Little play soldiers, if only you knew
what kind of battles are waiting for you.
~
Martin Cooper
When our oldest daughter was little, we – like many
enlightened parents in the 70s – were determined to give her a Barbie-free
upbringing. It was part of a developing movement based on raising children
without gender roles or stereotypes.1 We were pretty successful until the day, when she was four or
five, she came home from her baby-sitter’s with a cardboard box full of
Barbies. We gave in and gave up. She played happily with Barbie for the next
few years and then passed the Box-o-Barbies on to her little sister. The box now sits in our attic, where it will no doubt one
day be “discovered” by her daughter, little Violet, born just five days ago.
Violet has a three year old brother, Sam. His parents (and
grandparents) are raising him without toy weapons, and he has a completely
non-violent toy box. The other day he was working on a cardboard puzzle – some
kind of bright, happy Big Bird scene. He picked up one of the large puzzle
pieces, gripped it in his little fingers, and announced, “Hey, this could be a
gun!” Yesterday, his weapon of choice was a (closed) soap-bubble bottle. He
brandished it like a ray gun and “blasted” us with imaginary bubbles.
Personality development and gender roles are subjects of
much study, and my opinions are not professional, but based on observation and the experience of a being a kid, a parent, and a grandparent. Allowing for important exceptions, the emergence of gender-related
interests and traits in boys and girls (like a three-year-old boy’s
determination to turn almost anything into a gun) seems almost genetic, and no
doubt some of it is. But certainly a great deal of it has to do with those things
that we (parents and society) introduce our children to – both consciously and
sub-consciously: the colors we dress them in, the way we talk to them, the books
we read to them, the toys we buy, the images they see. My guess is that many of
the most important teaching events are so subtle that we don’t notice them and
we don’t realize we are doing them.
And, of course, genetic or cultural, there’s nothing predictive
or automatic about it. My loving parents gave me a Roy Rogers (or Gene Autry or
Hopalong Cassidy) gun belt every Christmas from about age five through age ten.
Few days went by during those years that I didn’t have a six-gun in a holster
slung at my hip. Like my grandson, I discovered an interest in making the bad
guys “go dead.” (I laughed at my girl cousin because she didn't know how to make a proper gunshot sound.) Today, although I don’t have the courage to be a pacifist, I am
not interested in guns.
(Similarly, although I am not a hunter, I have fond
memories of pheasant hunting with my dad, and I think that the male camaraderie
of the hunt was an elemental part of my development – especially since my dad’s
hunting buddies were the same guys I saw in church with their kids – my
friends. Another subject for another time.)
Yet, to use an over-used metaphor, there is an elephant in
the room. It is this: the developmental interest in guns among boys (whatever
its cause) combined with research that demonstrates that our brains aren’t
capable of critical thinking and decision-making until age twenty-five means
that our society raises (quite deliberately, I think) young men who are only
too happy to join up to make the bad guys “go dead.” Until they reach
twenty-five, that is. Then they wise up and want to stay home and raise their
own boys and girls. (It is no coincidence that twenty-five is about the age that heretofore immortal young men realize, "Hey, I could go dead, too!") This is why recruiting or allowing volunteers under the age of twenty-five for
war-fighting is immoral and criminal. Military operations should be limited to men
and women over twenty-five. Then let us see how many Iraqs
and Afghanistans
there will be.
__________________________________________________
1. I do not mock this movement. Although there was some trendiness about it, it was (and is) part of the ongoing liberation of men and women from harmful, limiting stereotypes. That said, I recall an essay I read back then, written by one of these enlightened parents. She recalled a conversation at the playground between two moms raising gender-neutral kids. Each had a boy and a girl. "And yet," said one, "there is a difference isn't there."
3 comments:
Thanks for your observations. I suspect there is some hunter genes in all of us left over from our hunter/gatherer ancestors. Could the instinct in little boys to create guns from almost anything (and I did this too as a child) be a remnant of that? I never grew up with guns (no adults in my childhood owned them or hunted, but then that was Southern California - peace, love & music,man!). I was mostly influenced by the westerns I grew up watching. I briefly owned a 6-gun during my young adult days working at camp - a 357 magnum white-handled revolver as I recall. It was so loud that my ears were still ringing a week after firing it the first time and so I sold it.
Thanks, Jeff. That explains why you're such a peacenik. I was thinking about the westerns, too. They were all over the place. But they were rather innocent, weren't they? No one ever got killed. Even the black-hatted bad guys just got "winged" (or had the pistol shot neatly out of their hand).
So in keeping with our generation's mindset. You put the thoughts, feelings, concerns, ideas, etc. into such good words. Thanks. Andrew and I thought we'd do the no weapons thing but then were concerned that we'd turn our boys into deprived-gun-passion-maniacs so we got "nerf" ones.
Just this weekend on our way back from the cabin Joel was reflecting on the very same thoughts you expressed in your last paragraphs about recruitment of under 25 year olds. He was willing to go a little lower - 21 or 22 - but, as a teacher of "children" in high school, he CANNOT imagine many of the likely candidates for military service immediately post high school being encouraged to use a real gun.
The bumper sticker on my car reads "I'm already against the next war"... I know I'm a bit biased.
Post a Comment