Tips on dealing with young boys' wanting to enact violent playHere's what I wrote:I would love some advice on this issue and ideas as to how you dealt with these things with Jacob. We do not want our son playing “killing baddies” which he’s learnt from other boys his age but are torn between not wanting to suppress normal boy’s play desires and thus turn it into a “forbidden fruit” as such; and yet not wanting to hear or see our 4 year old sensitive and generally caring son’s play involving “killing.” We don’t want this for sake of 2 year old son whose still having nightmares, but also because it seems ethically and morally wrong to us. Is this an expression of his sinful human nature? If so, how do we set boundaries on violent play (eg. superhero kills baddie) but keep it accessible to us to train him through and not completely repress it so it then gets played only when we’re not watching which does not help us train his heart in any way.
Dave and I have thought about this issue a bit ourselves and have mixed feelings.Any suggestions on other/different things I could have said? I'd love to hear your thoughts - my answer above was only just a few quick paragraphs sent off in an email to a friend, not a fully worked-out research article!! I'm also very conscious that I have had less parenting experience than a lot of you have, and only one boy too!
On the one hand, I think our culture these days can be quite messed up in its attitude to violence and masculinity. Sometimes it seems as if all forms of 'violence' are rolled up into the same category and treated as unacceptable, when I think the Bible encourages us to see some use of force and physical conflict in a fallen world as necessary and right. I think it's a shame that parents (Christian as well as non-Christian!) will sometimes tolerate all sorts of disobedience and rudeness and nastiness from their kids and other people's kids, but the first tiny bit of innocent boyish rough-and-tumble gets condemned as if some great crime has been committed! I want Jacob especially, as a boy, to grow up with an attitude that is not afraid of physicality and conflict (but with self control and a desire to use his strength to help and protect the weak). There's a lot about the 'superheroes/killing baddies' play that is, I think, an acting out of a proper, Biblical use of protective force in a fallen world . The pacifist/postmodern line that all those stories are just perpetuating the 'myth of redemptive violence' is not really Biblical, I think.
On the other hand, I don't want him to enjoy hurting people or to enjoy watching people get hurt or imagining them get hurt. And I don't want him to be misunderstood by other parents and written off as a nasty, rough kid.
So we haven't encouraged 'killing' story lines and we haven't given him toy guns and so on, but we have been happy enough with various pirate/ superheroes/ monster-and-dragon-slaying imaginative play scenarios. When they have played those sorts of games I have often listened in on the stories that he and his friends/sisters create and interjected if they sound like the moral code behind the story is immoral/amoral, or if the story sounds like something that will be too scary for younger kids.
We've also got him playing U/7s rugby this year to try and help him learn a bit more physical self-confidence and ability so he can enjoy that sort of thing and not feel intimidated by it. (He is naturally quite a gentle and bookish kid.)
Pic by joegranskiart on Flickr.
20 comments:
I've changed on this one over the years. When our oldest boy (we have 3 boys) was 4, we stressed a little about it. By the time he was 5 I was buying swords. By 6 I was buying guns and army outfits. At 7 I gave him an 'army party' where the kids wore camoflauge and we taught them battle techniques. A couple of weeks ago our oldest 2 were playing war games in the backyard with 2 other 9 year olds and I thought it was the sweetest thing.
I agree with what you said, Nicole. It's natural and innocent unless there's a desire to see people hurting.
Yesterday on the radio I heard a short snatch about the stages a man travels through in his life. I missed the name of the book and the author who came up with the theory - so if anyone recognises this and knows some details I'd be pleased to find out - but whoever it was says that men go through six stages (or ought to...some don't get past stage one or two...) and the stages are
boy
cowboy
warrior
lover
sage
king
I didn't hear any commentary on this and as I have said, I haven't read the book but the headings alone made me think. Especially as I am the mother of two boys.
An interesting take on rites of passage for boys and men and maybe provides some context.
Exodus 12, and especially verses 21-27, has the re-enactment of the original Passover feast becoming an annual teaching occasion for little children in the household.
So I suppose one argument could be anything up to and including the slaughter of lambs, the draining of their blood, the spreading of that blood around the doorposts and lintels, and the imaginitive linking of this to the death of foreign children, constitutes acceptable play.
Anything that goes beyond this, for example teaching children about vanity and fashion and the importance of owning attractive accessories (eg. dolls), is clearly crossing an important line.
That may all sound a bit implausible, though, coming from someone who only has little girls in the house.
"By 6 I was buying guns and army outfits. At 7 I gave him an 'army party' where the kids wore camoflauge and we taught them battle techniques."LOL!! So what did you do for the 8th birthday? An atomic bomb construction party? :-)
I've changed my thinking on this too over the years - 15 years ago, I was a pacifist!!
I haven't heard of that Meredith - sorry I missed the radio segment though. I did read an article by Vern Poythress a while back on 'rites of passage' that he did with his sons.
And thanks Gordo for the Exodus 12 tips. Might make our "passover" thing next year a bit more exciting!
And I'll be thinking about that vanity/fashion thing for a while now...
I agree that encouraging boys to use their strength to protect is good and biblical. This might one day mean real fighting (among many other things).
Having opportunities for boys to develop their physical strength in a way that is not a product of lack of self control is useful.
I like your vanity comments Gordon!
I googled those categories and it came up as "The Way of the Wild Heart" by John Eldredge. No idea if it is a good book of course, but that's the book. It is apparently quite old - published in the 60s I think...
"So what did you do for the 8th birthday? An atomic bomb construction party? :-)"
Um... After the army party came the 'dangerous' party where my husband made a catapult and we made bombs to fire at eachother. We also soaked tennis balls in metho and lit them up.
I don't think I'd know what to do for a little girl's party!
Thanks Cathy, and thanks Prue for thinking to google that.
Simone, I'm really REALLY laughing now. I had to read your comment a couple of times to get my head around it. It sounds fantastic, and something my girls would probably enjoy too to be honest (especially Elsie)!
SImone - did the boys get to be fired from the catapult? Now that would be a fun party!
We had fireballs at Girls Ag Camp when I was a teenager - and it was a highlight for us girls too. Kids like (adult supervised & controlled) danger & excitement, just like going on fun park rides...
Our boy just had his 12th B'day at LazerZone. They love shooting each other, hey? And they use up lots of energy - which is also good.
Boys want to feel like heros, they want to try their strength & skill against each other. I think we can get too analytical & cotton-woolly about it
My take is that, as long as they know that in real shooting it makes holes in people & blood comes out, we don't need to get too stressed about it.
But yes, if they are into really hurting people or animals, we need to take a long hard look at our parenting - and probably get them some counselling!
Hi Nicole,
Inflicting harm for no good reason is off limits in our house. But as Cathy said, self control is an underlying issue for determining if the behaviour is acceptable.
Yep, we're ramping up the 'passover' next year!!! So true about the vanity too...we are very aware of that in our house, especially living in this culture...
Jo
well I've got two little boys but I'm just feeling my way along!
Like you Nicole, I used to be pacifist but have moved to a very tentative possible just war position.
I don't like violent toys or games (guns etc). But superhero play is fine! My 4 year old is really into superheroes but his superhero seems to be into writing at the moment as his superhero power....
I think it is very hard to police imagination so maybe my boys might be playing cops and robbers with imaginary guns. But they can stay imaginary. Or maybe water guns which look nothing like real ones. But nothing made to look like the real thing.
I guess I just want to give the consistent message that aggression is not a good response, while still saying that protecting yourself and others is good.
I sometimes worry that my worry about the 8, 5 and 2 year old boy fighting games is based on making myself look good as a model parent and has little to do with what is acceptable play. I don't like the noise that accompanies this play as it usually means someone has been hurt but it gives me opportunities to instruct and teach about being in control and staying in control. As for guns well if we lived near to the grandparents my husband would have already taught the eldest how to ride the motorbike and how to shoot. Probably both at the same time.
Lauren
Well, let's start off by saying that context is important. Playing rugby league or union can certainly be physically tough, but I wouldn't call it violent, because violence is not the object of the game. In like manner, it's interesting to note that a surgery would usually constitute grievous bodily harm, but for the fact that it is performed with consent and in a hospital.
I wouldn't suggest that young boys wanting to play Superman is an indication of Original Sin, but merely that they are following the example of something that has been portrayed in a positive light. I would suggest that this is actually a great example of how the myth of redemptive violence is impressed upon us at a very early age. Please note that while I don't believe that violence can ever be redemptive, the term "myth" is not meant to automatically imply the falsity of redemptive violence, merely that it is a narrative that has come to be accepted by society at large and a value which is almost held as inviolable.
As a pacifist, I'd be interested in hearing why you chose to abandon this understanding. I hope that you don't take offence at this comment, but I'd question whether you really understood pacifism and/or postmodernity by choosing to equate the two ideas. There is nothing about pacifism or Anabaptist theology more generally that could reasonably be regarded as "postmodern". Perhaps "postmodern" is simply a bogey word that is thrown about to discredit an idea when it is disliked?
I should point out that I can certainly understand a person changing their perspective over time. Seven or eight years ago, I'd say I would have been totally sold on Calvinism and its intrinsic love of violence. Of course, having an opportunity to more thoroughly read my Bible since then has helped me to abandon this understanding since.
My 4 year old is really into superheroes but his superhero seems to be into writing at the moment as his superhero power....LOL - like mother, like son Megan?!
And Lauren, I can definitely identify with your thoughts about the opinions of others. And I love the image of the kids learning to ride motorbikes and shoot at the same time!!
Thanks David for the comments! A few quick responses:
"Well, let's start off by saying that context is important..."Glad you're with me there! (Though in a past life I do remember trying to argue in a criminal law essay that sports like boxing and rugby ought to be treated as criminal assault, and that allowing consent as a defence for this sort of ritualised barbarity was just androcentric bourgeois individualism - or something along those lines!)
"Please note that ... the term "myth" is not meant to automatically imply the falsity of redemptive violence"Of course - I wasn't intending to imply that people who speak about the 'Myth of Redemptive Violence' are saying that 'myth' = 'falsehood'. But they're not usually all that keen on the value system that the narrative functions to reinforce!!
"I'd question whether you really understood pacifism and/or postmodernity by choosing to equate the two ideas ... Perhaps "postmodern" is simply a bogey word that is thrown about to discredit an idea when it is disliked?"Well I'm hardly an expert on either, so am happy to be corrected! I should clarify, though, that when I talked about "the pacifist/postmodern line that all those stories are just perpetuating the 'myth of redemptive violence'" I wasn't intending to equate the two (or to imply that all pacifists are postmodernists, or that all postmodernists are pacifists). All I was suggesting was that there is a radical suspicion of legitimised violence that is common to both (e.g. Derrida's essay on 'Force of Law'). I haven't read Wink closely enough to mount an argument about whether he is influenced by writers like Foucault (though I think others -eg. the guy who wrote Godot in Sarajevo - have attempted some sort of synthesis between the two?).
" I would suggest that this [young boys wanting to play Superman] is actually a great example of how the myth of redemptive violence is impressed upon us at a very early age.I don't think so! My main problem with the "MORV" analysis (as I implied in the original post) is that I think it relies on a way of using the term 'violence' that obscures rather than illuminates. (I'd say the same thing about your comments on violence and Calvinism, too!). In the Bible, the vocabulary of 'violence' is always used in contexts that imply an element of oppression or lawlessness - it's never used to describe the legitimate punitive or protective use of force. As you say, 'context is important'!
"As a pacifist, I'd be interested in hearing why you chose to abandon this understanding..."Long story! The short version? "Having an opportunity to more thoroughly read my Bible since then"! I think the Bible portrays God as a just God and a God who loves peace, but not a pacifist God, unwilling to ever sanction the use of force to protect the weak or to punish wrongdoing.
We do two things with our two very active boys:
1. I wrestle with them which teaches them how they can use force in a restrained way
2. We lay down rules of engagement. We don't mind them play-fighting if they do it fairly.
What kind of rules of engagement?
No shooting innocent bystanders, girls (unless they really want to play) or your mother.
You have to use force to do good, protect the weak.
No disproportionate use of force on a younger sibling.
No fighting inside.
No blood. No sticks. No hitting about the face and head.
You can cry out 'Stop, I don't like it' which finishes the attack.
I'm so impressed by your stepping up to the academic-speak plate, Nic! Not that I got what you were on about! ;)
Dear Nicole, lovely to be connected to your blog via a friend. My brother has long loved the ministry of your husband from Petersham Bap days. I confess to a similiar development of boundaries as some of my ideals RE violent words in play come up against my motives. Plus I am more keenly aware of the difference in my long term vision of courage's demands for my sons to my daughters. I am keen to disentangle a love of violence from this and look forward to more comments on your blog to help.
A couple of thoughts:
The moral development of under 5-8's is often very 'Disney'. Good is all good and bad is all bad. They need stories and play that keep the boundaries of good and evil clear - hence our difficulty in teaching our kids that Christian doesn't <=> Good person. I am aware this plays a role in the explosive passion that my little boy brings to his imaginary games, and appreciate the thoughts of others on how use this phase of development helpfully.
I am also aware that 'plosive' sounds and in fact all sounds are far more attractive in themselves to both my sons - and this too plays a role in the magnetism of extreme words during play that involves 'deading the baddies'.
Also, John Elderedge's books on Men and Women are a thoughtful read on the drives that exist in our unique gender roles. Their points are perhaps taken a little too far, but are helpful fodder nonetheless.
I want to see Jesus become my son's ideal of strength. Like a great stallion willingly harnessed, Jesus obedience to kingdom-speaking, suffering and sin paying, was the ultimate act of courage. I would like to know phrases that help me to help him see this. Perhaps it's just the quiet moments when we drive by something that captures his love of strength and I can draw the paralells. Love your thoughts,
Liz
Hi Liz (ie, Elizabeth!),
Glad you found the blog. I loved your comment on "Jesus as my son's ideal of strength". That really is the bottom line isn't it!
PS. Are you Matt's sister? If so, say hi when you speak to him next! :)
Post a Comment