Why we don’t like it when children hit us back
To all the children who have ever been told to “respect” someone that hated them.
March 21, 2023
Even those of us that are disturbed by the thought of how widespread corporal punishment still is in all ranks of society are uncomfortable at the idea of a child defending themself using violence against their oppressors and abusers. A child who hits back proves that the adults “were right all along,” that their violence was justified. Even as they would cheer an adult victim for defending themself fiercely.
Even those “child rights advocates” imagine the right child victim as one who takes it without ever stopping to love “its” owners. Tear-stained and afraid, the child is too innocent to be hit in a guilt-free manner. No one likes to imagine the Brat as Victim—the child who does, according to adultist logic, deserve being hit, because they follow their desires, because they walk the world with their head high, because they talk back, because they are loud, because they are unapologetically here, and resistant to being cast in the role of guest of a world that is just not made for them.
If we are against corporal punishment, the brat is our gotcha, the proof that it is actually not that much of an injustice. The brat unsettles us, so much that the “bad seed” is a stock character in horror, a genre that is much permeated by the adult gaze (defined as “the way children are viewed, represented and portrayed by adults; and finally society’s conception of children and the way this is perpetuated within institutions, and inherent in all interactions with children”), where the adult fear for the subversion of the structures that keep children under control is very much represented.
It might be very well true that the Brat has something unnatural and sinister about them in this world, as they are at constant war with everything that has ever been created, since everything that has been created has been built with the purpose of subjugating them. This is why it feels unnatural to watch a child hitting back instead of cowering. We feel like it’s not right. We feel like history is staring back at us, and all the horror we felt at any rebel and wayward child who has ever lived, we are feeling right now for that reject of the construct of “childhood innocence.” The child who hits back is at such clash with our construction of childhood because we defined violence in all of its forms as the province of the adult, especially the adult in authority.
The adult has an explicit sanction by the state to do violence to the child, while the child has both a social and legal prohibition to even think of defending themself with their fists. Legislation such as “parent-child tort immunity” makes this clear. The adult’s designed place is as the one who hits, and has a right and even an encouragement to do so, the one who acts, as the person. The child’s designed place is as the one who gets hit, and has an obligation to accept that, as the one who suffers acts, as the object. When a child forcibly breaks out of their place, they are reversing the supposed “natural order” in a radical way.
This is why, for the youth liberationist, there should be nothing more beautiful to witness that the child who snaps. We have an unique horror for parricide, and a terrible indifference at the 450 children murdered every year by their parents in just the USA, without even mentioning all the indirect suicides caused by parental abuse. As a Psychology Today article about so-called “parricide” puts it:
Unlike adults who kill their parents, teenagers become parricide offenders when conditions in the home are intolerable but their alternatives are limited. Unlike adults, kids cannot simply leave. The law has made it a crime for young people to run away. Juveniles who commit parricide usually do consider running away, but many do not know any place where they can seek refuge. Those who do run are generally picked up and returned home, or go back on their own: Surviving on the streets is hardly a realistic alternative for youths with meager financial resources, limited education, and few skills.
By far, the severely abused child is the most frequently encountered type of offender. According to Paul Mones, a Los Angeles attorney who specializes in defending adolescent parricide offenders, more than 90 percent have been abused by their parents. In-depth portraits of such youths have frequently shown that they killed because they could no longer tolerate conditions at home. These children were psychologically abused by one or both parents and often suffered physical, sexual, and verbal abuse as well—and witnessed it given to others in the household. They did not typically have histories of severe mental illness or of serious and extensive delinquent behavior. They were not criminally sophisticated. For them, the killings represented an act of desperation—the only way out of a family situation they could no longer endure.
- Heide, Why Kids Kill Parents, 1992.
Despite these being the most frequent conditions of “parricide,” it still brings unique disgust to think about it for most people. The sympathy extended to murdering parents is never extended even to the most desperate child, who chose to kill to not be killed. They chose to stop enduring silently, and that was their greatest crime; that is the crime of the child who hits back. Hell, children aren’t even supposed to talk back. They are not supposed to be anything but grateful for the miserable pieces of space that adults carve out in a world hostile to children for them to live following adult rules. It isn’t rare for children to notice the adult monopoly on violence and force when they interact with figures like teachers, and the way they use words like “respect.” In fact, this social dynamic has been noticed quite often:
Sometimes people use “respect” to mean “treating someone like a person” and sometimes they use “respect” to mean “treating someone like an authority” and sometimes people who are used to being treated like an authority say “if you won’t respect me I won’t respect you” and they mean “if you won’t treat me like an authority I won’t treat you like a person” and they think they’re being fair but they aren’t, and it’s not okay.
(https://soycrates.tumblr.com/post/115633137923/stimmyabby-sometimes-people-use-respect-to-mean)
But it has received almost no condemnation in the public eye. No voices have raised to contrast the adult monopoly on violence towards child bodies and child minds. No voices have raised to praise the child who hits back. Because they do deserve praise. Because the child who sets their foot down and says this belongs to me, even when it’s something like their own body that they are claiming, is committing one of the most serious crimes against adult society, who wants them dispossessed.
Sources:
“The Adult Gaze: a tool of control and oppression,”
https://livingwithoutschool.com/2021/07/29/the-adult-gaze-a-tool-of-control-and-oppression
“Filicide,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filicide
2K notes
·
View notes
this is a HETALIA post that will end with a conclusion about hetalia. thx
i dont want to focus too much on global south victimhood or this or that, i dont want to take away agency from the global south, but its kind of heartbreaking to me how you can run through the entire history of this or that western country with colonialism, imperialist wars, and the flow of money as a footnote, but the histories of those countries they ravaged are forever ripped by that same imperialism.
I guess i was thinking about this, about history and nation personifications and what counts as ‘political’. To be honest, its impossible for me to totally separate nation and history from politics, to completely cleanse away the mentions of anything bad or scary or painful, you may treat it gently or grimly or comedically but it’s always going to be there as long as you see these nations as nations, as history (ie not an AU). And of course, that history of the global south which so deeply intertwines with colonialism/imperialism is almost always labeled as political, always seen as sensitive.
However… I think it’s telling that much of the fandom who engages with western characters (and I should put a quick disclaimer that there is nothing wrong with that in and of itself) are able to shrug the colonialism away and simply choose not to engage. Just like history books on western nations can cleanly sweep each war, each colony, each invasion under a quickly brushed aside footnote, it’s not hard to look away from where the money and resources come from. Total empire, colony influence on the metropole, they do exist, but what are they compared to the influence on the colony itself? To build the framework of a nation personification of a formerly colonized country, to make even the most basic decisions on their age and birth and identity becomes difficult without delving into the imperialist violence that formed their modern state. To give a recount of any country ravaged by imperialist wars, it’s impossible to avoid giving name to the violence that left the nation reeling into modern day.
So, yes, it’s very telling to me how easy it is to brush aside ‘politics’ when speaking only of western nation personifications.
24 notes
·
View notes
do I understand on a logical level that the average fanfiction reader is not going to be familiar with TCM best practices in treating [redacted] 1,200+ years ago? yes
do I also understand that this is a pretendytimes magical setting with historical trappings rather than an actual historical setting? also yes
is any of this stopping me from trying to decipher articles from modern medical journals? unfortunately no
17 notes
·
View notes
So er... how does the cultivation work actually?
Firstly, a meta point on soft vs hard world building. MXTX’s novels lean more towards soft worldbuilding, building on existing tropes and leaving details to the imagination. I love soft worldbuilding. It’s fine if it doesn’t make sense! As long as its internally coherent, you can have wonderfully magical, realistic worlds that make absolutely no sense on inspection. As for SVSSS, the worldbuilding is meant to be shitty. That’s the joke.
Oh and something something, I’m not a history person, nor an economics person, no this is not thoroughly researched (this was an afternoon with too much time on my hands), take my words with a pinch of salt.
So phew, caveats aside, let me jot down some thoughts on how the cultivation world might work.
Two key questions:
Where does the food come from?
Who builds the roads?
1. Where does the food come from?
More generally, where do cultivators get goods from? Like clothes, paper, the rice LBH is making his congee with, the oil they are using for papapa, important things like this. Now either sects produce their own goods, or they procure it from outside.
In the first case, they own land. If they own lots of land, then they employ people to work this land. They have factories and manage communities and things like this. And before you say ‘sects don’t care about secular affairs!’, official sect business and getting revenue for the sect can be two different things. Look at any religious institution anywhere. As a good example, Buddhist monasteries (which is very loosely what cultivation sects are based on right???) have historically owned vast amounts of lands. They received a proportion of harvest in exchange for protection against external threats.
In the second case, there’s a cushion between the peasant and the sect – some power which organises all the goods that the peasants produce and hand them as a lump over to the sect. We have indication from this in text – i.e. the existence of prominent families.
So rich families exist. Why are families rich? Because they own resources. Usually, the form this resource takes is land. On the other hand, we don’t see those families becoming regional powers – local lords and things like this (unless you count Huan Hua Palace???), and in fact they seem to have almost no military power at all. Having resources isn’t all fun and games – this stuff needs protecting. So a reasonable system to have in place is that prominent families and sects have deals – protection in exchange for goods. (This is basically the same system as above, except with the prominent families as buffers so that sects have less boring legwork to do.) An alternative to all of this is some central power which collects taxes and redistributes goods appropriately, but we see no indication of one so lets leave that aside.
Overall, it’s probably a mix of the two and depends heavily on the sect.
Example: maybe Cang Qiong relies on a bunch of deals with local families (e.g. the Ming family and their tea fields), while Huan Hua is more heavily invested in managing their territory. A very small sect on the other hand might have its members working the land as part of sect duty.
2. Who builds the roads?
The whole point (arguably) of central power is its ability to do things on a scale that individuals cannot. This includes building works: roads, canals, flood controls, defensive walls etc. And also things like enforcing law, setting standards for trade, defend against external threats, etc. etc. all that fun jazz.
Now the world of SVSSS is fractured into regional powers, so that makes coordinating all of this quite hard.
For small things – patching up a bit of road or building a bridge or whatever – the people who own the land can probably do it themselves. Off the track sects and villages would struggle a little, but maybe they had the cultivation equivalent of GoFundMe or something. Cities seem to have their own governance (Jinlan had a city governor) so they can deal with day-to-day law. If this seems a bit laissez-faire, remember that governments being so involved in everyday life is a more modern thing.
For big things, that was probably what sect conferences were for. We see all the sects came together to defeat Tianlang-Jun, and probably for SQQ’s trial. These conferences were no doubt absolute chaos, but having four (4) major powers probably subdued it a little. So overall, all locally managed, until the issue is too big for local management, in which case it is thrown into an Endless Meeting (we’ve all been in one of those haha).
To wrap up, we have that the cultivation world is this blob of different regional powers interacting with each other, generally managing their own affairs and occasionally coming together to deal with the Big Problems.
This seems... horrendously unstable and likely to descend into a chaotic war within generations lol
Anyway, all just stray thoughts. If anyone else has other ideas, would be interested in hearing!
20 notes
·
View notes