On Individual Choice

Choice for children is an illusion. The choices they are given have more to do with what is acceptable to the parent presenting the options than it does with children 'following their hearts' and any other such sentimental claptrap. This is not to say that an illusory choice is unfair, as complete freedom of choice for anyone is severely restricted, and just being granted the right to make it empowers and teaches them to use and form their own judgments, and--most importantly, suffer their own consequences (within reason). This is to say, choosing is always a learning experience.

Culture plays a big part in the degree to which a child's choice will be reinforced at any particular time, as eastern cultures tend to be more imperative and collectivist and western ones, more interrogative and individualistic. The idea of a child having choice at first appears to be something inspired by western individualism, however, in either culture, regardless of parenting methodologies, warmth, and cultural differences, trends regarding the child's choice are cyclical. It could be said that children in collectivist and individualistic societies are simply socialized to construct their individual wills likewise, to align with whatever the prevailing social trend is. It is inevitable that a thousand different influences (Bronfenbrenner) are going to converge on a child's will from birth and distort it, molest it, and mature it, until it is conformed with the cultural and historical modes of its society, and that with reinforcement, children will learn to bend their own will accordingly.

A child's evaluation of certain objects and activities has more to do with what the society that surrounds him or her values than it does anything particular to the characteristics of "childhood." If we lived in a society where anal sex in childhood was valued as much as we value the toy aisle, our children would love anal sex, and anal sex would be another so-called "pure" and innocent childhood pastime. There is nothing beautiful, pure, disgusting, or obscene, other than what adults have termed these things.

The former transition is one created by the socialization of the child by caregivers and the other contextual and ecological factors. However, it is also a child's human ability to resist the flow, and ultimately, this small resistance fuels the evolution of society, but such can only happen if they remain active players in the social game. Children who totally fail to bend their will to the expectations of society by the time they are developmentally expected are labeled disordered, or truant, or otherwise socialized in inappropriate ways, and they are effectively done away with. That is no exaggeration.

The ability of children to make the choice by which to structure their behavior, either in accordance or protest, highlights the reality of a child's humanity. And though parents seem to detest their children when they are either too eager to participate or too disobedient to comply, it is in those instances when the child is most human. If anything, those instances ought to be the most celebrated moments in a child's life. Unfortunately though, when a child's humanity interferes with an adult's authority, humanity is crushed.