it's the time of year that I'm supposed to be all warm and fuzzy, and I promise I'll do a favorite things blog next week, but sometimes something gets stuck in my brain and if I don't get it out, I'll drive myself mad. And I'll annoy the hell out of the people around me. Plus, I think I've overdosed on all the saccharine sweetness that are the made for TV holiday specials. I mean really, how many times can one watch a modern day Scrooge find his/her Christmas spirit, or that sweet lovely girl find the man of her dreams on New Year's Eve? Perhaps you could think of this blog entry as the Chex Mix in the middle of all the Christmas cookies.
I was having a conversation with a friend about how differently we see the world. My friend is a he and I am certainly a she. I said to him, "You are definitively a male and I am definitively a female." His instant reaction was, "I can be sensitive!" Okay. Yes, he can be. But it made me start thinking about how my simple statement could be construed as something negative or even dismissive about our behaviors. Think about it, I know my girls and I have said, "MEN!" as if that one simple word explains everything about a situation. (And it does.) My male friend will often say to me, "You can't help it, you're a girl." At which point the top of my head blows off. But isn't there some truth in both of those statements? Is that truth such a terrible thing, really?
Here's where I am, when did we decide that possessing what has traditionally been thought of as gender based behaviors or attitudes become something one must defend? Don't get pissed. Try to follow me a bit before you judge what I'm saying as "bad" or "good". We've long heard the old adage, "Boys will be boys" or "Girls will be girls", when did we decide this was problematic? Or maybe not a problem but just something to be discouraged or made neutral or fixed?
Please don't misunderstand, what I'm trying to express here is that it seems a bit that we're all working so hard at not stereotyping or pigeon-holing someone based on their gender that we're trying to do away with what comes naturally to some. Now, if naturally a boy is more sensitive or compassionate than boys of generations past we all applaud his enlightenment and assume his parents are doing something "right" in raising such a well-rounded child. But if a boy shows a natural tendency to be rougher or more aggressive or less affectionate we all assume he's a bully or that his parents are trying to make him into a sports star or a "real man". What if that rough boy is just simply a rough boy? What if that's what his personality dictates? Should we try to shame that out of him and make him into something he isn't simply because we think it's better for him?
Now take a girl, say her name is Lisa and when she was young she was a tomboy, by necessity and by choice. Little Lisa lived in a neighborhood with mostly boys and a brother only a year younger. If Lisa wanted to play outside, she was going to be playing with the boys. And she didn't mind that at all (she still doesn't). She played football and rode bikes and climbed trees and did what was considered "boy" things, keeping in mind it was the middle to late seventies. Obviously, I'm that Lisa. And I got hit and shoved and knocked down, never intentionally, but just through regular play. I remember getting the wind knocked out of me once and hearing my brother whispering to me "Don't cry. You're a girl, if you cry they'll never want you to play again." Now, that kind of thing has served me well as an adult. As much as I want to cry, I've realized that crying is seen as a weakness and it's best left to doing in private or around people who love you. But why is that a prized behavior in a girl? "There's no crying in baseball!", right? Why? If you're a girl and you want to cry, why shouldn't you? Why shouldn't you get to storm off in a huff, or be ridiculously dramatic or unreasonable if that's who you are? (OK within reason, let's not get too diva-crazy here.) Why does a girl have to push down what's considered her "girlness" so as not to be dismissed as weak?
My point with all that is, not only are we trying to potentially push boys who don't list "sensitive" high on their list of personality traits into being more emotionally expressive, we're trying to force girls into being "stronger" in order to be successful women. Huh. So in the process of trying to be open minded and allowing for boys to be softer and girls to be harder, we've started taking away some kids' personalities. We've taken something that is inherent to those kids' beings and made it something to be viewed as a flaw. In a quest to find gender neutrality and acceptance of those who do not fall into a spectrum of traditionally average behavior, we've vilified those who are on that spectrum. Oh crap, I hate when we go too far, don't you?
My 9 year old nephew doesn't like playing baseball. He's played for a few years and just never got into it. Now I'm sure this is a bit of a bummer for my brother who played baseball his whole life and loved it. But Gavin gets to be Gavin and he's lucky enough to have parents who will allow that. Gavin is also very sensitive about kids being left out or bullied or differently abled. And he's lucky enough to have parents that just realize that sensitivity is part of his personality. Don't get me wrong, the adults in Gav's life aren't perfect. His Mom and Grandma and Aunt Lisa baby the hell out of him. And sometimes his Dad and Grandpa and Uncles push him to be tougher and "man up". But hopefully, we balance each other out and he ends up just being definitively Gavin. A bad ass video game playing, sister torturing, basketball stud with a kind heart. I'll take that.
I see kids on Gavin's sports teams whose parents want it more than the kid. I see boys who would rather be drawing or cooking than standing in the outfield praying no one hits the ball to them. I see little girls in my niece's dance recitals who'd rather be digging in the dirt. And forcing those kids in those "gender typical" roles is no more right than putting a bat in the hand of a little girl who just wants to twirl in a tutu or an apron on a boy who just wants to make a tree fort.
Around the barn to get to here (you know that's how I do), I get to be me. I started being me when I was very young. I like knowing how cars work and I love putting on too much eyeshadow. I like ruffles and cute shoes and watching the Bears blow it in overtime (Vikings fan, duh). I'm lucky that my parents let me wear a dress with shorts under it while playing stick ball in the neighbor's yard.
Perhaps we all need to just let kids be. Stop trying to make them into anything but kind, strong, independent, productive and healthy little people in the way that is most true to themselves. Let them find the spot that makes them most happy and just be glad they're standing there, even if it's not what we pictured or hoped. Maybe let the boy decide what "being boy" means to him and the girl decide what "being girl" means to her. Because I think one of the worst kinds of hell for a kid is worrying that they're a disappointment because of who they can't be.
0 comments:
Post a Comment