Don't assume they're straight.

After all this, I still don't think I agree, as long as we're talking about someone who doesn't exhibit stereotypical effeminate behavior consistently from the moment they develop any consistent personality.^[1] It makes no sense to assume anything but that they're straight, because straight is the predominant way that humans are. Like, the opposite is that you're assuming they fall into a very small percentage of people, which isn't pragmatic. My argument is not supposed to be that you are either raising them straight or raising them gay, but rather that there is no other basis from which to approach parenting a child but from the assumption that they're more or less normal.

Thanks for settling the third P but I don't think the follow up has anything to do with what I said.

And, I still don't think your examples of convention are analogous, but are certainly provocative. I would actually lump the two together, in that they convey explicit sexual violence. In the first, young girls are commoditized for future fertility, and the second is actual FGM. Tying it back, I don't see anything in assuming someone is more or less normal as being violent.

[1] As an aside, if strongly effeminate behavior were going on with a pre-pubescent child, should you assume your child is gay and raise them thus? Or just allow for the fact that you might be misinterpreting some affect? Also I acknowledge this ignores literally everyone but gay dudes but whatever.