There is a common consensus today that kids do not spend enough time playing unsupervised with their friends and spent way too much time on technological devices. This may be the case or it may be hyperbole. But one thing that people always neglect to mention when they talk about the anxious surveillance of children and adolescents is that for a certain subset of youth there is still absolutely no surveillance or monitoring of any kind- poor children.
The parenting practises for the two sets of kids appear to vary rapidly , whilst middle-upper class parents surveil their children closely and try to safeguard every interaction they have with the world, the lower class parents are still stubbornly letting their children go out and get into trouble; either because they don’t care or because they believe in allowing children their freedom.
Where i live, in Hobart, Tasmania, the only trouble you will find in public is from teenage kids. Hobart is a safe place and we do not have problems with street gangs or organised crime. But the kids are reckless and often hang around the city late in the evening trying to provoke passers-by. The profiles of these kids are very homogenous: a long rats tail past the neck, a Nike/ADIDAS hoodie and trackpants, and a scooter to ride around in. I have never been bothered by any of these kids and even find their antics vaguely amusing but it is interesting that these are the only kids that you will see outside socialising for any length of time. Why is it only the truant kids that hang outside? Are truancy and outdoor leisure connected?
I don’t think so. I think the behaviour of the lower class kids is a response to the lackadaisical parenting style of lower class families which is in itself is a reaction to the cultural ideal of permissive parenting and egalitarian structures.
Rob Henderson coined the idea ‘luxury beliefs’, which are risque, trendy beliefs that do not cost the individual who has them but often costs others who adopt them and have less resources. For me, one current luxury belief is that discipline and hierarchy in the family is wrong and that children just need to learn to express themselves. Parents are now afraid to overtly exert punishment on their children. The act of discipline is either enforced in subtle ways or is just handed over to the school and the internet. The result is that children are not punished but they are also more closely supervised.
Whilst wealthy families may be able to get away with these beliefs, those at the bottom end of the social ladder are not so lucky. They follow these ideas and become like an older brother/sister to their child and the consequence is a poorly behaved kid and a detached parent. The irony with trying to treat your kids like an equal is that it leads to more frustration as you cannot understand why the newfound autonomy does not immediately lead to maturity. For wealthier parents this frustration can be easily concealed and softened by the opportunities and comforts of middle class life, but in poorer areas where the physical and emotional safety nets are thinner a dysregulated house can easily lead to mayhem.
It would be easy to say that the dishonest values of the middle class culture have sabotaged the lower class families who naively listen to the messages streaming in from the media. But it is even worse than that, the middle class need lower class delinquency, they need it to prove to themselves that their beliefs are wrong so that they do not need to go test it out themselves. Because the belief is a facade, a lie; children are not equal in the house of the average suburban home. They can barely reach into the fridge to get a snack without it being mentally noted by each parent. It is a subtle hierarchy that relies on giving the kids everything they superficially want so that they will never grow discontent and eventually try to assert what they really want. It is Brave New World. So the lower class functions as a convenient warning- that is what happens when you let kids off the leash.
Really interesting. I enjoyed reading that. Thank you.
Great example of expanding on Rob’s framework. Is this a one off piece or are looking into doing more research?