Something I've never really understood...

[vulgarweed]

the concept of "innocence" and why it's valued so much.



Usually when you see it thrown around online, it's got to do with sex (as if fetuses haven't been caught on ultrasound wanking in the womb). But it goes deeper than that - I just got into it with someone on a message board about a 14-year-old upset by studying history of genocide.

Urk...I read Anne Frank's diary at 11--after that I started reading every book and encyclopedia entry that I could find about the Holocaust, including lots of crying and nightmares and staring at death camp pictures, trying to understand what happened to her, for she'd become an "imaginary friend" to me, as characters in beloved books always do.

That was almost three years after the months I'd spent staring at the TIME magazine cover with all the pictures of the bloated Jonestown bodies on it, stealing it from my parents and trying to wrap my brain around the concept of people killing themselves...just because I knew my mom's best friend had killed herself 2 years before and she was still grieving - I'd overheard my parents talking about it at night, and they'd given me a dumbed-down "child-friendly" version of why Sally was gone, but just because I was little doesn't mean I was dumb, and I was well aware my mom was still crying about it sometimes.



I don't get it. Why is "innocence" considered worthwhile? Isn't it just a sentimentalized version of ignorance? If I hadn't been aware of intense human suffering in childhood, would I have any sense of social conscience or empathy now? It ALL starts young, or it never happens at all, right? (Believe me, I've met people who never empathized with victims or knew poverty or tragedy as kids. I don't envy them and I wouldn't trust them as far as I could flick them with two fingers.)

Comments

[aphrodeia.livejournal.com]

Isn't it just a sentimentalized version of ignorance?

Sure. But with awareness comes worry and anxiety, the realization that Mommy and Daddy aren't invincible - and neither are you. The real world is a very serious place, and being somehow immune from that is a wonderful thing. For a while, anyhow, until puberty hits and you start smelling funny and eventually need to get a job and pay taxes to allegedly try and keep people from blowing your country up. Or something.

Innocence is a wonderful thing, but it ends eventually. I don't think we need to rush it.

And, seriously... 14? Shoot. This kid's old enough to have babies. Kid needs to grow a spine.

[vulgarweed.livejournal.com]

I think I had that pretty early on, I had hazy memories of the end of Vietnam and the deposing of Nixon...but more than anything I think what defined my awareness was understanding that nuclear war was a very real possibility and there wasn't jack shit my parents could do about THAT. And I couldn't have been more than 10 when that sank in, because I remember taking the role of John Anderson in our "mock elections" when I was 5th grade and that being my key argument. :D My biggest emotional motivation in that was that, hell, if there was a nuclear war EVERYONE would die, and my parents were the ones I loved most, and I wouldn't want to live without them, so I was doing it for them. (I was dabbling in Christianity around the same time, and my missionary attempts to save them from Hell were less well-received. XD)

Oh, I know. I was fucking and working at 15. (not at the same time, my adolescence wasn't *that* bad). XD

[aubrem.livejournal.com]

mm, I think there is more to it than that. "Innocence" is more about not being tainted by anxiety, confusion, disillusionment, disappointment. Those things are inevitable in life, even if you only get them to a small degree.

Hopefully loss of innocence will be tempered by deeper compassion, etc but sometimes it isn't - sometimes it just leads to cynicism and bitterness.

[vulgarweed.livejournal.com]

anxiety, confusion, disillusionment, disappointment

But is there a magic age when you're free of these? I can't remember if I ever have one. certainly all my concrete memories involve them to some degree, even my very earliest one of being on a table being diapered and being afraid of falling off.

There IS no state of freedom from these feelings AFAIK.

[sarahsan]

I have toyed around with this concept and why it's in place and why the hell it's so sacrosanct, too (and I think saying "so sacrosanct" is actually grammatically fucked-up, but whatever). My gut reaction to most of these discussions about the "innocence of childhood" is to scoff because it was a Victorian concept and Victorian-era concepts piss me off. The fact that my own childhood was so sheltered I was eighteen before I started learning sexual terminology like "come" and "missionary position" just makes me kind of want to whiplash in the other direction.

But that's part of the reason I don't ever want to have kids myself--the responsibility of crafting that kid's worldview (when I may, in fact, just scar them for life and make them distrust me as much as I distrust my mom) is way too great a burden for me. I mean, I turned out okay, I think--who's to say that wrecking my innocence earlier instead of having it drag on through adolescence would really have turned me out any better? Maybe I could've turned out WORSE*crossesself*. XD

...Every time I try for "thoughtful" in your LJ I end up with "stupidly rambly." My apologies. -_-

[vulgarweed.livejournal.com]

No, I think this is totally smart. Because the idea of the "innocence" of childhood is VERY Victorian, and upper-class at that. (In the 19th century, only upper-class children had a shot at "innocence"; the rest had factory jobs). For that matter, the idea that DEATH of all things is an adult concept is only about 100 years old...for most of human history, those who were lucky got to die at home, with the whole family attending. I'm grateful for the experiences I've had of being there when people passed on, personally.

"Innocence" for children is SUCH a notion of privilege. 14-year-olds in the US come home in tears from seeing pictures of corpses in textbooks? NEWSFLASH: chidren half that age in Iraq see (and smell) the real thing coming home every day. We have NO IDEA how privileged we are, that there hasn't been a war on our soil in living memory. It WILL happen eventually, though--even Rome fell. I grew up in a Confederate state, so at least that memory is still alive of bein on the losing side, so, cross fingers, a small degree less hubris.

I never had kids because I was just never interested enough - no regrets there. But I would still recommend my parents' approach - no censorship. Ever. Disagreement just means you've raised a person with her own mind - high five. But if you snoop, that trust can never be rebuilt, so don't.

[quantum-witch.livejournal.com]

We were both eighteen when those terminologies entered our bubbles. Try not to be as terrified as me and wait til you're 27 to explore them for real. They're honestly NOT so scary.

You're very much okay, I think. You're acknowledging all this, and you're moving forward :) And it's wonderful to watch!

[musegaarid.livejournal.com]

I work with children and parents all day long and I think we can all agree that the next generation is spoiled beyond belief. Parents give their kids everything they never had as children or everything they think their kids deserve. I think innocence, which is essentially a sense of nostalgia for when the world seemed pleasant and easy, is just part of that; something their kids should have, even if it's an impossible fallacy. I'm very afraid of what the world will be like in thirty years or so...

[shiv5468.livejournal.com]

Isn't is mostly about making the parents feel better, who equate innocence with safety. And we know how that turns out in the end.

[acusa-dora.livejournal.com]

I don't know how I feel about this. Watergate was exceedingly hard for me (I was in high school when the shit hit the fan) because I believed in the system. I knew the government had problems (I remember the summer of 1968 very well. I was 11), but I didn't know how bad it could be. I think most kids realize that adults are not superhuman when they're about five or six. They can see through you pretty well. I'm still a cornball old person, though, and I hate to see people become jaded and lose hope. The loss of innocence to me means becoming someone who doesn't have anything/anyone to believe in or care about. That is really damaging. The rest of it--knowing how cruel people can be and also the flip side--how generous and good people can be just prepares you for life.

As for the kid who didn't know about the Holocaust--what stupid parents don't teach their kids about history? We took our son to the Anne Frank house when he was seven. We thought that would be the way to introduce the whole topic to him without overwhelming him with that information. We were in Amsterdam as part of our vacation that year, so it was the right place/right time thing. He studied the Holocaust in 8th grade and then we dragged him to the museum in DC.

[wandlimb.livejournal.com]

The loss of innocence to me means becoming someone who doesn't have anything/anyone to believe in or care about.

I'm a cornball old person, too, and about your age, and agree with you about how not believing in anything is the soul killer. As "Boomers," we're part of a pretty idealistic generation. Maybe the definition of "loss of innocence" shifts slightly depending on what generation you're a part of.

[shadowvalkyrie.livejournal.com]

as if fetuses haven't been caught on ultrasound wanking in the womb

*lol* Seriously?

Isn't [innocence] just a sentimentalized version of ignorance?

Agreed, it is. I'm glad I was always curious enough to avoid it.

Why is "innocence" considered worthwhile?

I think you view the issue from the wrong direction. Being an innocent person yourself is clearly a disadvantage, but being surrounded by innocents while not being innocent yourself? Damn practical! *has another cynical day*

I still think it's immoral to keep children stupid this way. Of course the opposite (say, child soldiers in Ghana) of having seen too much too young is even worse, but there has to be some middle way, right?
The modern overprotectiveness of many parents towards their children is something that I never understood anyway. I was glad my parents let me climb on trees, for instance: I may have skimmed my knees once in a while and there was a good chance I'd break an arm or something, but that's the only way to learn, isn't it? Of course you should warn your children about dangers, but pretending bad things (or things you simply don't like) don't exist runs exactly counter to that, does it not? How shall children learn to existimate risks later, if they've only known invulnearabilty? How will they deal with the facts that no, they can't have whatever they want right now; no, the world doesn't revolve solely around them; no, criticism isn't evil; no, not everybody loves them and wishes them well; no, working for their money is not going to kill them, if they don't learn it young?
Many Parents really don't seem to see that.

[quantum-witch.livejournal.com]

I was glad my parents let me climb on trees, for instance: I may have skimmed my knees once in a while and there was a good chance I'd break an arm or something, but that's the only way to learn, isn't it?

Holy crap, I have had the same thoughts, and thought I was the only one having them. I haven't seen a kid climb a tree, or do anything outdoors without mandated padding and helmets, since I was a child myself (looong ago). I wonder if adults aren't denying their children the right to do things because they'd be labelled "bad parents" if the kid got a scratch. I've read police reports (I worked for the police) about DCFS being called over things like a kid bumping their head on a coffee table. I wish to fuck I was kidding.

[dragonlady7.livejournal.com]

I think I've been going on rants about how innocence is ignorance since I was at the age where people were saying I should be innocent.
I *was* very innocent, but I think that's more due to my own late-bloomerishness than anything else. I knew about sex when I was in kindergarten, but wasn't in the slightest bit interested in it until I was 18 or 19. I felt bad about not being interested, but I just wasn't.
But I would get very annoyed every time someone praised someone else's innocence. I was convinced it was a conspiracy to keep us dumb. Ignorance was never something I aspired to.

So, in short, well-phrased.

[hopita.livejournal.com]

I remember being at the vet once with one of my rats. A little girl and her mother were there, and the little girl was interested in the rat. She told me that she had had a hamster, but that it got too big and had to go live under the porch at her house. The mother shot me a wink which meant "you and I both know that the hamster is dead," and I felt moderately ill. I'm sorry, but isn't part of the point of having pets to teach kids about death? Isn't having your hamster or your goldfish die part of how you learn to deal with loving and losing?

P.S.
A 14-year-old upset by studying genocide? I'd hope that anyone would be upset at studying genocide. Studying genocide should be upsetting.

[divinetailor.livejournal.com]

A 14-year-old upset by studying genocide? I'd hope that anyone would be upset at studying genocide. Studying genocide should be upsetting.

Word.

[apricot-tree.livejournal.com]

I think there has to be a balance. And I believe you can bring children up to be socially conscious and aware, without going too far, too fast. I had a childhood full of anxiety, anger, and depression. I wouldn't wish it on anyone else. It didn't make me a better person. (YMMV) I don't believe in sugar coating, or pretending the hamster went to live under the house. However, kids at this point are getting exposed to all the horrors and worries of adulthood at a young age. And it's not working out well. We now have a whole generation of medicated kids (which is a whole other issue.)

There has to be a balance.

[ithilwen.livejournal.com]

I think it's aprotective mechanism - for the parents. Losing your innocence, however necessary, is painful, and for many people, watching a child lose his/her innocence brings back their own painful memories, which they don't want to relive. So they insist on "protecting the children" to avoid dealing with their own pain, never mind the fact that in the long run, they are increasing the pain the child will go through. (I suspect a loss of innocence at age 14 is much tougher to take than a similar loss at age 8 or 9. School-age children seem to "roll with the punches" better.)

[quantum-witch.livejournal.com]

Oh my gods. Genocide is a fact of the world, kid! Doesn't NEED to be, but it fucking IS. Learn about it, so that you can fight against it! My gods.

As I wrote above to SV, I really have seen parents get investigated by DCFS for the littlest things, thanks to other people trying to protect children that aren't even THEIRS. All well and good if the kid is being abused, but a bump on the head or a scratch on the knee ought not to raise the alarms in the ER. And it fucking does, regularly.

Innocence and ignorance is a loooong rant. Myself... I lived in purposeful and deliberate ignorance of damned near everything I could, for as long as I could, because my innocence had been shredded at a rather early age. I couldn't cope with it so I shut down. I would remain "innocent" damn it, no matter how many things I had to pretend didn't exist. I can remember literally plugging my ears and walking away when people were discussing sex, and I was in my 20's. Holy fucking hell.

When it comes to death... the only thing that bothers me is seeing the corpses. And it should bother anyone other than a mortician. Heaps of bodies in the Holocaust is tragic and heart-wrenching, and it SHOULD BE. We should learn from it. Pity there are places that haven't, and people who still deny it. Sad, fucked up people.

I might cringe and weep and hide under the covers when my mental issues have it looping and looping into infinity... but I always crawl back out and accept the world's shit.

Here's the thing... are we allowed to get offended when, say, someone is discussing a horrific death in every gruesome detail while in a supposedly-civilised public place?

[quantum-witch.livejournal.com]

Additionally, your comment about people failing to empathise with others because THEY never experienced whatever... I've worked with such insensitive fucktards, regarding homeless people. I was homeless. I got it. I ground my teeth til I saw sparks, but there's no changing their opinions.

[salsify.livejournal.com]

Trying to find some sort of balance with my kids drives me crazy. I don't want to make basic things like sex and death and illness a big blank to them, and I can't imagine how it could be done in this family anyhow. At the same time, most news media spend lavish amounts of time on the sickest, goriest murder and abuse cases every damned day, and yes, I want to filter that. I want them to know that bad things happen, but I don't want them to grow up thinking that that's ALL that happens. They don't need to be trained to react as if everybody outside their own little clique is a life-threatening danger.

I try to give them as much correct information as I think they're ready to handle. The older one is much less disturbed by gore than I am. With him, the problem's always to get him to remember that those are real people on the news, not video game graphics. The younger one has the same problem I did with a very vivid imagination. He'll have to learn how to get to the information without ending up paralyzed with horror. That's still a hard one for me to do myself, so I don't know how well I'm going to succeed with the kid.

If a 14-year-old girl is upset by what went on in the Holocaust, then her parents should congratulate themselves on raising a daughter who cares about other people, and try to help her process what she's learned. If the school is having a good wallow in atrocities to try to get through to the most jaded kids and leaving the empathetic ones to flounder, the school needs to give the second group some support and not just tell them to stop being so sensitive. But if the parents just didn't think their little darling should have to deal with anything unpleasant, tough.

[jenlittlebottom.livejournal.com]

The most 'innocent', sheltered children I know are some of my cousins. This is not a good thing. The eldest was shocked and horrified when we watched a crappy made-for-tv movie (bunch of teenaged cousins lazing around and watching bad tv = so much fun), because it had a murder in it.

The youngest wants to become a model and had to be stopped from going off to meet some guy she met on the internet who told her he was a modelling agent. (My youngest sister and her friends, on the other hand, would tell shady guys who tried to ask them about personal info in chat rooms that they were undercover police officers *G*).

[viedma.livejournal.com]

Thank you for this post, seriously. It says everything I've been thinking and says it very well.

[ellimayhem.livejournal.com]

And to take it a step further, beyond merely trying to shelter them from reality, I am reminded of that group of idiots in the UK who are trying to ban any children's literature that doesn't have a happy ending from their schools and libraries. Because, it might make lil pweshus sad, and chilluns should never be allowed to encounter disappointment, evar. Because as we all know life is always fair and there's absolutely no need to provide children with frames of reference for coping with adversity.

And on the second point, what is this "innocence" anyway? Because children certainly aren't nice or polite or anything short of evil little dictators until they have been *taught* otherwise, frequently from the frames of reference given to them ... in stories, and from the world around them.

IMO a lot of the people who think they are doing kids favors in the world today are really fashioning a monstrous result. I don't look forward to the day when those with no empathy become the norm.

[dreya-uberwald.livejournal.com]

Children aren't innocent, they're merely not guilty by reason of neuro-cognitive under-development.

I'd say that what's termed 'childhood innocence' is really just a combination of ignorance, vulnerability and oblviousness to adult social norms (the last of which can sometimes be amusing/enlightening/refreshing/charming on occasions). To me it's an inevitable phase of development rather than a virtue.

When it comes to Bad Things That Happen In The World, my guess is that parents' reluctance to talk about said Bad Things is usually more a result of their own discomfort about discussing about the issues with a child than the idea that the child might somehow be damaged as a result.

[anna-wing.livejournal.com]

I'd say that what's termed 'childhood innocence' is really just a combination of ignorance, vulnerability and oblviousness to adult social norms

So would I. Which is why tourists and foreign visitors are usually considered innocent too, in the sense of being non-combatants in whatever social struggle is going on in the particular society in which they happen to be passing strangers. Of course that doesn't work for children brought up within that society. For them, I agree that "innocence" in the sense mostly being used in this discussion ie knowledge about (a) sex and (b) various kinds of danger and wrongdoing, reflects the kinds of ignorance that a society deems desirable to inflict on children, for reasons largely to do with social control.

On the other hand, the presumed opposition between innocence and cynicism is quite false. The common assumption that as soon as one stops being ignorant of the complexity of the world one must automatically turn into a sociopathic misanthrope is demonstrably untrue.

There's also a certain false cynicism which is equally the product of ignorance (one sees this in people who lack the experience or the wits to know that they are inexperienced).

[fyrdrakken]

For them, I agree that "innocence" in the sense mostly being used in this discussion ie knowledge about (a) sex and (b) various kinds of danger and wrongdoing, reflects the kinds of ignorance that a society deems desirable to inflict on children, for reasons largely to do with social control.

I keep seeing parallels between our recent levels of cultural fetishization of childhood and Victorian era myths about what women should be allowed to know or do, and I'm thinking it's for a lot of the same reasons, with control being a big one. (The excuse for making all their choices for them is that they're too innocent to decide for themselves, and then active steps are taken to keep them from learning things that affect their own lives and perpetuate that "innocence"...)