Perhaps the fact that some people have gender disphoric disorder may imply that we need to have a gender in order to have a firm self-concept. Perhaps not. It's too bad a real human being has to be experimented on to find out, but I certainly do hope for the best for the little person.

Because of the language. I am Mexican, and in spanish and other romance languages (such as italian, portuguese and french) nouns and verbs have gender-specific forms. You cannot refer to a baby as "it" in spanish. It either is a she-baby or a he-baby.

I don't know about swedish, but I guess it's got to be english-like for the parents to get away with this.

when I accidently say, "what a beautiful boy you have" to some mother I don't know and it turns out to be a girl. Later on however, I chuckle to myself.

Clearly the parents have read "X: A Fabulous Child's Story," by Lois Gould, first published in Ms. in 1972:

http://www.gendercentre.org.au/22article4.htm

While it may seem wonderful to let the child choose his/her own gender role, what if the kid does what nearly every other child does and find one that suits the biology that matches? Poor kid'll be years behind, just as someone who changes might be. Seems like this is just creating a confused kid by guarantee rather than chance.

In Salon today I read about a pair of Swedish parents who have made the decision not to tell their two-year-old whether it is a boy or a girl. I struggled with “it” just now. I felt, in using “it” that I was denying the child “its” personhood. And yet, is personhood defined by gender? Should it be? My gut ties them together in ways that are tough to explain. “It” makes me think of a chair or a bike.

In English, the definite and indefinite articles attached to these objects are gender-neutral, but in many other languages, like French, these objects have gendered articles attached to them: “la chaise,” “le velo.” And in vernacular English, we assign genders to objects constantly. But I digress.

I had a discussion with my coworker about the propriety of depriving a child of knowledge of his or her gender. Would it necessarily damage the child to go through its first few years of life as a socially genderless human being rather than as a little boy or little girl?

What does gender inform as a child grows up? Clearly, once the child encounters other children, in school or in play, the subject is bound to come up. And mutual anatomical comparisons will resolve the issue in fairly short order. But while the child is still young enough to be protected from the knowledge of its gender by its parents, how will it be affected by lack of that knowledge? Should this knowledge play into natural development of the mind, personality, and interests? If the child is given access to a wide variety of the cultural artifacts of gender, a neutral mix of clothes, toys, books, and media, will that produce an androgynous child? One who enjoys the loud clanking sounds of toy trucks and the colorful accouterments of dolls in equal measure? Will this change the way the child understand the world?

I think of some of the essays I’ve read by Ursula LeGuin about the role of gender in storytelling. Will this sort of early upbringing change the stories that the child makes up to understand its own existence and the world in which it lives? Personhood is made up of these “stories” that one tells about oneself. The whole field of psychoanalysis is based on “telling your story” and analyzing it to better understand the self. Do we deny the child an essential element of its early story? Or do we make more stories possible? Only time will tell. I would be very interested to see a follow up on the Salon article in a year or two.

Whenever people ask me what gender I am, I ask why they feel they have the right to know about my genitals. Parents who rightfully refuse to share details about their child's genitals with anyone FTW!!!

@Rebecca White:

You make an extremely interesting point that will be exciting to find out about as this story unfolds, but I want to take issue with:

"Perhaps not. It's too bad a real human being has to be experimented on to find out, but I certainly do hope for the best for the little person."

Every real human being is an experiment for its parents. We might be born with instincts, but that doesn't translate into knowing how to be a good parent, especially in such a complex society.

When I have kids, i have a few experiments I want to eprform - i think COLOR is a social construct - so for the firast five years of their lives, I will blindfold my kids to see if they can then recognize color...

These parents are assholes...

What will Pop be behind in? Expectations as to what s/he does or does not like?

And its not a secret from the CHILD, just from everyone else. Pop knows there is a difference and as soon as Pop cares to say what gender s/he is s/he will. Right now, being very small it doesn't matter to Pop. I think the parents point, and I agree with them, is that it shouldn't matter to anyone else either.

years behind at WHAT, exactly? at performing gender-stereotyped activities? i mean, presumably this child is learning how to walk, talk, run, play; learning its preferences (likes soccer, painting, watermelon, doesn't like peanut butter, swings, scary movies), developing into a little person. What kinds of *really* important things are being missed if the child doesn't have society's expectations for gender behavior imposed on it? So when it realizes it's a girl, it's bad that the child is "behind" at simpering, flirting, preferring pink and disdaining sweaty activities? lots of parents would see that as a plus.

i just don't see what "catching up" this child would have to do.