Yossarius's Dungeon
The Illusion of Childhood Innocence


Yet another example of the theory that, if you tell a lie often enough, it becomes the truth. Adults whom champion this particular cause have conviniently forgotten their own childhoods. Likewise, you don't see many adults whom have no children to whom this is an important issue. Why? Because they don't have a vested interest in it. Parents are desperate to get their children to behave, and if getting the rest of the world to lie to their children will do the trick, where's the harm?

The harm lies in raising a whole generation of people with a warped sense of reality. Life doesn't magically change just because you say it's different. Children are NOT innocent little angels. (Before we go any further, let me make clear that I am not talking about babies; the ages I mean will generally range from 9 to 17 years of age, give or take a few either direction.) Childhood requires of us all the need to explore boundaries. This means rebellion. Although not all children rebel in an overt manner, they all do. We all did when we were there.

We have all been trained to think that any form of rebellion is inherently wrong. If this training is correct, than shouldn't we revoke the rights of everyone except for white males to vote, as well as rejoin the British Empire? Of course we shouldn't. We shouldn't, because this kind of thinking is small-minded and ego-centric.

Rebellion is necessary for two reasons. Firstly, those in authority are just as capable of screwing up (or abusing their authority) as anybody else. Rebellion is the most powerful tool available for reminding those in power that they are not gods, not perfect, and that they are not indivisible of their authority. Granted, rebellion for this reason should be as a last resort, but it is all the more important for that exact reason.

The other reason that rebellion is necessary has more to do with the individual. Rebellion is a means of exploring our boundaries. A couple of expensive speeding tickets are generally much more effective in discouraging speeding than any number of "Death on the Highway" type movies they show during drivers' education classes. After all, people are much more likely to follow rules when it's been demonstrated that failing to do so has unpleasant consequences. Without those irresponsible and childish acts of rebellion, the only reason this person would have to not speed would be mindless adherence to rules to which they have no real respect.

I'd like to believe that most parents want their children to follow rules because they respect these rules, or at least they fear the consequences of breaking them, rather than doing so because they have no minds of their own and do whatever they're told. I'd like to believe this, and I suppose this is actually the case for some parents, but it is my opinion that most parents don't care why their children obey, so long as they do. In my mind, this is not far off from parents that make heavy use of their televisions and VCR's as babysitters, then complain about what their children are watching when they don't like what their children learn from their babysitters. If you're so concerned about what your children are learning, maybe you shouldn't be leaving their early education in the hands of nameless, faceless strangers.

So, how does all this theoretical talk about personal rebellion relate to a false perception of childhood innocence? Simple. People would like to believe that all of the unruly behavior of childhood is due to external influences, such as television, video games, and music, but I really don't see that this is the case. It seems to me that these things merely give them ideas on how to do things they already feel the desire to do. I believe that children whom say they got the idea to push their little brother off the roof from a Bugs Bunny cartoon are just trying to refuse responsibility for their own actions.

The issue that I believe to be at the heart of this fabrication of reality, however, is sexuality. Most parents seem to want their children to possess no sexual identity whatsoever until they become fully-formed adults. But, becoming an adult isn't some magical process. It doesn't happen isolated from the rest of the world, nor is it instananeous. This transformation from child to adult takes years, and there's a good reason for this. These years can be awkward, and embarressing, and at times, incredibly degrading. But it is through this awkwardness and embarressment that we all learn to see ourselves as sexual beings, as well as how to relate to those to whom we are attracted. It is through this that boys discover their own personal definition of what a man is. This is equally true of girls.

This whole process, generally called puberty, actually starts long before physical puberty (according to Sigmund Freud, it starts at birth). Parents whom punish their children for trying to explore this question, whether they are aware of it or not, are shaping the attitudes their children will have towards themselves and the opposite sex as adults. It is of course necessary to disuade children from engaging in dangerous activity, but any punishment (for any reason) should be handed out with understanding, rather than an iron fist.

Children whom are taught that sex is bad grow up to be adults whom, in the back of their minds, still believe sex is bad. Parents don't seem to realize that they are not making babies; they are making adults. The average person (assuming they live long enough to die of old age), spends less than one quarter of their life as a child. Perhaps parents should be a little less concerned with the kind of children they want, and a little more about what kind of adults they'd like their children to grow up to be.

You hear all the time about "protecting" children from sex. As if, sex, in and of itself, is dangerous. Sex is not dangerous. Unprotected sex is dangerous. It is, however, now the Twenty-first Century; it's not terribly difficult to protect oneself from venereal disease or pregnancy, nor should it be at all difficult for a young teenager (or even a younger pre-teenager) to find this out. The dangers or unprotected sex can be circumvented with a little education, and a little responsibility. Essentially, it's not unprotected sex than is dangerous; it's ignorance and irresponsible behavior that causes teenage pregnancy and the spread of STD's. The whole issue reminds me of the people whom want to raise the minimum driving age, since alot of drivers ages 16-20 are involved in traffic accidents. The idea is that, until the age of 18 (or even 21), people just aren't responsible enough to drive. This is retarted. The majority of these traffic accidents aren't a function of age, they are a function of inexperienced driving. Someone who starts driving at age 21 is going to be just as poor a driver as a 16 year old with the same amount of experience. No matter what age a person starts driving, they must start out as inexperienced drivers. Perhaps, if we want to make the roads safer, we should require states to adopt more stringent requirements for all people to get a driver's liciense. Of course, this will never happen, because all the major corporations that make their money off drivers (car makers, oil companies, etc) are also major campaign contributors, and thus have bought and paid for their continued prosperity for years to come.

The largest problem, in my opinion, with "protecting" children from adult issues is that they are not being prepared to act like adults. You can't expect people to be responsible for themselves without requiring them to be responsible for themselves. Responsible behavior is not fun; you have to force people to take care of themselves. If you don't prepare people to be self-sufficient when they are children, you only increase the chances that they must spend the first part of their adult years learning how to be adults.




Back to Bitching

Back to Main