Guilt or innocence? Four-year old suspended for hug
December 8th, 2006
As the TV shows get ever more risque, our sexually conflicted society gets even crazier. A four-year old in Texas was suspended for
“inappropriate physical behavior interpreted as sexual contact and/or sexual harassment.”
The offending action? Either a hug or else “rubbing his face in the chest of a female employee,” depending on who’s describing.
As a psychoanalyst, it’s upsetting that the parent’s fight against this absurd school department behavior has to be fought using the concept of sexual innocence:
Blackwell says it’s ridiculous that the aide would misread a hug from a four-year-old. Blackwell wrote to administrators demanding that the whole incident be expunged from his son’s academic file because his son is too young to know what it means to act sexually.
David Davis, the executive director of the Advocacy Center in Waco tends to agree with Blackwell. He says assuming the boy has not had sexual encounters, or been inappropriately exposed to pornography, most four-year-olds are sexually innocent.
One hundred years after Freud, we still need the cultural defense of pretending that children are innocent. They must have no “sexual” desires. Once we grant them the existence of desires, they are not safe from the thought police taking over in our schools. So, at age four the choice really is innocence or guilt.
By the way, the school administration is holding firm:
Blackwell got a response from the La Vega administration. The sexual references on the discipline referral were removed. But the thing that makes Blackwell most upset is they told him “your request for an apology by the aide and removal of all paperwork regarding this incident is denied.” Now the young student’s file will refer to the incident as “inappropriate physical contact.”
Perhaps, if he does it again, they’ll send him to Guantanamo.
Entry Filed under: Culture, Education, Psychoanalysis, Psychology, Sexuality
7 Comments Add your own
1. prefer to remain anonymous | December 8th, 2006 at 10:42 pm
Too bad this ever became an issue, the child probably had an itchy nose, closed his eyes ,and for a moment forgot that he was not in the arms of a loving family member. The other factor is obvious. Oprah found that one out the hard way… travel to Texas,any part of rural Texas and you will catch my drift…like traveling back 50 years in time. Waco and anything N or NE of Waco is full of schizophrinic bible thumpers who create this kind of chaos. God (if there is one) help his family because these idiots are probably calling on child protective (even bigger idiots) to make something out of nothing and succeed in ruining alot of lives in the process… and everybody still wonders why JFK never made it out of Dallas alive. Good field work opportunity for psychology students. You are safe so long as you stay in touch with family, and don’t talk religion with anyone-ever. Don’t forget to avoid politics and military issues,you are in Bush Country.
2. private | December 10th, 2006 at 9:48 pm
i’m from outside dallas and you are dead-on accurate about the people that live here. I have to fight for my opinion around here since everyone is a bible-holding, right-wing, gun-carrying, fanatic.
3. W | December 11th, 2006 at 3:56 am
I know some people up there round about dallas who act like that. However, some of them are turning against Bush’s wild foreign policy when they realize how harmful it is to our military.
4. skeptical wf | December 11th, 2006 at 1:06 pm
Only a complete dumba$$ would misinterpret a hug from a 4 year old. Any sane adult knows that you can solve most any behavioural problem with a simple time out and a gentle reminder to never do that again.
I am so glad my child doesn’t go to that school. Seriously (no joking here, )I think the teacher aid must be on some mind altering drugs or smoking illegal things. (S)he must be investigated for mental stability, drugs, and the parents whose children attend that school better make sure the teacher aid is not a pedophile, mentally unstable etc. I also wonder about the sanity and mental stabilty of the school faculty and administration for blowing up a minor problem. In this age when kids bring weapons and knives and used hypodermic needles to school, a silly hug seems like a very small problem indeed.
5. Willem van Camerijk | December 11th, 2006 at 7:45 pm
I think the whole affair has hardly anything to do with the behaviour of the child. It has to do with the fears of adults.
Something like this: “Has someone seen that he touched my breast?” “If I don’t react, people will think that I liked it / has given cause to it / etc.”. And after that we see a pattern of institutional fear: “What will all those other parents think of this school.”
Those patterns can only be broken when there are (enough) people with common sense. And we know there is no direct relationship between education and common sense.
6. Deanna Easley | December 13th, 2006 at 2:53 pm
I noticed in the TV coverage that the father is Africa-American. I wonder about the aide. Fifty years ago the “good folks” of Texas might have lynched the offending child. Is it a stretch to wonder about the racial overtones?
7. su | December 17th, 2006 at 3:55 pm
We all know loving human contact as children makes for a healthier adult. Perhaps the school district needs some literature starting with Harlow.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed