The World Beyond BetterMost > The Culture Tent
What Happened???
serious crayons:
--- Quote from: Jeff Wrangler on February 15, 2012, 07:47:48 pm ---Obviously I have little contact with families with children, and the contact that I do have is usually as a witness to behaviors in public, but it troubles me when I think of all the times I've witnessed "directives" in the form of profanity-laced yells directed at kids who are hardly more than toddlers.
--- End quote ---
I suppose that's an extreme on one side, just like the extreme on the other side would be helicopter parents who control every aspect of their kids' lives. I read somewhere lately that there are even parents who call their kids' employers to negotiate on their behalf!
--- Quote ---I'm not sure I buy the part about teaching children to "respect and take the advice of people in authority." Maybe back in the mythical 1950s, but today? Independence is a good thing, but what about when that independence results in gangs of adolescents beating up people in the subway?
--- End quote ---
I've read about this book in a number of different places, and I think that actually her point is a bit more complex (I quoted the Wikipedia excerpt because it succinctly covered the major points). I think that stye of parenting emphasizes a more "you" (children) vs. "them" (parents, teachers, employers, cops) attitude toward authority. That is, they focus on having children follow parents' directives, as well as those of school officials and later bosses. One of the primary goals is to keep the child from getting in trouble. But of course, that can backfire if the child decides to reject, rather than obey, that authority (by breaking the law, for example). So the result is far from guaranteed.
The more typical middle-class style, according to her theory, would be parents teaching children that they're equal to authority figures. Of course, most middle-class parents don't want their children to get in trouble, either, and basically they do want them to follow the teachers' rules so they can succeed in school. But the children are more likely to be encouraged to negotiate with or question authority, because it's assumed that one day the kids will grow up to BE those authority figures. Again, it doesn't always work out that way, but that's the idea.
Here's an example. A friend of mine said the first time she saw my son (at school; her son was a classmate of his), he was correcting his 5th-grade teacher's pronunciation of some word. And my son's pronunciation was correct. I later mentioned the anecdote to my son. "I'll bet the teacher loved being corrected like that," I said. "He encourages it," my son said. That seems like a very middle-class situation, according to this author's analysis. And, in fact, it was in a school that served mostly middle- and upper-middle-class families.
milomorris:
--- Quote from: serious crayons on February 15, 2012, 05:27:17 pm ---
--- Quote ---Concerted Cultivation: The parenting style, favored by middle-class families, in which parents encourage negotiation and discussion and the questioning of authority, and enroll their children in extensive organized activity participation. This style helps children in middle-class careers, teaches them to question people in authority, develops a large vocabulary, and makes them comfortable in discussions with people of authority. However, it gives the children a sense of entitlement.
Accomplishment of Natural Growth: The parenting style, favored by working-class and lower-class families, in which parents issue directives to their children rather than negotiations, encourage the following and trusting of people in authority positions, and do not structure their children's daily activities, but rather let the children play on their own. This method has benefits that prepare the children for a job in the "working" or "poor-class" jobs, teaches the children to respect and take the advice of people in authority, and allows the children to become independent at a younger age.
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
Fascinating!!
I can most definitely attest to the veracity of these observations. They basically describe what I learned growing up about myself and my suburban buddies. I am most definitely a product of the Accomplishment of Natural Growth (ANG) model. While my most of peers at summer camp and at school (not to mention the performing arts programs & ensembles) were the product of the Concerted Cultivation (CC) model.
Whereas I met and played with other children in my community by playing with them in the streets, my CC peers did so at church/synagogue, Boy/Girl Scouts, ballet class, soccer practice, etc. My CC peers were directed to participate in a range of activities such as music by their parents--usually, whether they liked it or not. Conversely, I discovered my musical talent on my own with neither any guidance nor any hindrance from my folks. As an adult, I noticed that my CC peers meandered from job to job until they found something they liked and/or were good at. I didn’t think I could afford such a luxury, so I had a fairly singular approach to the job market.
The good news is that both approaches alternately work and fail equally, from what I have seen.
milomorris:
--- Quote from: serious crayons on February 15, 2012, 04:56:21 pm ---
--- Quote ---•Parents of Chuck Norris
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
BWAAHAAHAAHAAHA!!
ifyoucantfixit:
So, yes, as you can tell from public experience with people and bratty kids, parents are not often very good at their jobs. Mostly, because as some people on this thread have admitted, they're not very disciplined when it comes to raising their kids.
I do not think that all children that are crying or throwing a tantrum, are brats, or a result of a undisciplined parent. I have never said that. I said, that it is how some people see them.. There are many many explanations for why a child is acting in this fashion.. Most of them, (not all,) out of the control of the parents.. It is simply a sad situation for both, the children and the parents. We that observe it, should try to show more sympathy for the both of them. Not simply look at it, as an annoyance to US> throwing up either a silent, or voice formed chastizement, or epithet.
Jeff Wrangler:
--- Quote ---•The Duggars Kramer (The Dad, not Kramer The Mother)
--- End quote ---
This one confuses me. I know who the Duggars are--we've talked about them and their "quiverful" enough, and they were just on Today again recently--but I don't understand the "Kramer" part. What's that mean? The only Kramer I know is on Seinfeld reruns. ???
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version