly modern {demi}'s' Words for names. (ie. Apple, Echo, Pilot) BQ3: Whats your name (first & middle)? Do you like it? Shona Olivia, I do like Olivia but not too fond of Shona

Answer 6

I'm not big on medicating children for "behavior problems". In the case of this boy, he doesn't need meds, he needs discipline. BUT, excusing this little terror's unacceptable actions as "Boys are just being boys" is just as bad as pushing meds on kids. The only thing that would excuse his actions is if girl #1 pulled his hair first, girl #2 kicked him first, and girl #3 tore his notebook first. In all the things you said he did to the three girls, none of it is justifiable or excusable. I think there may be more to this boy's story then you either know or are telling, normally behaving boys don't get physically violent with three different girls for no reason.

Alexandra, there's a difference between normal and natural activeness in a boy like yours, and a boy that goes around hitting girls(or anyone, for that matter) unprovoked.

Answer 7

I absolutely agree with not medicating him.
Am strongly against children being drugged, it sickens me how some people will put that kind of sh*t into their children and rob them of their health and natural individuality.
Drugs don't heal, but only suppress symptoms and provoke side-effects which in the long run cause other ailments, its a never-ending story with medications.
Heck, I don't even think adults should take them, as there are alternative - naturopathic or homeopathic treatments for mental or physical dis-ease. But to each his own.

Perhaps he is just going through a phase, or an underlying matter that needs attention or to be disciplined, though it is normal for children to sometimes display some aggressive tendencies, I don't think that parents should freely allow their children to hurt others, whether boys or girls.

This was a very good question (for this section), will star it.

Answer 8

It's always a good idea to get a second or even a third opinion before signing anything like that. However, in the school's defense, it does sound like he has some issues that need to be addressed. It's not normal for a kid to act like that. Maybe he's having problems at home, or he's being picked on at school. Sounds like he could have some anger problems and/or impulse control issues. But he could be reacting to being bullied, in which case he needs help learning how to handle the situation appropriately. It wouldn't hurt to get that looked into a little more deeply.

But yeah...don't sign anything until you're sure...and when it comes to schools, they can be very pushy. They like to think they are authorities on such problems because they see them...however seeing them and diagnosing them are two entirely different things. Get the opinions of someone who actually specializes in such things...like a psychologist. Medical doctors and school teachers are not specialists in the study of human behavior. It may be that he does not need medication. Meds should always be a very last resort, and recommendations for meds (when it comes to behavior problems) should come from a psychologist or psychiatrist, not a general doctor or teacher.

I wouldn't ignore the child's problems. The school is seeing something that really does need to be addressed, and if it's ignored, it might get worse and that's not in the best interest of the child (or the other children he's around.)

EDIT: I don't see this question as one that really pertains to the "feminization" of boys..it seems to have more to do with psychology (human behavior), and it does seem to warrant further examination.

Answer 9

___Another case of "human" defined in feminized terms. Many boys, then, turn out not to measure up. What a surprise.
___"Boys being boys" can be a rationalization for bad behavior, but is not always that. It has nothing like the legal force of, "placed me in fear of imminent physical danger" (or some equivalent), which shows up on restraining order affidavits. This phrase can be used as an excuse for women to act in an emotionally and morally irresponsible manner, and to throw a guy out of his home or into jail, whether or not the "fear" is actually felt, and whether it's a result of real danger or just a consequence of emotional self-indulgence. It can enable an abuse of the political power of victimhood, in a feminine way, in the way "boys being boys" can enable abusive cavalier disregard in a masculine way. Both phrases can used truly or dishonestly. But only one of the two is regularly derided in public discourse.
___Clinical psychology is a biased occupational group to begin with (most of their practitioners sharing an ideological inclination). More deeply, its notions of "human" behavior focus narrowly on emotions and other passive aspects of human personhood-- nature or nurture. Its biased metaphysic makes it unsuitable for the half of humanity that's testosterone-driven and prone to overt activity. Its passive focus also renders its perspective incompatible with moral discourse, since morality presupposes some form and some degree active responsibility for behavior. Beings categorically determined by nature or nurture are necessarily without moral capacities.
___Some aspects of the human condition aren't quantifiable, but not less real. Physics can't determine a particle's velocity and location at the same time, and quantum physics has its "uncaused" events. For psychology to rely on its narrow pressuppositions, and to pretend that it has anything close to a complete perspective about something as complex as human behavior, is arrogant and idiotic. But it's the only conventional wisdom on the subject that we have.
___So expect more ritalin totalitarianism for the near future.

Answer 10

If it was like this growing up, I'd be on meds.

And some of my friends would probably have been lobotomized.

They may need discipline but let boys be boys.

Answer 11

Boys are naturally active and they're known for having ants in the pants. Unfortunately certain people think that acting like a boy is unacceptable and want to drug them.

I'm the mother of a 5-year-old boy who likes to climb on everything. Believe me, that's a concern of mine...that someone won't like how active he is!