Mothering Forum banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
810 Posts
I'm still trying to process all my feelings about the article, since I think it made a lot of good points. However, the thing that leaps out the most to me is that the Yequana live in a village setting. It's completely okay for their kids to run around playing with others. The supervision of the children is shared by all the adults. I would love to live in a situation like that! Sadly, I don't. My husband works nights and we've had a hard time making friends so my children's number one interacter is me.

Hmm, I had a much better response in my head, but I guess this will have to do!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,737 Posts
It's hard for me to get past my gag reflex over the noble savage stuff, to be honest. I find it to be pretty racist in many ways, even though the author is overbending backwards to express admiration for these cheerful, happy angels with no troubles because they live a blissfully simple existance.

Aside from that, I agree with the concept that kids can be very content (and some may be MORE content) living in an atmosphere where they are part of things, not the total center of existance.

OTOH, we live in a different culture and a different era. Children are not needed in the same way that they might be in a society where every single person must contribute for community survival. Since parents are not encouraged (and may even be socially/legally penalized) to view their kids as people on whom one can rely on to contribute to family/community survival, I think it's natural that then people spend more time cuddling/petting/playing/devoting themselves to their kids--after all, they probably have more time to do so as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
811 Posts
I've read this before. I can't remember where I found it, but I found it somewhere online when I was pregnant and my husband and I both read it and discussed it. I think it's a very interesting idea. I might not 100% agree with or accept all the author's assertions, but I generally do think that a very child-centered, modern, "I'm gonna get down on the floor and play with my kids all day!" approach to dealing with children (especially toddlers) actually does tend to put too much undue pressure on the children. Giving very young children too many choices also puts undue pressure on them: I firmly believe that, although I know a lot of moms here disagree.

So I think she makes a very good point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,246 Posts
I have mixed feelings about it. I also am bothered by the noble savage stereotype, and frankly I don't believe that these kids never fuss or cry or tantrum.

OTOH I do think that it's good for kids to entertain themselves and help parents with parent activities more than being played with by parents, and I'm very free range and let my kids wander the neighborhood much younger than most parents at MDC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
538 Posts
Makes sense to me, though some of the attempts to figure out why this works by looking at the child's perspective sounds a little hokey.

From what I've read of the Continuum Concept (I haven't read the book, just the website), it seems pretty reasonable. Like others have said, the problem is that we can't just transplant it into our culture unchanged.

I think if you're just looking at this article on its own, it seems less child-friendly (as in giving the kid what he wants) than the overall CC idea.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top