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

[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.

[sarahsan]

"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...

A-fucking-men. Many American ADULTS wouldn't be able to handle that kind of exposure, and I think our knee-jerk "protect the children" response probably just produces head-in-the-sand irresponsible citizens. The kind of people who go on not caring about people in other parts of the world because, gosh, we just can't imagine that kind of stuff happening.

I ditto everything you said about raising kids. I haven't written it off totally, but I really hope that if I ever do spawn, I have the courage and humility to raise a person who may very well challenge my worldview.

[vulgarweed.livejournal.com]

SOME American adults. But in the time of Katrina, there were so many abandoned bodies floating in the floodwater and being eaten by dogs, we might as well be in some "Third World" place. Oh, I can see thestrals so many times over, but the first time...well, I was honored to be there when my great-grandfather passed. I was only 13 but I understood it was an important occasion. That's really all I ask of my inevitable end, that there be someone who respects me bearing witness.

If it's a child, all the better. IF it's in a time of peace, that's all any generation can hope for.

[zillah975]

A-fucking-men. Many American ADULTS wouldn't be able to handle that kind of exposure

I wonder if we want to protect them from it because we wish we didn't have to know about it ourselves.

Not, you understand, that I think that's a good idea. I'm with vulgarweed on this one. The only thing my mom censored coming into our house was a Life Magazine that covered the Mei Lei massacre, not because she didn't want us to know, but because she couldn't face trying to explain it to us. Which, given how strong a person my mom is, says a lot.

I think that there are things children should be sheltered from at certain ages, and that when we stop sheltering them from them, we should be active in their learning about it -- not just tossing books about the Holocaust at them, but also talking with them about it, about how it happened, about their own fears and the anguish it is almost certain to produce (and if it doesn't, well, that's another issue). But while I'm not a bit sure that a 5 year old needs to know about genocide, I'm pretty sure a 14 year old should be able to study it, even though it'll be upsetting. It should be upsetting, we need to be upset about freakin' genocide. It's important, and 14 isn't too young to learn about it. Not by a long shot.

[fyrdrakken]

I wonder if we want to protect them from it because we wish we didn't have to know about it ourselves.

Given how often, "But think of the children!" is the rallying cry for an attempt at censorship, I have to agree, because people like to use protection-of-the-innocents as an excuse to attack anything they don't want anyone to be exposed to. You aren't allowed to "protect" functioning adults from their own decisions (unless and until they reach a point where they've lost "rationality" and have to be restrained), but as a culture we're comfortable with the idea that children have no rights of self-determination, so.

[aphrodeia.livejournal.com]

It is indeed a notion of privilege - a very wise statement. And it's something that parents are willing to work very hard to give to their children, for whatever misguided reason.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's good to overly shelter your children, and I think that those who coddle their kids for too long end up with some very special messes to clean up. But we adults see the world for what it is and wish our kids could have better. So for a short time, we try to give them just that.

Doesn't really pay off, I know. But what can ya do? Being a parent short-circuits the brain. It has to, or nobody would ever have more than one kid, and we'd all die off. :P