80% of spending is done by women because most women do all the shopping for their families. Women are usually the primary caregiver, so they're responsible for things like

grocery shopping

clothes shopping for children

buying school supplies for children

running errands (picking up dry cleaning, filling prescriptions, take the pet to the vet, etc.)

Feminists do actually complain about why it's unfair for social standards to place most of the housekeeping and maintenance burden on women.

Also, re: your interesting definition of feminism, you should be aware that the first line of the Wikipedia entry on the subject reads thusly:

"Feminism is an intellectual, philosophical and political discourse aimed at equal rights and legal protection for women."

Full text here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism

I specifically point you to the section entitled 'Biology and Gender' for citations of modern feminist scholarship on the issue, which does not claim that all differences between the genders are social (just a lot/most).

my son was 6 months old when he discovered his own genitals. he nearly did a somersault trying to get a good look.

i guess if they have another boy they can keep up the facade.

While you're at it, you could broaden your education and read a little about Christine Jorgensen whose parents had the audacity to call her George. Some people have just 46 chromosomes and some could have 88, for all I know, but George thought Sweden was the best bet for becoming Christine. All these Scandinavian countries are exactly the same to someone born in New York but they're full of trolls - wicked little creatures - Ingrid Bergmans and Greta Garbos, not counting all those who escaped to Minnesota.

Look at you paying attention and being all rational. You're just trying to spoil everyone's histrionic hand-wringing fun.

@ imnobody

gender is at least partially socially constructed and partially biological.

What you state as "fact" and "science" reveals how little you know about science. A few things.

Sex and gender aren't the same thing. There are 2+ sexes in humans (males, females, XXY "supermales", hermaphrodites, etc.). there are about 6.5 billion genders. Notions of masculinity and femininity vary in important ways by culture.

Some thinsg are clearly biological--genatalia, build, and hairiness come to mind.

Some things are clearly cultural--blue is for boys and girls like to cook come equally to mind. These things vary tremendously from time to time, society to society and place to place. if there is variation, generally, it's cultural.

Dichotomizing gender (or even the cause of it) is foolish and innacurate. gender identities and roles are some part bioogy, some part culture, life experience, and even perception of the one viewing the other person (that is, I think of myself as a rather feminine guy, but am often told I'm masculine, go figure).

In any case, if you want some "science" I'd suggest starting with some Margaret Mead (an anthropologist), who first and better made this case. Today, within academic world (where you imagine this science happens) there is both debate and agreement. the agreement is that gender isn't as simple as "nature vs. nurture." The debate is about how much of each contributes to each component of behavior. And their's agreement again that culture is the prism through which we interpret behavior.

The case of the sex reassignment surgery you cite (sort of) actually proves my point in a way. Aren't there also those born with male genatalia who identify as female, or even have surgery to get there? And aren't there cultures (some native American tribes and South Pacific islanders for example) who have more than 2 clearly defined concepts of gender?

And would biology tell us we should be patralineal like the English or matralineal like the jews? Should men lead religious institutions like the baptists or women like the ancient Egyptians?

I'm not sure of all the details and decisions on this particular Swedish family, but I'm convinced imnobody is an idiot.

Doesn't mean it actually doesn't exist.

If so, the toddler knows if it's a boy or a girl.

I'm not sure I get why the parents care so much about gender. If you tell your child they can wear, play with, or do what they want, they will...until their friends tell them it's strange. At 2, little POP couldn't care less. At 4 or 5, this child will care and will mimic peers regardless of parental advice unless there is some sexual-identity issue at play, which I would bet anything there's not.

...because Pop is not going to have such an easy time at age 5 or 6 if he/she's still being referred to as a "whatever". Maybe Swedes in general are a tolerant lot, but elementary school kids? Not so much.

I understand their motives (I'd prefer not to have my 3-year-old son indoctrinated to become a homophobic, 'roid-raging, fratboy type, either.) But this sounds awfully pretentious to me.

How does this end well? This experiment will fail very soon basically once the kid spends more than 2 minutes with a peer well unless the parents are really as crazy as they seem (going public with this experiment suggests that) and force their agenda down onto the kid. How are the parents going to react when the kid actually inevitably starts to acts his/her sex? Again based on there actions so far it does not seem promising.

This is the sort of empty, sensational, trivial news item that I usually try to ignore. It’s really nobody’s business but the parents’, who sound awfully narcissistic. Anyway, I predict that their little experiment won’t last much longer… the kid is at some point going to start asking questions.

What will they do then? Refuse to answer? Sounds like a guaranteed recipe to make the kid neurotic about gender roles, not free him/her from them!

And I’m amused by ideas like this from the Swedish gender-equality expert: “But if you give them no gender they will be seen more as a human or not a stereotype as a boy or girl.” Exactly how does having no gender make one seem like more of a human?

Like it or not, gender is part of being human. We are not asexual robots! You can debate about equality and whether or not the assigned roles are appropriate, but to deny its existence is just ideologically silly. It's no different than forcing a kid to grow up in a strict religious household, just inverted.

“Pop, you’re different than the other children… you are neither a boy or a girl, because we, your parents, decree it so. Why are you crying sweetie? Oops, I didn't mean to confine your gender role by calling you a sexist term of affection.” Ridiculous.... you can tell they have never had a child before... and most of the other people commenting here who are cheering them on.

It will not work.