From: dwelch@devnull.mpd.tandem.com (Dan Welch)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Those damned magazines (was: clearing something up)
Date: 18 Dec 1992 17:45:17 GMT
Organization: Tandem Computers (MPD) Austin, TX
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In article <1gq754INNcnq@agate.berkeley.edu> bf455@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Bonita Kale) writes:
>In a previous article, uunet!infmx!hartman@ncar.UCAR.EDU (Robert Hartman) says:
>>Note that the answer here is not to suppress these forms of
>>entertainment, but to make sure that children are exposed to healthier
>>influences.

I'm not sure what Robert means by "healthier" influences.  I don't think
he means ones not involving sexual content -- I've never pictured him as
prudish.  As for Playboy (which he mentioned and I deleted), I have yet
to find any source as evenhanded in its treatment of sex and sexual
relationships, but I gather that he doesn't see it the same way.

>I work in the children's room
>of a library, and between our room and the young adult section, we have
>quite a lot of stuff--some of it junk, but some of it exactly the sort of
>thing you seem to be thinking of.
...
>But, in my experience, it's too late for the boys.  By the time they're old
>enough to be interested in mature (or any!) sexual expression in reading,
>they aren't reading fiction, or at least, not much.  There's a whole bunch
>of boys (of the ones who read at all) who go from kid's sports stories to
>Playboy or nothing.

I think this is unfair, both to boys and to Playboy.  I think the only
problem that young boys, 12-15, reading Playboy is that it is *too* mature
for them.  They are just going to look at the pictures, and not was is
written.  I know I did when I was that age.  Then again, I still read the
magazine, but now I read the articles first.  I know that's a cliche, but
its true; ask my fiance -- who, interestingly enough, likes to read it too,
but she always looks at the pictures first!

>My own boys, both readers, were the same.  They didn't want to read
>anything that dealt with relationships in any depth.

In my experience, anything I read involving relationships that was aimed at
"young adults" was amateurish and juvenile beyond belief.  I still laugh
at this section of a bookstore.  When, or if, I have children, this is just
the sort of stuff I would steer them clear of, be they boys or girls.
This doesn't mean that I don't want them learning about relationships.  I
think that "aiming" books at a certain age group, though, is almost bound
to underestimate the intelligence of that age group.

>In literature, both boys missed a lot of good stuff that my daughter read
>and enjoyed.  They never read about Narnia, or the Black Stallion, or Jo
>March or Heidi, to mention a few books I actually own and tried to interest
>them in.  They seemed to go from picture books to nonfiction to Sherlock
>Holmes and Tolkien--the sexless wonders.  Now they're adults and read adult
>books (still, by the way, missing a lot of good kid's books that I bring
>home).

I think a lot of children books are misguided, since so many adults feel
they have to talk down to children, or else the children don't understand.
This is something that I am determined to avoid doing, with my nieces, or
my own still theoretical children.  The best children's books are those
written with adults in mind, IMHO.  The Narnia books are a great example.
Others are the Oz stories, which I still collect and read.  Dr. Seuss books
are also wonderful.

>Sorry this ran on so long.  I don't understand it, myself, but I've seen
>how many eager girls we have coming in, telling their friends, "Read this,
>it's great!" and how few boys do the same.

All of my life, things have been exactly the opposite.  My sisters never
read anything, and I read everything I could get my hands on, including
Narnia and the others you mention above.  Now, I have a fairly large
collection, and regularly swap books with a friend (male) who has an even
larger collection.  My fiance, though, can't seem to struggle through
any of the "slow" books, i.e., the ones that really about something,
instead of just being a story.

Daniel Welch
----
The only thing that speaks the truth
Is the eloquence of passing time;
The spoken word is a jacket too tight.


-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
newsgroup is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.