I was in one of those sort of surreal conversations the other day, where someone was telling me that, now that he’s two, the Boychick really should spend some time away from The Man and me, so he can “develop independence”.
I tried to stutter a defense about how he has a lot of independence already, just within the context of our family unit (see? I can’t even articulate the thought well in retrospect), which earned me a patronizing head shake.
But it got me thinking: what IS independence? And why is it seen as so damned important?
Here’s the thing: the Boychick has never been away from The Man or me. One or the other of us has been with him, been the one primarily responsible for overseeing his well-being, at all times. We’ve never had a “date night” where we left him with someone else. We’re not, at this age, absolutely opposed to the idea, but we have no particular desire for it, either. We’ve had lots of dates, and lots of adult conversations, with the Boychick around, and all three of us like it that way just fine. (This is in no way meant to condemn those who do desire — even need — breaks from their children, dates with their partners, or to work in child-free environments part or full time. Although I am overtly and entirely in favor of attachment parenting, I have no desire to police what that looks like in other families, nor even whether they choose it or not.)
In the popular conception, at least in America, this makes the Boychick horribly smothered, denied the opportunity to be “independent”, tied to us (literally, at times) in ways sure to stunt him in the long run.
And yet, no one would ever accuse us of being helicopter parents:
- At the park, I plop myself down on a bench with a book or my schoolwork or my iPhone, and gently encourage the Boychick to run and play — and eventually, when he’s ready to, he does, and wanders far and wide, though usually within my sight.
- At home, he plays on his own while I do my work, and has done since he was a few months old — a few minutes at a time at first, in my lap or on the floor right next to me, now for hours a day (with numerous swings back to show me this or that), and often in other rooms.
- We are entirely in favor of free range parenting, and I, as a former latch-key kid who started biking home by myself at age 8, was recently horrified to discover that Oregon law strongly discourages children under 10 years old being left home alone for even “short” periods of time. (I also discovered I could be prosecuted for leaving my sleeping toddler in the car in our own driveway to run inside, pee, and get the bed ready for transferring him. But noooo, surely society is not at all oppressive of women-who-caretake!)
- We love the book Whistle for Willie, published in 1964, in part because of its portrayal of a perhaps 5-8 year old boy playing on his own in his neighbourhood, even getting sent on an errand to the corner store by himself — of course, he’s not actually alone, because there are several other kids also outside playing (without an adult in sight).
Modern American culture is horrified by almost all these things. We raise the spectre of Stranger Danger, of the Pedophile Lurking in the Bushes, of the omnipresent and omni-oppressive What If? at every turn, restricting and limiting and oppressing — and yes, smothering — our children, even as we push them away.
It seems to me, then, that The Man’s and my sin in the eyes of “mainstream” culture is not failing to foster independence, but our refusal to force detachment — what I sometimes call “pathological independence”. It is our willingness and commitment to provide a safe base from which the Boychick may explore, and to which he always may return, that earns us ire and shaming clucks of the tongue.
Independence, no matter what popular culture says, cannot be created by forcing the chick out of the nest; that is only detachment, which teaches children they cannot trust those around them, and cuts off their rightful sense of interdependence. Real independence, which is entirely capable of coexistence with interdependence and thus dependence as well, is grown in to, at one’s own pace, under one’s own power, and comes from knowing that one is free to roam, free to leap, and yes, free to fall — which children are so much more likely to risk when they know they have a soft space to land.
We spend so much time demanding “independence” in our offspring’s infancy (demanding they sleep alone, forgo our embrace, learn to “self-soothe”), then refusing to let them taste anything approaching real independence (freedom to explore and exist unobserved and unoppressed, along with responsibilities to others who depend on them) when they are at the age they most need it. How much more backwards can we get?
To take this, once again, from the personal to the political: I suggest there is something inherently anti-feminist — misogynist — in this backwards stance.
First, we replace mother’s own (ideal, biological default) milk with man-made artificial infant food; a parent’s arms with artificial rockers, swings, play pens, etc; a parent’s bed and a mother’s breast with barred cribs and artificial white-noise and silicone “nipples”; we tell parents to ignore their instincts, and allow their babies to cry themselves to sleep. Not to put too much biology-is-destiny spin on it, but all of this serves to separate and detach the motherbaby — which biologically ought still be thought of as one unit even after birth, only gradually and mutually separating over time (with “mother” here being substitutable with any number of close allomothers; the point being that infants and to a lesser extent toddlers biologically expect the constant presence of a known, loving, familiar adult or near-adult) — damaging a mother’s belief in her own abilities and conceptualizing her as broken, incomplete, inconsequential.
Then, when both primary caregiver and child ought to be naturally starting to get ready for the child to explore ever further afield, we demand constant vigilance: children must NEVER be left alone or unobserved for even a moment, “because something might happen, dun dun DUUUUUUUUUUUN!”; this serves to tie the primary caregiver, usually a woman (either the primary mother or a usually-female allomother in the form of daycare workers, school teachers, playground monitors, etc), to the child, never allowed to pursue her own goals and career, required always to have her attention focused completely and near-exclusively on the child(ren), or risk being cited negligent, labeled a Bad Mother — even risk having her child(ren) taken away by a system that declares alone time under some arbitrary and ridiculously high age actually illegal.
This is classic patriarchy modus operandi: declare women broken, insufficient, lesser-than, dangerous even; then demand our complete sacrifice and subsumation of self under some pretext (which also inevitably serves its end goals), usually exactly counter to the previous demands (thereby, if we are to follow, requiring suspension of rational, logical thought); make it almost impossible to deviate from the demands (lack of allomothers, break up of neighbourhoods, laws and a Big Brother culture quick to dial 911 to enforce the norms); and punish us completely out of proportion to the “offense” if we dare to deviate.
So no, we’re not going to leave the Boychick with a sitter or take him to daycare just so he can taste “independence”; nor will we refrain from leaving him in our yard to play, or home alone when he is ready, just so he can be “safe”: I may not be totally (hah!) independent from the patriarchy, but neither will I bow down and allow it to define “independence” for my child.
Arwyn
In my bathroom hangs a plaque with a picture of a yin yang and the word BALANCE. I can never get it to hang straight. This probably says something deep and meaningful about my life.
oh very well said!
I have to say, I have left Bertie for “date nights”, from quite an early age actually (four months, with several cups of EBM!)… but with his Nana (my mil) who also looks after him while I do paid work part time.
I think some equality feminists overlook the importance of a loving relationship in a baby and toddler’s life.
And some attachment parents overlook the fact that other people than the mother can provide this.
I am so going to buy free range kids now!
1) RUTH! Email me pretty pretty please?? I’ve not been able to comment on your blog and it’s driving me (more) nuts!
2) Thank you.
3) There was a good discussion going on over at Hobo Mama’s site about allomothers, which I totally meant to link to but obviously neglected. And now I’m on the iPhone and can’t. Argh! But look it up, it’s worth it.
Emailed you at raisingmyboychick AT gmail DOT com, hope that’s right? else you can email me at msrlmoss AT googlemail DOT com.
Yes! Thank you for saying this! Lately I’ve been told by several sources, including his pediatrician and my therapist to let my 9 month old “cry it out”. He’s still co-sleeping with us and nursing and we like that just fine, but according to the pros, he needs to learn to “self-soothe” or we’ll never be able to “break” his habit of being so attached to me. Hmmm. Sounds like something I don’t want to break!
(Also, if my hunch is correct Arwyn, I think we live in the same area.)
(Cancel that hunch. Wasn’t paying attention to the front page.)
Crazy society, isn’t it? Why do parents want to push their children away from them? They will certainly regret it when they are teenagers and don’t come to them for anything!
I think it’s important to let children socialize with others, but it doesn’t mean you have to leave them alone. I believe in letting children venture away at their own pace…they learn independence but also that they can come back to you.
Anyway, well said. I’m going to check out that free range kids blog, too.
Broodmother: people who should know better (like pediatricians and psychologists — for pete’s sake!) spouting that nonsense drives me up the wall. And out of curiosity, where HAD you hunched I was? (I only just added my location to my profile; I figured it would take someone all of two seconds with google or link clicking to figure it out, so I might as well put it up.)
Lisa: I’m a fan of socialization as well, and I’m not sure the Boychick gets as much as would be ideal… but we don’t live an ideal life. *shrugs* He has a best friend, and several other kids we hang out with on a regular basis, and he socializes with everyone we meet out in the world; it’s not like the options are “locked away in isolation” or “perfect socialization in daycare”, as is sometimes insinuated. (It’s not like the options are “thrown away to the wilds of daycare” or “perfect contentment at with stay at home parent” either, of course.) Anyway, that was tangential…
Ruth: another thing I meant to reply to was that if we did have more family closer, odds are he probably would have spent more time without as by now. But his only grandparents live 800 miles away, and our best friends and relations in the are are a 45 minute drive away. Good for regular playdates, but not close enough for the kind of daily familiarity that would make leaving him with them comfortable, alas.
Oh, I had you hunched in Seattle, where I am.
I love Whistle for Willie & The Very Snowy Day. I love the sense of exploration and the artwork is divine.
Hey, here I am, finally catching up on my reading. Is this the post about allomothers you were thinking of?
I really like your suggestion of the word "interdependence" vs. the other options out there. I can't fathom why people would think a 2-year-old doesn't have the right to be dependent, but anyway…
We happen to have an almost-2-year-old who is more dependent than is perhaps average (based on my limited interactions with other toddlers). Mikko is what is popularly referred to as clingy, and he demands near-constant attention, despite my let-him-roam attitude at, say, the playground. I've been wrestling with my own emotional blocks to that sort of dependence (having been raised to self-soothe and be independent!), but also defending him against others who think he should be more grown-up (at 21 months!!).
It really has bothered me, now that he's attending a preschool twice a week, that people I tell about the decision give sort of a relieved, "Good! That will be so good for him, and for you, too." And, you know, it is good for both of us, but their implication is that it's good because what we have had as an intact (interdependent) family unit, all together all day, is somehow not good. That we shouldn't be so close or involved in each other's daily lives or ??
Sam & I got that a lot with working from home as well — our pastor routinely referred to us as codependent. WTF? Because we like each other and don't mind spending time together?
But I'll stop rambling and just say that I endorse free-range parenting as well but am also scared about running afoul (ha ha — free range must make me think of fowl! apparently I'm not done rambling) of child-endangerment laws. Yesterday Mikko was out on our patio without pants on (because such is his life), and Sam and I were both inside for a few minutes to, I forget, pee or get a drink or whatever, and I wondered if there were any neighbors peeping through their blinds and reporting us for neglect.
So how to balance that? I grew up a free-range kid, something I'm very thankful for. I biked and walked all over, sometimes alone, sometimes with another friend or two. Even when we lived in Berlin when I was in junior high, I was a fearless explorer, riding the bike paths and taking buses and shortcuts, and this was before cell phones could track my movements. My parents let me start babysitting my younger brother at 10 (he was born when I was 9) — if a 10-year-old can barely be permitted to remain at home alone, then can she be trusted to look after someone else?
It's strange, though, because I look back at my past and wonder — could I be as trusting as my parents? What if something terrible had happened to me? (The old spectral what-if questions…) And now, of course, what sort of freedom am I allowed to offer my son? Bah.
Anyway, thank you for the food for thought! I’m going to check out the site and Whistle for Willie (have you read The Snowy Day? Same author, similar young boy out-in-the-city experience). And feel free to enjoy your interdependence!
Oh, and Broodmother, I’m in Seattle! See you around.
Broodmother — Portland, Seattle, close enough!
Jen — I need to check out The Snowy Day, too.
Hobomama — Yes! That was the article.
I love me some Hrdy, and need to check out that book. I suspect you’re getting it exactly right: give him both the freedom to roam and the freedom to stay close. As for the issue of running afowl 
of our anti-free-range culture, well, that’s a whole ‘nother post. It’s a real concern, because we simply DON’T have the freedoms parents used to have to make those kinds of decisions (to leave our children alone, to give them responsibilities, to let them run and play). It’s scary how much that is taken away from us, without being offered any kind of real support in return.
I don’t know if you’ve seen the “Mommy Myth Busting” site linked to from the Free Range Kids one. Very disappointing.
Oh that is crap. (And several of the posts are flat out wrong, too–the carseat one starts out with a big fat lie, er, error, which makes the rest of it bunk.)
But, that’s also the nature of the Internet. You only need one or two clicks to get from my site to a misogynist site, or an anti-breastfeeding one, or an anti-attachment one. It’s hard to find even a single site that doesn’t offend me — or at least, that I can entirely agree with — some way or another (I’m thinking especially sexist attachment parenting sites, anti-mother feminist sites, anti-tv-free unschooling sites, anti-massage science sites, anti-science natural health sites…*); it seems too much to ask that all the sites they link to be unoffensive as well.
(* None of these things are actually inherently incompatable; rather, they reveal just how common irrationality, prejudice, and false dichotomies are.)
Erm, that went tangental; what I mean is, yes, that is really disappointing, and thanks for pointing it out.
This is excellent. I should make this a required reading for my site.
I just found this blog and I LOVE IT! I’m a single mother of a 3-year-old, and just today I found myself thinking “how do I raise him to understand that the misogyny which the media shoves down our throats isn’t acceptable?” I also wonder how to react to people who say he’s “girly” or even “gay”, and at such a young age! (I currently go with a “I love him the way he is” response.)
I don’t know much about attachment parenting, and I hadn’t heard of helicopter parenting before now. I couldn’t say what any style of parenting has over another. All I know is that having him sleep next to me for a year helped me get more sleep because I didn’t have to get out of bed. Breastfeeding made sense, since that’s all I could afford to do. Choosing a quiet home for his daycare fit my need for flexibility as a single mother. Leaving him with the boyfriend every so often to go out with friends – that helps keep me saner and him healthier as a result. Every other parenting website loves to say what mothers “should” do to raise their kids the “right” way. Bah! It’s refreshing to find a blog that breaks away from all of that.
[...] Independence, attachment parenting, and societal misogyny [...]
[...] Independence, attachment parenting, and societal misogyny [...]
[...] Independence, attachment parenting, and societal misogyny [...]
[...] Independence, attachment parenting, and societal misogyny [...]
[...] Independence, attachment parenting, and societal misogyny [...]