Sigh....
Just when I start to think there might be hope for humanity, I hear about something like this:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/city/collin/stories/DN-nakedcomplaint_24cco.ART0.North.Edition1.3e87f61.html
I just don't get it....
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/city/collin/stories/DN-nakedcomplaint_24cco.ART0.North.Edition1.3e87f61.html
I just don't get it....
posted by Samantha Wolov at 2:34 AM
2 Comments:
Hard to believe for us, french people ... like "Nipplegate" was
it's an interesting situation, actually. normally, i would defend the instincts of the parents--they have the right to choose if, how, and when they want to "expose" (pun absolutely intended) their children to sex and nudity. it's the same for abstinence-only sex education. i strongly believe a more comprehensive sex-ed class should be available, if not the norm, for all children, but a family has the right to choose to opt-out in favor of something more in-tune with their beliefs, and they should in no way be harrassed or made to feel badly about the decision.
i'm troubled by the fact that the initial problem was the exposure to a nude statue simply because it was nude. i would be happy to send them a paper explaining how, historically, nudity has often played a vital role in religious art, allowing the artist to preach and uphold the morals of that religion ("look! nudity on evil people! nudity must be evil, let's all value chastity and the morals of God!") however, what concerns me more is that, based on the article, it seems like no one, not even the teacher, attempted to start a dialogue about the statue. these kids, 10 and 11 years old, probably knew about sex but didn't know about sexuality or symbolish, or the nuances of any of them. they probably saw the nude statue and automatically associated it's nudity with sex. they couldn't help that. however, i think it should have been the responsibility of the teacher and the school, as educators, to address the REAL problem: the ignorance of the students. no one bothered to teach the kids what that nudity meant. the kids just took the nudity at face value and ran with it. the parents did the same thing, they just fixated that their kids had seen nudity, but didn't bother to find out how. the school reacted to the complaints of the parents, and didn't bother to really examine the crux of the issue (ignorance), and offer a solution (teach them). the teacher didn't actually see why the parents were upset (it probably wasn't the nude statue, it was that the moral upbringing of their children was being violated by someone they thought was supposed to nurture them; not the nudity itself, but what exposing their children to nudity represented), apologize for making them uncomfortable, and offer a solution that both appeased their concerns and fulfilled her goal to teach. instead, she just acted defensively. they all acted impulsively, which i think i think, in this context, is reflective of their ignorance. with the children, it might be excusable, but with the school, teacher, and parents, it's incredibly disappointing. i really think this could have been avoided.
Post a Comment
<< Home