West LA Times

Virtually all study respondents on the political left and more than 75% on the right supported allowing children to play with both traditionally “girl” and “boy” toys. Those on both sides of the political spectrum also supported the idea that girls should be able to aspire to traditionally male pursuits. However, while most left-wing activists supported the idea of a child living in a way that does not align with their birth sex, most right-wing activists rejected the idea.

Society appears deeply divided on how to parent with regard to gender. For example, some parents throw “gender reveal” parties to announce the birth sex and traditionally corresponding gender of an unborn baby, while others use gender-neutral pronouns to refer to their children until they are old enough to self-identify. School board members, legislators, and the public continue to have politically charged debates on the rights of trans, nonbinary, and gender-nonconforming kids.

A new UCLA study titled “Following a Child’s Lead and Setting Kids Up for Success: Convergence and Divergence in Parenting Ideologies on the Political Right and Left,” authored by UCLA sociologists Mallory Rees and Abigail Saguy and recently published in the journal Social Forces, points out some areas of alignment between the political left and right when it comes to gender and parenting.

“The issue of gender and parenting has become deeply polarized,” Saguy said. “Hopefully, this new research sheds light on areas where different political sides overlap, and can allow for more nuanced, and ultimately more helpful conversations about these complex issues.”

UCLA researchers interviewed 85 activists with a range of political orientations, including feminists, LGBTQ+ activists, and activists on the political right. The sample was diverse regarding racial and gender identity, geographical location within the U.S., and parental status.

Researchers asked interviewees questions about two different types of parenting. They were asked how they felt about allowing kids to play with both “girl” and “boy” toys, as well as about not assigning gender to a child until the child is ready to self-identify.

The open-ended questions helped researchers draw conclusions about how activists from different political ideologies think about parenting and gender.

Activists on both sides affirmed avoiding gender stereotypes by allowing girls —and to a lesser extent boys— to play with both traditionally “girl” and “boy” toys. Virtually all those on the left supported this idea alongside over 75% of those on the right.

For example, a policy analyst at Independent Women’s Forum said: "If your little girl picks up the fire truck Lego set, by all means let her play with the fire truck Lego set."

Activists on the left went further by actively encouraging children to play with all types of toys. Activists on the right also supported girls aspiring towards traditionally male pursuits—a stance promoted by feminists in past decades but still associated with today's political left.

A traditional conservative said: "I don’t get into this whole… we teach girls that they can only be mommies... That’s a bunch of bulls--t..."

When discussing future careers or professions however; right-, but not left-, wing activists denied existence of any gender pay gap or sex discrimination against women today.

Yet participants from both groups criticized feminist mothers who refuse buying daughters Barbie dolls or letting them dress as Disney princesses arguing such practice devalues feminine-typed objects/activities without acknowledging reinforcement effects upon stereotypical norms therein either group referenced innate conceptualizations regarding ‘gender identity’ albeit differently impacting attitudes toward respective forms via distinct implications per parental guidance thereof most notably whilst contrasting majorities observed concerning their children's adherence unto birth-assigned sexes instead opposing divergences posited predominantly across opposing factions respectively characterized fundamentally variant contextualizations underlying same basic notion juxtaposed ultimately

“Our study suggests that we need broader conversation surrounding pertinent aspects herein overall,” Saguy concluded summarizing implicit thematic insights therein entirety hence recommending greater inclusivity encompassing prevailing discourses addressing multifaceted intersections pertaining ongoing dialogues accordingly throughout wider societal fabric generically thus urging comprehensive engagement among varied stakeholders constituting participatory framework therein aimed facilitating progressive harmonization amidst prevailing discordance presently prevailing notwithstanding essential potential convergences possibly emergent via constructive deliberations undertaken conjointly herewith prospective outcomes entailed thereby envisaged optimally...