The Sociology of the Life Course
2 – The sociology of childhood
Accompaniment to the superb Giddens and Sutton (2013) (left) Chapter 9, with an assortment of additional accompanying resources and activities
Contents
2 The sociology of childhood
Also in the series…1 Introduction to the sociology of age and the life
course3 The sociology of youth and adolescence4 The sociology of young adulthood5 The sociology of mature adulthood6 The sociology of later life
2 The life stages in socio-historical perspective:
1- Childhoodsee Giddens and Sutton
2013:348
.
As in most areas of sociology, the sociology of childhood is based on the idea that this
phenomenon is in part
socially-constructed… ie
not based entirely on the same ancient laws of nature governing the remaining .
As Giddens’ human-existance-as-24-hour-day analogy shows on G&S2013:108,
modernity is an extremely “recent” event in human history; and cultural
changes since early modernity have occurred at lightening speed relative to those of the vast
majority homo sapiens’ existence
No area demonstrates this more purely
than the life course; in
particular, childhood
Stages in the life course are
influenced by cultural differences but also by
the material circumstances (affluence) of people’s lives in
given types of society.
Giddens and Sutton 2013:346
The above applies to both the stage of life
each individual is at, right
now; and the culturally-specific social meaning attached to these stages at
various points in time
Sociologists, and common sense in general, have long identified
“childhood”; early life- a time of
being biologically and psychologically pre-developed
As functionalists
such as Parsons and
Merton, along with
feminists,
Marxists and others, all agree that it is at this stage that
people are most actively
socialized(Below) Karl Marx as a young adult
ExerptThree years ago, while she was on maternity leave, Ros Ball and her partner, James, began a diary of their children's lives. Their daughter Josie was three and their son Clem three months old. They wanted to record the moments when their children were made aware of gender stereotypes; when they were directed towards a view of the world in which girls and boys inhabit separate, rigid spheres of pink and blue – the first sphere passive, pretty and gentle, the second aggressive, active and strong…(Continues at above link)
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/apr/22/gendered-toys-stereotypes-boy-girl-segregation-equality
The fightback against gendered toysDo all girls really want to play with dolls and tea sets? Do all boys want guns and trucks? Of course not. Then why are toymakers so aggressive in marketing these stereotypes?
Kira CochraneThe Guardian, Tuesday 22 April 2014
Children are socialized by “agents” -
their families,
early education, and the
mass media
Activity:
List (i) two values, and (ii) two behaviour patterns children are socialized with for each of the agents in this slide
In most views of childhood, it is relevant as
a transitory stage of
learning and training; our gender, social class and consumer identities are developed most quickly at
this time
The educational and leisure experiences of
children, and the socializing messages young individuals
receive, are quite rightly seen as
highly important to
them, and society
Key to all socialization theories of “childhood” is the notion that these
individuals are, naturally and inevitably,
incomplete;
transitory, half-finished adults
Activity:
What does ‘transitory’ mean; and how does it apply to the conventional view of childhood?
This links with the idea that children are v_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, w_ _ _, n_ _ve, in_ _ _ _ _ _ etc.; and together they are
an even more pervasive
notion than that of little girls being naturally
effeminate ie “girly”, or that
working-class children are more likely to be
“naturally stupid
(or, “low ability”)
Activity:
If a norm or value is ‘pervasive’, does this mean it is commonly held, or not?
Activity: List five adjectives you think survey respondents would associate with the noun “child”
Extension: Conduct this survey
In recent years, the sociology and social history of childhood has moved beyond
the notion that childhood is
necessarily a time of
vulnerability, dependence and
innocence…
Despite the obvious importance and accuracy
of socialization theories, many believe something is
missing
Missing –say many- is the notion that these associations of
vulnerability, under-development and
innocence are time-space specific;
not based on natural laws but rather
modern social processes and the
material/economic conditions of our social era
Philip Aries (1962):
Centuries of Childhood
Our current concept of childhood is a specifically modern one; which only dates back to the
early industrial revolution
In the 18th century, for the first time, childhood began to be seen
as a time of learning and
development; and children became an economic
liability for their parents.
Activity:
If children became an economic ‘liability’ for their families, what were they before? Why?
A_ _ _ _s
Children worked throughout pre-modernity(below) and in
early-modern factories(above); but were
later removed and educated instead- starting with the
upper classes
Rather than working with other family members in
cottage trades,
farms or early factories and
workhouses, children were increasingly sent to
school, and cared for by nannies (later, modern
childcare)
The modern “child”, for Aries (1962) was an upper-class
phenomenon that
trickled-down to the proletariat eventually
‘Trickle-down’ theory of culture is associated with Pierre Bourdieu (below)
According to Aries (1962), “children” –rich and poor- depicted in pre- and early-modern paintings
and books were of course
physically under-developed; but not as
socially or psychologically as in the present era
Aries provides some evidence that pre-modern “children” were more
“miniature adults”
than today; in their clothing, body language and facial expressions
Activity:
What is one flaw in taking pre-modern paintings as a representation of reality?
In pre-modern settings, many now believe,
“Children took part in the same work and play activities as adults, rather than in the childhood games we now take for granted”.
Giddens and Sutton2013:349
They wore clothing no different to
adults; quickly learned to speak in the same tones and with the same vocabulary; and
worked and relaxed together with older generations
From this key social history stem late-modern
theories that everything associated with childhood need not be:
We are, in late-modernity, over-pampering, over-
protecting and patronizing our young people; and this functions as a boost to the capitalist mode
of production
Activity:
Why might this social construction of childhood support the capitalist MoP? (then see next slide)
Leaving a sizeable proportion of society in training for around 15 years produces a more skilled workforce, clearly;
…and without schools, where would we learn the
disciplinary and social skills necessary to every good worker or citizen?
Childhood, and as we shall see, adolescence/young adulthood, are in
late-modernity, times of a very special
sort of identity-forming consumerism that
wouldn’t exist if
uneducated “miniature adults” were working alongside adults
from ten years of age
Today, in some “still developing” parts of the
world , something similar to Aries’ pre-modern
“miniature adulthood” still
exists
In countries lacking full industrialization and
corresponding long, full,
compulsory education, it is
still common for children to work in family cottage
trades…
in factories (often supplying the industrialized world’s consumer goods)…
Even as
soldiersActivity:
How do think most citizens of the “developed world” would feel about the scenes depicted here? Would similar public attitudes have existed in Medieval times?
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), 1990:
This groundbreaking agreement –signed by 194 countries by 2009- set
out “basic human rights” for people under 18
Among them was the right to education, and to not have to “work”.
Activity:
Giddens (2013:349) defines this “attempt to universalize the right of children and childhood in very different social and economic contexts” a “bold task that raises some important issues”. Why is it bold? Isn’t it “obvious” that children should go to school and not work?
What controversies does it raise in poorer countries?
The problem –sadly for Western children's’ charities like UNICEF – is that the
household economies of families in many poorer countries, and
therefore the macro economies, depend on children
still being an
economic asset to their parents
.
• .
They have to work to support their family, and
themselves…they may be making 1st-world clothing in industrialized factories, but
their cultural norms remain those of pre-modernity (as in the vast majority
of human history)Activity:
Should we pity the pre-modern, uneducated, working child?
Are there reasons to feel sympathy with the late-modern child?
.
Giddens and Sutton (2013:349):
“Is the UN definition of childhood culturally sensitive to different
societies, or does it impose (unworkable)
Western ideas of children and childhood on the rest of
the world?”
Will the UNCRC really
improve lives and
economies, or will it restrict the economic development of families too
much in the short term by banning children from working?
Often, the task of the sociologist it to ask “says who..?”
In wider society –more crucially- new technology, the internet and an easily-accessed, globalized mass media are
believed to be reversing the infantilization trend
Children are becoming “free”
consumers at an earlier age; and are consuming products
and entertainment previously seen as “for adults”
Activity:
How could the late-modern childhood experience be improved for the good of society and the individual?
Others, on the other hand, argue that we are in fact
infantilizing everyone- not only
children
Many critics echo the warnings
of the Frankfurt School critical theorists, such as Theodor Adorno, the
‘culture industry’ of pop music, “trashy” novels and movies,
robs adults of their maturity; their ability to
think rationally and
critically
The culture industry robs not only children, but also adults of their
ability to
question capitalist inequality and unfair power
relations… potentially
turning us all into the late-modern
infant
Activity: Does a ‘culture industry’ exist? Does it have a positive of negative effect on children, and adults?