Playing the Indian Card

Wednesday, August 19, 2020

A Voice Crying in the Wilderness; A Voice Crying in a Crowded Theatre




The film previews are finished, and the movie theater is quiet as everyone waits for the feature film to appear. However, the stillness is suddenly broken by a noise. The audience hears a sniffle. The sniffle soon turns to a cry, then a wail. There is an uncomfortable, or perhaps unhappy, toddler sitting in the movie theater. People start shuffling uncomfortably in their seats as they wait for what will happen next. Will the child be taken out of the theater, or will the parent pretend that everything is ok? Scenarios like these happen regularly. Bystanders wonder what the parent or caretaker will do. The action, of course, often depends on the parenting styles that adults use with their children. The two extremes are the lenient (laissez-faire) parent and the disciplinarian parent. Lenient parents often focus on their child's having fun and enjoying "being a kid.” If a child does something careless like break a glass, lenient parents will not become angry or scream. They know that the child is probably experimenting and meant no harm. Likewise, they may even explain to the child that it was an accident and the child should not be upset or cry. In addition, lenient parents may not be too concerned about time-based activities and schedules. They will allow their children to stay up late and experience new things. The motto "You're only a kid once!" ring true to these free spirits. This type of parent sees themselves as guides for their children, which cannot be said about the second parenting group: the disciplinarians. Disciplinarian parents consider themselves role models for their children. Unlike laissez-faire parents, their main priorities are safety and protection of their children! In essence, children are monitored very carefully and may not be allowed to play outside, interact with animals, or rough-house in general. A child who experiences this upbringing may be encouraged to focus on his studies instead of making friends. In addition, interaction may be limited to only close family members. Children who are raised in highly-disciplined environments are likely to do very well in school.

In the end, no parents are truly 100 percent lenient or 100 percent strict when it comes to raising their child. Most fall somewhere in the middle depending on the child, the environment, and the particular situation. Society knows that both child-rearing styles have advantages and disadvantages, but the more interesting question is this: Which style will these children choose when the time comes for them to become parents?

The passage appears as a model essay in a current composition textbook. It illustrates the problem in our culture. It deals with childrearing with no mention of the issue of teaching morality.

Consider the opening scenario: a child is wailing in the theatre. Apparently, whether the parents silence the child, or let them wail, is here merely a matter of their “parenting style.” No acknowledgement that wailing, or allowing a child to wail, in a crowded theatre is a violation of the rights of others.

Again, the second example, of a child breaking a glass: the essayist represents all such incidents as equal. There is no moral distinction made between genuine carelessness and mere childish clumsiness. The only distinction is “parenting style.” It is okay, then, to blame children for things over which they have no control—the very definition of moral abuse.

In discussing “disciplinarian” parents, there is no acknowledgement that the purpose of discipline is to develop moral behavior. Instead, the only possible aim is “safety and protection.” No doubt that was what Hector and Lysander were striving for.

Given the literal meaning of “discipline,” “The practice of training people to obey rules or a code of behavior” (Oxford), this looks like deliberate suppression of the idea of ethics or morality.

In our textbooks. In our schools. Taught to our children.


No comments: