Tuesday, April 25, 2006
Outrageous Children's Books!?!?
I try not to be to reactionary and for the most part I think outrage is an emotion we could do without.
But, I couldn't contain myself about this one. I had to say something.
Today, I was listening to "On The Media" from WNYC in New York via podcast. I heard a story about a pair of children's books.
Help! Mom! There Are Liberals Under My Bed! By Katherine DeBrecht and Why Mommy Is A Democrat by Jeremy Zilber.
Like I said I try not to nurture my outrage but WTF? These are books for children. I understand people get pretty fanatical about their political beliefs. But, I cannot believe we are creating political propaganda for our children. Why would anyone be interested in indoctrinating innocent children into the sleazy world of us-and-them politics.
I want to teach Sophia to be compassionate and non-judgmental, to love people regardless of their views. This is enough of a challenge without introducing this type of dreck. I do not understand why there seems to be so much hostility when it comes to differences of opinion. People seem to nurture the promotion of sectarian ideology over values like wisdom, compassion, love, kindness, empathy and humanitarianism in general. Is there anything of value to be derived from this type of situation. Are we so attached to our thoughts and ideas that we would sacrifice our children's innocence for them.
Here is a quote from a psychologist, Dr. Andrew Getzfeld, excerpted from the story.
I, for one, hope Sophia can be more open-minded than I am able to be. I would rather she embrace the good in people rather than fear their possible differences.
-Michael
But, I couldn't contain myself about this one. I had to say something.
Today, I was listening to "On The Media" from WNYC in New York via podcast. I heard a story about a pair of children's books.
Help! Mom! There Are Liberals Under My Bed! By Katherine DeBrecht and Why Mommy Is A Democrat by Jeremy Zilber.
Like I said I try not to nurture my outrage but WTF? These are books for children. I understand people get pretty fanatical about their political beliefs. But, I cannot believe we are creating political propaganda for our children. Why would anyone be interested in indoctrinating innocent children into the sleazy world of us-and-them politics.
I want to teach Sophia to be compassionate and non-judgmental, to love people regardless of their views. This is enough of a challenge without introducing this type of dreck. I do not understand why there seems to be so much hostility when it comes to differences of opinion. People seem to nurture the promotion of sectarian ideology over values like wisdom, compassion, love, kindness, empathy and humanitarianism in general. Is there anything of value to be derived from this type of situation. Are we so attached to our thoughts and ideas that we would sacrifice our children's innocence for them.
Here is a quote from a psychologist, Dr. Andrew Getzfeld, excerpted from the story.
What we really don't want, or at least what parents should not want, from my perspective, is to create really mini-versions of themselves, although a lot of parents do that. My belief is that within reason, kids should be allowed to make their own choices, and that's what Piaget said, is that a child learns best by being an active explorer in his or her environment. Now to me, the way I interpret that is that children should try everything on their own, within reason, even if they get hurt - not seriously, obviously - but even if they get hurt, they should be able to learn from that. Instead, if we end up sheltering kids - and that's really a form of sheltering, by saying, okay this group is like this, everybody else is bad - in effect, you're forcing kids really to make a decision before they're able to understand really what the differences are.
I, for one, hope Sophia can be more open-minded than I am able to be. I would rather she embrace the good in people rather than fear their possible differences.
-Michael
Comments:
<< Home
I completely agree, it makes me sick that they would create "children's" books like that. I would have reacted strongly too having listened to that, goodness I reacted just reading what you wrote. I hope all of my children, too, can be even more open minded than me.
# posted by 
: 4/25/2006 7:34 PM
: 4/25/2006 7:34 PM
Devils advocate here, and I haven't read the books, but don't you think by excluding a child from a book like that is also in a sense sheltering. That could be like not reading your child a book that includes racism because you rather avoid the topic than bring it up and discuss it with your child, presenting both sides of the picture. In fact it almost seems that if you want to present politics to your children reading both of these books and then having a conversation about them would be an excellent starting place. There are so many times that books could be leaping points into many topics.
Of course I hope Shawn is open minded too and it's not like I'm running out right now to buy those books (or rather the one book that I like more and whose ideas I want to force onto him) to read to him every night, but there is a benefit to having someone else put in words similar thoughts to your own. If you are conservative or liberal and your child/ren start asking about politics maybe it's a good thing to have books out there that help express an opinion. Granted the books sound pretty one sided, but so are most books, especially those aimed at children. I've read Shawn books about endangered animals and how saving the rain forests is important. They didn't talk about the people that feel they need to make a living. Plus one of them is 55 pages long, which isn't exactly 4 year old attention span material.
Wow this comment got long, but while I see your point and agree that forcing an opinion on a child, especially your own child where it makes the most difference, is wrong, I don't think books like this serve no purpose.
Of course I hope Shawn is open minded too and it's not like I'm running out right now to buy those books (or rather the one book that I like more and whose ideas I want to force onto him) to read to him every night, but there is a benefit to having someone else put in words similar thoughts to your own. If you are conservative or liberal and your child/ren start asking about politics maybe it's a good thing to have books out there that help express an opinion. Granted the books sound pretty one sided, but so are most books, especially those aimed at children. I've read Shawn books about endangered animals and how saving the rain forests is important. They didn't talk about the people that feel they need to make a living. Plus one of them is 55 pages long, which isn't exactly 4 year old attention span material.
Wow this comment got long, but while I see your point and agree that forcing an opinion on a child, especially your own child where it makes the most difference, is wrong, I don't think books like this serve no purpose.
Does a 4-year old need politics? Can they understand the abbstract nature of such a complex idea? outside of a right or wrong/good or bad context?
As far as sheltering goes, as parents we have to avoid exposing our kids to things they are not cognitively prepared for...graphic violence is a perfect example.
Plus, I think this is different than our children discovering racism, say through reading Huck Finn, and discussing it with their parents. This is blatent propaganda. It would be like teaching your kids about racism by exposing them to the doctrine of the nazi youth.
These books definately serve a purpose, but it is in no way an altruistic one. And they connot be justified through sighting other examples that do the same thing. I think this is less about the what the ideas being expressed are and more about the audience and vehicle of communication.
I am just saying I think the things we teach our children should expand their minds rather than box them in to an ideology.
As far as sheltering goes, as parents we have to avoid exposing our kids to things they are not cognitively prepared for...graphic violence is a perfect example.
Plus, I think this is different than our children discovering racism, say through reading Huck Finn, and discussing it with their parents. This is blatent propaganda. It would be like teaching your kids about racism by exposing them to the doctrine of the nazi youth.
These books definately serve a purpose, but it is in no way an altruistic one. And they connot be justified through sighting other examples that do the same thing. I think this is less about the what the ideas being expressed are and more about the audience and vehicle of communication.
I am just saying I think the things we teach our children should expand their minds rather than box them in to an ideology.
Wow! I had to click on the links to make sure this wasn't a joke -- I totally agree with you, Michael. It is so sad to that that some parents would feel the need to expose young children to this type of propaganda. I mean, is the thought that a child may grow up to have ideas of his/her own so frightening that people feel a need to provide "early intervention"? That seems so crazy! I love your line about Sophia being more open-minded than you are ABLE to be -- I have the same hope for Brayden.
Wowsers! I'm hearin' ya loud and clear and echo your "WTF?!" I clicked on the links... Why do children need to worry about taxes? Are baseball moms better than soccer moms? Of course these are superficial questions, but you all have already echoed my sentiments quite well. As someone who usually votes for the Democratic candidate, I find "Why Mommy is a Democrat" as apalling as the Republican drivel. They are both harmful propaganda. Children do not need to worry about politics. There are other things they should be learning and developing; intolerance, sectarianism and hate are definitely not part of the ideal curriculum.
Post a Comment
# posted by : 4/26/2006 12:14 PM
: 4/26/2006 12:14 PM << Home
