- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
In SM meeting today, a little boy of four got up to bear his testimony. After the usual rote material, he said “I know that my dad loves me because I’m a good kid.” There was a rumble of laughter from the congregation – you know the kind. Oh, look at the kid, ain’t that cute. The boy couldn’t finish his testimony. He turned and ran to his mother behind him. She picked him up and held him while she took her turn, his face turned away from us. When she turned to leave the stand, he covered his face with his hands.
My heart ached to see a fellow human being shamed. (After meetings I found him and told him “I didn’t laugh at you and I’m sorry others did.”) It brought to my mind an episode from my childhood, when I was about six and got signed up for T-ball. I recall a game when I swung repeatedly at the ball and missed, and I was mortified to hear the spectators laugh every time I did. I was not only ashamed but furious. After the game, my family told me: oh, they’re not laughing at you to make fun of you, they think you’re cute. It’s ok.
I tried to swallow that as a tonic to my wounded pride, but it was slow poison and it’s time to spit it out. It’s a poison that too many people drink like water. People pretend to love and presume to care for children while under the influence of poisonous ideas about them. We use them to serve our fantasies and our whims. Even if we don’t violate their bodies, we routinely violate their souls with our self-inflicted blindness. We project our ideas of innocence and sweetness, behind which we hide our contempt, and which we use as excuse to force them into sitting quietly in rows and doing other things contrary to their nature. It’s widely taken for granted that children are not to be taken seriously, and their foot-stamping insistence that we do take them seriously is easily laughed off as cuteness or stamped down in turn as impudence.
Oh stop being so sensitive, someone might say. It’s not a big deal if a kid gets laughed at, they’ll get over it!
It’s not ok. It’s not right that so many people in the One True Church are stripped more of empathy than of pride, that so few are interested in putting aside all the sentimental ideas about childhood in favor of connecting with children as they really are, and reflecting on what someone else might truly be feeling. It’s not right that we think that someone’s purity or innocence gives us license to trivialize them. It’s not right that we bring children up in lies, giving lip-service to ideals of soft-heartedness with our hearts far from them. It’s not right that we arrogate to ourselves the responsibility, let alone the ability, to teach our children honesty, when what we really do is to curtail their natural honesty, and teach them by relentless example and ruthless precept to say one thing and do another.
This boy who got laughed at is naturally exuberant and can be rambunctious, which is right and proper for a boy his age but of course intolerable in church. In fact I’ve heard his parents talk about his “need” to be more reverent, so his assertion meant a lot to me. Faced with the conflicting messages that are the ordeal of every child in Primary, this son of God tried to share the divinity of his soul, a knowledge that came from the fire within him – alive in Christ from the foundation of the world – and in obeying that light of Christ, he was rewarded with mockery from those he had been taught to trust.
He will go through his childhood hearing grownups talk about the importance of standing up for what’s right, and he will try to do this, but unspoken lessons like the one they taught him today will continue to teach him that he can’t trust his own feelings or understanding to know what it is that he should be standing for: how many times will someone let themselves get shot down for trying to be true to themselves before giving up? “Safety and peace” lie in letting others tell you what to think and do. Of course teachers and leaders talk about conscience and the light of Christ, but the only words that sink in might well be “lean not unto thine own understanding” with the kind of facile fast-food meaning that is known as “scripture mastery.” In the absence of a real communion with the Lord, a soul cut off from herself will seek mortal lords to trust in with all her heart, surrendering her own knowledge and reason – because to keep them awake and engaged hurts too much, and the good people around you just tell you to get over it.
Is there really a place in this kingdom, this hastening work, for tender hearts and honesty? Because I’m having a hard time seeing it.
Thanks for posting this story. Two thoughts instantly came to mind. I remember when I was an investigator in 1992 in a student ward, and an eccentric Native-American got up to bear his testimony wearing a cowboy hat. There was audible snickering from the congregation. The person who was trying to get me baptized talked to me later to make sure I didn’t get a bad impression of the Church.
More recently, there was a relatively liberal bishop who invited the “baptized members” to bear their testimonies. Since we didn’t have a problem with non-members trying to bear their testimonies, it was obvious he was referring to little children. He never said that again, and to this day I have no idea if he got any pushback.
I do have one question: since he’s only four, don’t you think he could very well forget this incident? I’d be much more worried if it happened to him at 13.
“Baptized members” – heh. That’s a good one. convert1992 wrote:I do have one question: since he’s only four, don’t you think he could very well forget this incident? I’d be much more worried if it happened to him at 13.
He may well bury any clear recollection of this single incident later in life, but it’s a symptom of something much bigger and more pervasive. By the time young men get to be deacons they generally have a lot more exposure to the “harmless” and “good-natured” banter and “just giving you a hard time” and all that kind of stuff that some of us never quite get around to understanding or feeling comfortable with. Quite likely this boy will go through life without any apparent self-esteem problems, since he’s got the kind of parents that like to say “awesome!” and “good job!” and are wealthy besides. But there’s so much more to people than what meets the eye, and there’s so much more to our motives than our conscious will. Even if nobody ever gets laughed at in Primary, it’s still a training ground for turning yourself off, stifling your real thoughts and feelings and learning to abase yourself, for learning whether you’re good (quiet and docile) or bad (energetic and impatient with the absurdities adults try to force on you). When I was in the MTC I heard a talk about charity wherein the speaker said that as we learn to love ourselves, we can then love others. That shocked me because it flew in the face of all the messages I’d been soaking in since childhood: put others first, be selfless, etc. Even after I came to accept intellectually that you have to love yourself in order to love your neighbor as yourself, I’ve had a lot of work over the 18 years since in trying to accept this, and it has cost me dearly in money, time and opportunities.
I don’t think anyone who laughed in the entire congregation was acting out of any conscious malice at all – on the contrary, they felt that they were showing him how cute they thought he was. But when you deal with other people, especially children, that is simply not good enough: you can really hurt them if you’re not careful. I knew this intuitively from looking at my own earliest memories, but it’s really been drawn out as I’ve read
The Drama of the Gifted Childby Alice Miller (the title is somewhat misleading: it’s not just about the children that get put into GT programs). There are things from our earliest years that we might not remember consciously, but we keep in our unconscious and in our bodies. Sincere question: Why do you think the laughter was contemptuous and not just the typical laughter at something that is cute?
I’m not defending laughter in that situation, and I know it can be hurtful for someone who misunderstands it (and I agree totally with almost all of what you said in your follow-up comment, especially), but I have a really hard time equating it in the situation you described with contempt. I also have a really hard time agreeing that there is a theme of contempt for children in the Church.
Therefore, I’m interested in understanding better why you saw contempt as the motivating factor behind the laughter.
I have the same question as Curtis. I’m not at all sure the audience was poking any kind of fun at the kid or that they were bullying or that there was contempt. My thought as I read the account was that if it were my kid I would have explained to him (later, of course) that the laughter was because they thought what he said was cute and that they weren’t laughing at him. I might point out that people laugh all the time when people think the prophet says something cute. Please don’t misunderstand me here, it is not my intent to be critical or unfeeling in any way, but all of this is part of growing up. We have ALL, and I mean that, ALL, had such experiences and there is no way to stop such experiences – and there shouldn’t be. It’s part of the human experience. We have come a long way from the “children should be seen and not heard” days, and I don’t believe what you describe with the boy is abusive. I do think laughing at you missing the t-ball may have been, but we also need to build bridges and get over things. Once more, I’m not attempting to be critical here, but have you considered seeing a counselor to discuss these feelings?
Sorry I think it is a little overboard. Go on to the next kid doing the same thing and he would have eaten up the laughter as a indication of his popularity. Kids are resilient and to worry to much about such minor issues is not healthy for them I think. Any kid will get much more of a hard time from his peers than many an adult. Well, a few thoughts. The T-Ball experience that you referenced from your own childhood did not happen at church. So, I think it is safe to drop the notion that somehow the Church is worse about this than general society.
Also, I have been laughed at. I have failed in front of peers and adults. It’s part of growing up. I well remember an experience in baseball (before T-ball was invented to help every child feel like a winner). Our pitcher was struggling. So, the coach called me in from right field to try my hand at pitching. I had never tried it before, and this was during a live game. I failed miserably. It was embarrassing. I was 8 years old. Yet, what I remember most about it was that our third baseman was so frustrated that he literally turned his back to the plate and faced out to left field. I threw a strike, but not one close to fast enough to get by the hitter. He hit the ball straight to the kid playing third base, and it hit him square in the back. Haha. I never pitched again, but I accepted it as a low moment in my career and moved on stronger for it. A few years later, but still primary-aged, I was running the bases and trying to beat the ball to home plate. The ball got there well before me. The catcher squared to me in front of the plate with the ball securely in his mitt. At full speed, I left my feet and plowed into the catcher with all my might. I was called out at home. The catcher and I were both writhing in pain. I got up and hobbled over to the bench amid cheers and every one of my teammates giving me a hardy slap on the back. Parents I didn’t know came up to me after the game to congratulate me for my toughness. It was the highlight of my baseball career. I failed plenty of times. I was never more than an OK player. One of the things that baseball taught me was that successes and failures were just part of the game… and I learned always just to try as hard as I could.
I love that you went up to this child afterwards to offer your support. That shows a great deal of empathy on your part, and I agree that I wish people in our world (not isolated to any particular group) had a little more compassion and caring.
But, I can’t really let this go:
Riceandbeans wrote:People pretend to love and presume to care for children while under the influence of poisonous ideas about them. We use them to serve our fantasies and our whims. Even if we don’t violate their bodies, we routinely violate their souls with our self-inflicted blindness. We project our ideas of innocence and sweetness, behind which we hide our contempt… It’s not right that we bring children up in lies, giving lip-service to ideals of soft-heartedness with our hearts far from them. It’s not right that we arrogate to ourselves the responsibility, let alone the ability, to teach our children honesty, when what we really do is to curtail their natural honesty, and teach them by relentless example and ruthless precept to say one thing and do another.
I just don’t think that is fair. I think people in our Church are much better parents than any random cross-section of people living in the same town. Are there some people that aren’t great parents in the Church. Yeah, of course. Are there terrific parents outside the Church… again, of course there are. But take an hour and ten minutes and go hang out at the local walmart and you’ll see far more underachieving parents than you see in any given SM.I took a marriage and parenting class that is sponsored by the LDS church. It has helped me to better communicate and treat my family with more respect as individuals with unique personalities and feelings. One example is that I now own my statements. Instead of commanding “go to your room” or projecting “you need to go to your room” – I say “I need you to go to your room.”
I know my trigger points. Feeling disrespected is one and misbehavior in the car is another. Sometimes I can be prepared to avoid these problem areas. For example – in the car sometimes we take turns telling knock-knock jokes and this obviates the fighting that might otherwise happen.
Rather than keep it bottled up until I burst I verbalize that I am getting frustrated with the situation.
In any situation in which the child is upset I try to listen to their point of view. I try not to exert my parental authority in order to “have the last word.” Steven Covey puts this as “Seek first to understand before being understood.”
I am trying to model the behavior that would make my children better communicators themselves and more successful as well rounded adults. I try to treat them as I myself would want to be treated if I were stuck in a little body with nobody taking me seriously.
:thumbup: Roy wrote:I am trying to model the behavior that would make my children better communicators themselves and more successful as well rounded adults. I try to treat them as I myself would want to be treated if I were stuck in a little body with nobody taking me seriously.
:thumbup: Beautiful!!
:clap: :clap: I try to do this as well.
R&B’s I dont’ want to tell you that you don’t have the right to be hurt by an experience you had at T-ball. That is your experience. But I agree with others that children are different and the experience that this child had of people laughing at them. The child’s perception of the experience would more likely be influenced by the parents reaction and explanation. I have for sure laughed at something I found super cute at the pulpit by children. I tend to feel bad after reading your post. I never want to hurt a child, and I am sure that it the intent of your fellow ward members.
I can recall an experience I had at school. I was in second grade and we were learning multiplication tables. 1 x 100= 100 1 x 101=101 102 x 1=102 etc… I went all the way to 1,000. I wrote an entire notebook…haha My teacher took me outside with the notebook to show another teacher and they got a good chuckle. It wasn’t until years later that I realized they weren’t making fun of me. I was hurt when I first realized this, or at least my pride was, but now I find it funny. They thought I was cute. I know they didn’t mean to hurt my feelings, they really thought I was cute and innocent. I am glad that I could remind them of their innocence. I think that in most cases people don’t intend on hurting people. IMO I think our perception of every situation is the key. We can change our life by changing our perception.
On Own Now wrote:I think people in our Church are much better parents than any random cross-section of people living in the same town. Are there some people that aren’t great parents in the Church. Yeah, of course. Are there terrific parents outside the Church… again, of course there are. But take an hour and ten minutes and go hang out at the local walmart and you’ll see far more underachieving parents than you see in any given SM.
OON, I agree with the basic thrust of your statement, but we have to be careful about making assymetrical comparisons with society. Not counting converts, Latter-Day Saints in the United States are on average wealthier and more educated than the population as a whole (especially if your mental image of LDS = multigenerational Saints of pioneer heritage), so any comparison needs to be made against people of similar socioeconomic background, not the people at the corner store with a sign out front that says “beer and milk sold here.”
In terms of specific parenting doctrine or techniques, Latter-Day Saints are not more enlightened than their non-LDS counterparts. LDS parents at any given time are just using the same parenting methods that are accepted by society, except that they are slower to adopt the most cutting-edge doctrines. I see very progressive (for the Church) parents in my ward who are parenting in a way that was already being pioneered a couple of decades ago by the most liberal Americans at that time.
What makes Latter-Day Saints more effective as parents is that their families are (arguably) more stable. And even this point is subject to debate about whether that stability is really because of LDS teachings or because of Mormon culture. Just as with the greater society, many LDS families are breaking up once they lose the external reinforcement of small town society, extended families, and social stigma of divorce.
convert1992, Fair enough, we do need to be careful to compare apples to apples from a socio-economic point of view. So let me revise my statement and say
Quote:I think people in our Church are much better parents than any random cross-section of people living in the same town
and the same socio-economic group.(phrase in italics added) In my own case, if I compare my own children with those next door and across the street from me, I’m very very happy with the way my kids turned out and I believe a significant element in their upbringing was the culture of the Church. My children are intelligent, engaging, hard-working, compassionate, dedicated, accepting of others, and have a high degree of self-efficacy. Without getting into too much detail, let me just say that my neighbors’ kids are… underemployed.
The Church has many faults. I believe that contempt for children is not one of them. Quite the opposite, I believe the Church raises really good kids, and I think that is a reflection of the culture of the Church that invests heavily in the kids. Long ago, First Lady Hillary Clinton wrote that book,
It Takes a Village, which postulated that the effort to raise capable, smart, resilient children takes more than just the inner workings of a family (“No family is an island”); that raising these kids is a societal matter. Most members of the Church would cringe at the irony, but what she was describing was what the Church itself does. We go on about age of accountability etc… I don’t think children should be allowed to bear testimony til seven or eight at the least, but I don’t like it. Songs, readings etc – they’re okay, but five year olds bearing testimony, no thanks.
Hi rice and beans. I will go for and against the grain in this one. Because I think it can go over board but in the other hand I know all to well how much kids are diminished in trust and control. Both personal and first hand as well as listening to new physiological evidence. Here is a video dealing with this. http://ed.ted.com/lessons/what-adults-can-learn-from-kids-adora-svitak#digdeeper ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://ed.ted.com/lessons/what-adults-can-learn-from-kids-adora-svitak#digdeeper I was a little older then her but sounded very much like her but without any self confidence growing up.
Education leaders encouraged me, the LDS adult commodity condemned and restricted me… To the point of having it out not just with me but with the school educators for encouraging the growth and establishing trust and reciprocal listening and learning.
But is far from unique in the LDS families. Parents on many communities shun new doctrine(new studies and findings that don’t correlate with what they were taught by there respective authority figure.)
I essence I never knew myself, I tried, some educates tried. But many parents are stuck in a world of outside-in patenting and not inside out parenting. The result is many kids today with “no spark”.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TqzUHcW58Ushttp://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TqzUHcW58Us” class=”bbcode_url”> It’s a old parenting and teaching technique. That a child is a empty vassal to be filled … Not a vassal to find and nurture their spark. So many people replace their child or other children with a empty vessel philosophy seeking to put their wishes and beliefs in the child. Instead of seeking what the child’s spark is and nurturing it.
We gave the data now. We can see what is going wrong and why. We just need to accept it and adjust out teaching and observation changes, not to diminish children to what we want for them.
Kodos to those that are nurturing children for who they are not not what we want them to be.
SamBee wrote:We go on about age of accountability etc… I don’t think children should be allowed to bear testimony til seven or eight at the least, but I don’t like it.
Songs, readings etc – they’re okay, but five year olds bearing testimony, no thanks.
I agree with SamBee on this one – I see little value in small children bearing testimonies in testimony meeting, especially the type where Mom or Dad are standing beside them whispering what to say in their ears. Doing so in Primary is a different story. I don’t see my stance as contemptuous (I love children – really), rather I find more value in hearing the testimonies of those that actually have them. On the other hand, I also don’t believe the practice should be banned or publicly discouraged, either.
I don’t want to pile on, but there is so many things to criticize the church for. This is not one of them, IMO. Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
- The topic ‘Contempt for children’ is closed to new replies.