The concept that children should be kept from knowing that sex exists is indeed a taboo. In my readings of anthropology I have learned that anthropologists define a taboo as a generally accepted aversion in a culture that has never had a justification for it. An example would be to ask most people in most any culture if it is okay for one to have sex with one's brother or sister and to get a very emotional denial. If the person is asked why not then the answer would be something like, "It is just wrong." That is the same kind of answer I usually get when asking why we should pretend to children that sex does not exist, so it is clearly a taboo. Also, usually when I ask for an explanation, instead of an answer I only get anger. On the rare occasions that I do get an answer it is the one you just mentioned, that children will not understand sex. Well, so what? Children do not understand a lot of things that no one has any problem exposing them to. I have noticed that when someone does not understand something they usually just lose interest in it and look for something more interesting. That most certainly applies to children. Personally, I do not understand organic chemistry, but I took a couple of courses in it in college. I don't know how I passed, but somehow I did and I still don't think I ever understood it. Needless to say, I am not very interested in organic chemistry. But nothing about it harmed me. I suspect that those who say that children should not be exposed to sexual writings are really afraid that they will understand it. As a matter of fact, they probably will. Children are constantly talking about sex among themselves and absorbing knowledge of sex from the surrounding culture that they cannot possibly be shielded from anyway. Some of it is false information and some of it is true. Very young children may very well have a difficult time sorting out truth from falsehood, but that is the case in everything else they learn from the surrounding culture and from each other. As they get older they will sort it out and the practice that delays that sorting out process the longest is the misguided attempts by adults to shield them from knowledge of sex. It seems to me that there are a lot of real dangers in this world that we should be protecting our children from without wasting protective resources on things that are not dangers in the first place, and even if they were, cannot be protected from anyway. I am not one to accept any taboo as good just because it is a taboo. For a taboo to be good it should have a good reason for existing, but then, if it had a good reason it would not really be a taboo would it? Also, think about this. We are calling some people children who are not really even children. Adolescence is a cultural concept, not a biological one, and in most historical cultures it has not existed. In most cultures throughout human history, from the primitive right up to some fairly advanced agrarian cultures, when a person reaches biological adulthood the rituals that declare adulthood are conducted and the person is declared an adult. Vestiges of such practices can be seen in such rituals as the bar mitzvah. However, after a certain level of complexity is reached in a culture a much longer time is required for the individual to learn to function properly in that culture and, thus, the concept of an extended childhood called adolescence is invented. I am not denying the necessity of adolescence. It is necessary if we want to maintain an advanced industrial society, but we should realize that it is artificial and not pretend that the artificially extended childhood is really childhood. When we do we fall into traps like not only protecting children from knowledge of sex which we cannot do anyway, but also "protecting" people from knowledge of sex who are likely participating in it on a regular basis and often know more about it than their ostensible "protectors."
I am convinced that the way any of us get what we want, either individually or collectively, is by manipulating reality. In order to most efficiently manipulate reality we should have the best understanding of that reality that we can. That means that when we try to deprive people of any kind of knowledge we are doing them a grave disservice and, since I did say collectively, we are doing ourselves a grave disservice.
-----Original Message----- From: Ann Parsons <akp@xxxxxxxxxxxx> To: rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx Sent: Fri, 3 Oct 2008 8:41 am Subject: Re: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Adult or Not? Advice, Please Hi Roger, As one who is against censorship in all its forms, I agree in principle with what you have said. However, I do believe that some books should be tabu for children under a certain age; not because they are bad but because they carry information which is too complicated or too advanced for a child to understand well. Most folks don't truly understand the meaning of tabu. Tabu implies either sacred or secret information which is given to people when they earn the right to acquire it. The inner sanctum of a temple is tabu. The rites and ceremonies of adultsin many cultures are tabu to children. Books and information can also be tabu.
This book which Marilyn asked about seems like it would qualify as being tabu. I agree that children who are grown up enough should have the right to read such things. I believe that parents have a responsibility in this area. I also think that Bookshare, as a responsible entity has the right to label certain books as being tabu. There is a difference between anarchy and freedom. <smiling> I had a headmaster when I was in sixth grade whose speech regarding freedom has staid with me all these years. He said that freedom implies responsibility. Therefore, the right to read whatever one wishes implies a responsibility on the part of the reader and the library and the parents or guardians of a young reader. Learning to read with discrimination is one of those things which schools and parents should teach children. Unfortunately, all too often, parents abdocate this responsibility either because they don't care or because they can't care, figuring that the schools have the responsibility. Some parents prefer to just put up restrictions rather than to teach discrimination. After all, teaching discrimination takes time and Mentoring children is difficult and takes effort. Merely banning ideas and books is easy. Teaching critical thinking is always difficult. However, if it is done, it makes better human beings. It protects children in a way that cannot be taken away from them. For, if they are taught to be critical and independent thinkers, no political system, no tyrant, no religious dogma, will have power over them. It actually frees them and protects them at the same time. RE the quote from Tom Leher, it does make a difference as to whether the sex or violence is there for its own sake or if it is there as part of the story. Ann P. . -- Ann K. Parsons Portal Tutoring EMAIL: akp@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.portaltutoring.info Skype: Putertutor "All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost." Email services provided by the System Access Mobile Network. Visit www.serotek.com to learn more about accessibility anywhere. To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email to bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the subject line. To get a list of available commands, put the word 'help' by itself in the subject line.
