|
Philip Spiess
Dave: Although I don't have grandchildren (yet), I spent the last eight years (2005-2013) of my varied career in history and education teaching 5th and 6th Graders in a private school (call it upper Middle Class) in Alexandria, Virginia. The kids ran the spectrum (and it is a spectrum) of not only well-behaved and misbehaved kids, not only bright kids and kids who hadn't a clue, but also kids on every potential point along the gender spectrum (they were at that age when they could head in any -- or every -- direction). At that age (10-12), girls seem, on the whole, to have a better sense of direction and know who they are than the boys do, though the girls can be nasty little social snipes vying for power over each other. And with them I had to be aware of, and careful about, the "Oh, I love you, Mr. Spiess!" and their trying to give me little presents.
The boys, on the other hand, seem to have, at that age, a less developed sense of self (I'm not sure why, aside from greater immaturity at that age). Although they were quick to anger, they were also quicker to get over it; on the whole, they seemed to be more socially serene (maybe oblivious!) than the girls. Certainly boys are more physical in their interactions and in their desire not to sit still in the classroom; I had to devise more "physical" learning for them, although they could have sat still for hours at the computers playing electronic games like "Mineshaft," etc. (the girls were not into this).
I dealt with boys on a one-to-one basis (maybe because of my many years as a Scout leader): guys who were apt to be "big-man" blowhards I tried to redirect to be "leaders" instead; to guys who were teetering on the edge of what might likely have been recognized as "feminine" behavior I tried to suggest ways in which they might stand up to other people or at least to assert themselves as they saw themselves -- without telling them to "man up!" -- whatever the hell that current term means. And yes, boys these days are certainly more fashion-conscious regardless of their class or upbringing; "selfies" only add to and perpetuate this physical self-awareness (though not, I think, to the point of G-strings -- this sounds like Times Square in the '60s or '70s, or West Hollywood -- but I did not have to deal with any "sexting" issues). Certainly I'm not at all an advocate of "manly men" or "101% he-man guys" -- my own attitudes, life, and career have mitigated against that! (Yes, when I was in pre-school, I liked to play with my mother's kitchen equipment; now that I'm retired, I'm into quasi-gourmet cooking; coincidence? who knows?) Again, there are too many variables on the spectrum to say "you should be this or that." But certainly the majority of boys and girls have distinct attributes, ways of thinking and acting, and instinctive physical and social roles that separate them by gender; we should just not force them into these assumed roles, but let them develop naturally to be themselves. And it seems that, as the present generation evolves into high school and college students, they are, on the whole, more accepting of differences than our generation was (though there can be glaring exceptions to this!).
I will confess that after eight years of teaching in the Middle School, on the day I retired I was stunned: an astoundingly large number of boys in the Middle School cried; all of the girls, though hugging me, were dry-eyed. (Did this address what you were asking, Dave, or was I way off the mark?)
|
.jpg)
