There was a great post at Womanist Musings a few weeks ago about children and touch. (Forgive me, I can’t remember which reader tipped me off to it.) The post begins:
Sunday was Father’s Day and so we went out to dinner to celebrate. When “Destruction” (the author’s son) was telling the waitress what he wanted to eat, she reached out and pinched his cheek. After she left, he told me that it hurt and that he really did not like that she had touched him. Upon her return after clearly thinking about the incident, he politely told her that she hurt him and he would appreciate it if she did not pinch him again. Destruction has always been protective of his personal space. I remember when he was three and got into a scuffle with a Walmart Greeter when she wanted to hug him.
Once he became old enough to understand what I was saying, I began asking if it was okay to kiss or hug him. I never presumed that I had the right to have access to him because he is my son. Most of the time it is always an enthusiastic yes, however occasionally it would be no I’m not in the mood. I have never gotten upset or felt rejected, I simply tried again later…
As a feminist first-time father of a five and a half month old daughter, I’ve been thinking a great deal about issues of parenting and body integrity. As I wrote not long after Heloise was born, my shift back to a firm pro-choice position was solidified by watching my wife go through pregnancy and childbirth. My sense of the importance of women’s sovereignty over their own flesh was strengthened, not weakened, by sonograms and the like. And in a not dissimilar way, caring for my daughter is solidifying my belief that physical autonomy is an indispensable right for all.
Each day that passes, my daughter gains greater control over her own flesh. She’s learned to roll over. (There was a one-week lag time between being able to roll from back to tummy to being able to roll from tummy to back.) She can raise up her head easily; she can reach out and grab with ever-increasing force and accuracy. She can suck her toes, getting her foot into her mouth in one fluid motion. And she is achingly close to crawling, something we think she’ll be able to do in a matter of days. Heloise’s body responds more to her will each and every day; in a very real sense, we’re watching the miracle of the growing assertion of sovereignty.
But still, our daughter is radically dependent. We change her and bathe her and dress her. We strap her into her car seat and carry her about. She has very little say in how or when she’s touched, but that doesn’t mean she has no voice. We notice when she reaches out for us (something she started doing within the past month); we can tell when she wants to be held and when she’s perfectly happy playing by herself. We try, as best we can, to respond to her needs; when she wants cuddling, she gets cuddling. And when she tries to wriggle out of an embrace, something she does on occasion, we are quick to allow her — within the bounds of reason and safety — more freedom and mobility. She may be less than six months old, but she’s learning that her needs matter. Her body is hers, even if that body — for now — requires our active and constant care.
As the blog at Womanist Musings points out, adults are too quick to create a simple dichotomy between “safe” and “unsafe” touch for children. Our assumption is that “unsafe” touch is sexual, and it is certainly true that an adult touching a child in a sexual way is indeed unsafe. But the problem with that dichotomy is that it assumes that nonsexual, non-violent hugs and caresses and pinches and kisses are “safe” and appropriate. As the story of Destruction indicates, it’s possible to violate a child’s boundaries in a very serious way without being sexually inappropriate. Indeed, in some ways the problem of non-sexual boundary violation is more acute, because a great many adults refuse to acknowledge that well-meaning affection is something that is within a small child’s right to refuse. We accept, rightly, that there are precious few reasons for an adult to touch a child’s genital region; we don’t as easily accept that children have a right to refuse hugs and kisses and pinches.
I’ve never liked the phrase “private parts” to refer to our reproductive/excretory area. One reason, of course, is that the phrase seems charged with shame. The other, more important reason, is becoming clearer to me now that I am a father. When we label certain areas “private”, we imply that everywhere not so labelled is somehow “public” — and in the case of a small child, fair game for adult touching. The thing is, non-sexual touch can still feel violating; the well-intentioned hug can feel invasive. And small children have enough experience feeling invaded and overwhelmed.
I love my daughter with such an intensity it brings tears to my eyes. She and my wife are such joys, such gifts! But just as I learned that in the end, my wife’s pregnancy was hers and not mine (I despise it when men say “we’re pregnant”), I am mindful that my daughter’s body is hers. She needs me to hold her, clean her, clothe her. But sovereignty isn’t vitiated by temporary dependency. It’s still her body, and I am only the father to whom the happy task of caring for this body has been delegated. As she ages, my access to her body will be withdrawn. I bathe her now; in a few short years, I will do so no more. Her nakedness will be concealed from me, as is good and right. I will love her no less as she asserts her rightful autonomy.
My daughter will be raised to know that she has the right to refuse hugs and other unwanted touching. Her body is hers to delight in, hers to share. Her body is a vehicle for her own pleasure, and a means through which she can share love in its myriad forms with others. Her arms will embrace parents and (one hopes) siblings and friends and dogs and chinchillas and, in time, lovers. She will get to decide who holds her and whom she holds, and we will make sure she knows that the final say lies with her. I will have no problem making it quite clear that no one — not me, not my wife, not doting grandparents — gets to foist unwanted kisses or hugs. I hope my daughter will always want to hug me; I know well that there will come a time when in all likelihood she goes through a period of wanting greater physical distance. I won’t take it personally.
When it comes to my daughter, I know that I have no claim upon her, only what will become over the decades a gradually decreasing responsibilty to ensure her well-being. But though she may need me less (or at least need me differently) to come, I have no doubt that the love I have for her will do nothing but grow and grow. I hope it is reciprocated. But whether it is or not, I know that soon enough the decision about when and how I hold her will be hers alone.
There is absolutely no question when they want “down”. It’s practically suicidal and you have to be on your toes to prevent something unfortunate.
The other day, walking with my two-year-old grand daughter, she wanted “up”. I told her to keep walking. She got in front of me and wrapped me up like an octopus. Had to pick her up. What a chore.
You will know when you are trespassing.
Great post!
Congrats to the rolling over both ways (Little Miss Kickboxer decided to sit rather than roll)! And yeah about the bodily integrity.
Now, what do you say to the cultural perception of girls as being “cuddly” by default whereas baby boys are perceived as “independent”?
I’m curious how you feel about tickling, Hugo. I used to participate in an online forum for parents (years ago) and one of the guys there was massively opposed to tickling kids. It is (at least in my experience as a child) exhilirating but also based on coercion and loss of control. I mean, I loved it, and kept going back for more, but it wasn’t always completely consensual in the moment.
Awesome post.
Yet you’re in favor of involuntary infant circumcision, Hugo. Yes I know you were circumcised and have been happy with the results, but most people really like hugs and kisses (when appropriate) and yet you argue (rightly I agree) that they should not be forced upon on anyone, even a child. Forcing permanent and unnecessary body modification upon a child is the right thing to do though?
Excellent post, Hugh – it’s given me a lot to think about.
Though it’s unfair to expect you to know this so far in advance, how do you think your current position will extrapolate in the future to issues like piercing (ear and body) and tattooing?
Thanks, Hugo, for adding to the voices of sanity. Sounds like Heloise is a very lucky girl. This post is going to be a bit disjoint but bear with me…
Not sure how I feel about circumcision… now there are some medical procedures that have to be done without consent, e.g. vaccinating kids or moving an unconscious person to the hospital, in order to save lives or at least health, and there might be some gray areas–I just don’t know if that’s one of them. I will leave it alone, and hope those who are qualified really think it out.
As to tickling and roughhousing, I bet that kids and adults both could learn and benefit from the use of a safeword.
We already went thru the session some months back about picking at someone else’s skin, and how doing it against their will, or even suggesting it, could be very damaging, because it tells them they aren’t all right just as they are but need fixing in a painful fashion. Which leads me to the next item. Along with not forcing unwanted contact on a child in the name of affection (or their looks), I think folks ought to take mind of what they are pouring into the kid’s ears as well. If you are a parent or a doctor or a p.e. teacher, the minute you find something wrong with a child, you need to find something good about them to make up for it. You think something is subpar, you find something better than normal to balance it out, and make sure the kid hears that. Some of us could count better than you think, and grew up with decades of body-hatred caused by a stream of unsolicited, and uncompensated-for, judgments.
No I don’t claim to have all the answers. But I am sure that teaching kids that their bodies *aren’t* masses of flaws, as well as that their bodies are not anyone else’s toy, can be only to the good. It will help them learn to respect others’ bodies also.
One of the most sickening moments I had reading comics was that episod of For Better Or Worse some years back–a friend of the main family had a baby who had 12 fingers not 10, and the doctor decided to just lop the extra ones off–no explanation given, save that everyone seemed freaked out by something unusual. [The extra fingers were not deformed.] I would have never thought of doing that at all. Some conditions can be real problems, but I for one would rather go thru life having my gloves custom-made than know that I had been mutilated without my permission just to conform to an esthetic standard not of my own making.
And no I haven’t got around to writing Johnston about this; I wish I had suggested she have that kid grow up to be a vehement body-rights activist.
Say, what will you do if someone at school feeds her some cheese or meat and she really likes it–or actually turns out to need it? When does she get to make that choice?
First off, this post made me cry. Secondly, I hate tickling. I’m ultra-sensitive to touch, and tickling is completely terrifying for me. Third, barring any necessary surgeries, I don’t think I’m going to have my son(s) circumcised until he’s/they’re old enough to make the decision for himself/themselves.
Good, thoughtful post, Hugo. I do hope you think about what the full implications of “physical autonomy is an indispensable right for all” are for baby boys.
So right, Hugo. You might enjoy Tracy Hogg’s book “Secrets of the Baby Whisperer”. According to her, it’s never too early to begin seeing your baby as a little person with boundaries – to the point of telling her “OK Heloise, I’m going to change your diaper now” instead of just undressing her w/o warning. Though baby may not understand words, she gets the idea that you respect her. (Not that I’ve had a chance to try this myself yet, but God willing, soon…)
Ditto what Angiportus said about negative body talk in front of kids. My pediatrician was always being judgmental about weight, body hair, etc. when I was a pre-teen. Made me feel like a troll!
Some excellent points, everyone, though I think that the circumcision topic — as richly complex as it is — is out of the scope of this discussion, which is more focused on touch and less on elective surgical procedures.
“I bathe her now; in a few short years, I will do so no more. Her nakedness will be concealed from me, as is good and right. ”
this part concerns me. Concealing a body even in nonsexual contexts continues to sexualize nudity and make it taboo. the way you have phrased this says that “covering up is good” not “having the automomy to choose to keep one’s nakedness private is good.” This puts an dichotomous judgment on seeing genitals. As a nudist I’ve been around naked adults and naked children and clothed adults and clothed children. To say that concealed nakedness is “good and right” really shames and continues to closet the nudist community.
I have to write with a pseudonym because there are people who I can’t be out to (people would label me as “perverted” and it would greatly reduce my chances of working as an educator.) This attitude helps maintain that hostile environment where I feel I have to conceal part of my identity.
Seems, naked, as if your view conflicts with certain others.
If a person’s genitalia are of no more moment than the forearm, what’s wrong with touching the former to make a point?
I enjoyed this Hugo: I don’t have kids, but a few of my close friends have new and newish babies at the moment.
It made me wonder what your thoughts are on discipline – picking up reluctant kids, and placing them in cooling off areas is a received method of discipline. It seems, from your post, that this is something you’ll be aiming to avoid; so what are your alternatives?
I don’t like being touched on the arm either, especially to “make a point”. Bu it’s what is usually in reach if you think you need to touch someone, so it gets touched. Also, it’s easier to keep clean. So that example is not much use.
And there are some things you just don’t do in the nude…welding, for instance.
But arms don’t suddenly pop up against the owner’s will [so far, anyway], or leak who knows what on unususpecting surfaces. Sometimes I wonder how nudists manage…but I guess they do, so I won’t criticize them. But not everyone can achieve that equanimity. Until the gene or brain-lesion that causes pedophilia and rape is completely wiped out of the human species, until all kids are raised to defend themselves, until everybody just gets some manners, I suspect nudism isn’t going to be for just everybody. Maybe it is one of those things for which there is a time and a place.
After all the stuff I’ve gone thru, I don’t feel like uncovering in front of anyone. Each to their own.
angi.
Been taught for years that the forearm is one of the few neutral places on the other person’s body to touch.
Couple of women who said things like…That’s nice of you, etc, would touch my forearm. One was married, the other didn’t like me much but apparently got carried away.
Made a comment about something abstruse with a buddy who shared the same view. “Who else in this town has a clue what you’re talking about?’ Squeezed my forearm.
No other part of the body is neutral. Or as close to neutral as one can get.
Which is why I used it.
My point was that what hugo said basically shames nudist families because what they are doing is NOT “good and right.”
So having a picnic at the beach where naked children are running around would be not good, not right.
I never said it was for everyone. But if you are talking about personal autonomy, it should be the child’s choice to cover up, not the mandate of society or a parent. I never wanted to put on clothes when i was at home. eventually I started wearing cloths at home when puberty hit (which is common in nudist families.)
Angi: you say “each to their own” but you also paint nudism as causing pedophilia. is that really different than saying “well until we know what causes men to molest little boys we’d better keep our kids away from gays..” are you saying that the families I picnic with are being irresponsible and putting their children in the grasp of pedophiles? there are problems in the nudist community as there are problems in all communities but not MORE so. in fact children growing up in nudist households tend to have GREAT self esteem about their appearance since they don’t have unrealistic expectations for body image, and nudism is a very body accepting culture no matter what shape, color, size, or body modification performed on you.
I won’t get into how “nudists manage” because that would be hijacking the thread. There are plenty of resources made available by TNS and AANR if you want to google it.
Arright, I switched my eardrops and my eyedrops and now I can see what you’re saying. My apologies.
(Still doesn’t make ME like to be touched anywhere, though. Growing up abused will do that sometimes.)
Richard – it’s sexually neutral, but touching somebody without their permission, or without the familiarity that means you’re reasonably sure it’s welcome, is a power play.
Nakedthoughts, I didn’t mean to ever suggest that nudism encourages pedophilia–I do not mean that for a millisecond. What I meant is that some people who are already pedophiles would not be people you’d want anywhere near a nudist area. Your post appeared after mine, and I do agree about the child’s choice.
Hugo –
I think that circumcision fits right in with any discussion of body integrity in infants and children. For that matter, so does diet. If we honestly believe in body integrity we have to question whether or not a parent really has the right to say no to that third glass of soda. “Body integrity” means that I get to put what I want into my body. It’s my choice. True body integrity might mean that a young child says “no” to vegetables and “yes” to cheeseburgers even if her parents are vegan.
Yes, it fits in all right, but body rights is a big field, and Hugo might want to deal with it in separate threads. Same thing with diet (let the fireworks begin.)
Safety, though… if my parents had let me run into the street, or open those colorful bottles under the sink, I wouldn’t be here today. I do maintain that their fiats on how many animal crackers were “enough” were excessive. (Still, for some kids one hard-way lesson on how much is enough can be mighty effective.)
I think the subject of this discussion was touching and physical displays of affection, and learning of control over same. Just as it can be hard to remember that only so many cookies are enough, it can be hard to learn to ask not to be touched, and so on. I read, and have used, a tactic that the young might find useful. If some one is coming up to you looking like they want to hug you, you catch both their hands with both of theirs, hold them up a little, and say nice things, and they will usually get the idea.
Hugo,
Bless you for this post. Certainly, the discussion about the physical sovereignty of a child, no matter what age, is not a new one, but it should never be allowed to go stale. Every generation of kids and parents needs to learn it afresh, it appears.
What Volly said.
I think there is a difference between actually knowing what is better for the child (cookies, playing in the street, playing with dangerous chemicals) and things that not only do you not know what is better for that child, it is doing them a great disservice (touching when they don’t want to be touched). If I let a child play in the streets, that means they could die or be seriously injured. If I don’t touch kids when they tell me to, then they learn that their body is theirs and theirs alone, and that’s a good thing.
“Body integrity†means that I get to put what I want into my body. It’s my choice.
I find that my kids generally aren’t going to put a third glass of soda pop into their bodies if I tell them “okay, but you have to buy your own soda”.
Great post Hugo.
Why do so many assume that they have an automatic right to touch and hug children? Barraging an adult with copious amounts of, or any amount of unwanted touching is rightly seen as an invasion of personal space and harassment. Why not with children? I strongly suspect, as many here do, that a large part of the answer lies in children being seen as the property of their parents.
As a child, I resented not being able, no, not being permitted to tell adults that I didn’t want their hugs, kisses, pats on the head etc. I also resented the inevitable chastisement that ensued when I pulled away, or went stiff or otherwise didn’t enthusiastically respond to their touch.
As an adult, well, unwanted touching can still be a problem, but at least one is much more likely to be listened to and heeded if one expresses that one is uncomfortable with, or doesn’t want to be hugged. Even if one does run a risk of being perceived by some as being stand-offish or strange or emotionally stunted for this, especially if one is female.
People are also much more likely, in my experience anyway, to heed and respect the non verbal cues that one sends out in regards to touching when one is an adult. For example, I rarely say that I experience various degrees of discomfort with being touched or hugged. However, I clearly send out via my body language, and have done so for all my life, that I am not too fond of either. Therefore most people tend not to get too “touch-feely” with me . Which didn’t always happen as a child I can tell you!
Absent a really radical parenting philosophy, you can’t grant a child fully bodily autonomy. You have to be willing to pick up a screaming toddler and carry her away from the park. But I think what’s really harmful is the notion of imposing caresses or other “good” kinds of touch on an unwilling child. The message there is that they are supposed to enjoy it whether they wanted it or not. That seems like a worse breach of bodily autonomy than doing something (appropriate) that is mutually understood to be unwanted.
Right. Taking something that could have been nice and making it bad.
Some kids are like dogs, all over you and okay with you being all over them [appropriately that is,] but others are like cats, and don’t want physical contact unless they start it. You don’t help them by clipping their claws. Let alone doing bad things to them.
Oddly enough, when I was grown up, there were a few people–precisely those whom I had NOT grown up with–whom I didn’t mind getting swept up in a bear-hug by. But if any of them had started slobbering all over me, or made the least hint of anything other than platonic interest, I’d've pulled away fast enough for a sonic boom. Context, I guess. Still, I was an adult then, and I wasn’t the one who initiated it.
Dinana nailed it, there are some parents who think they have the right to do any blasted thing they want to a kid just because they are providing the food and shelter. Not so fast, there’s laws about the treatment even of animals. One wonders how many cases of elder abuse are actually revenge? No, I don’t condone that either.
I wish every parent could read this thread.
I may be jumping in rather late on this post (longtime lurker) but as someone who has (for various reasons) a heightened appreciation of my personal space I can appreciate the sentiments in this post. I have never been a “huggy” person (defying female stereotypes) and in recent years have developed abnormally touch sensitive skin (health related).
Until this happened I had never really thought alot about my personal space, I did not give hugs/pats etc… but if someone did embrace/initiate contact I would accept it as is “socially appropriate). Now I have to spend my time dodging everything from hugs right down to should taps/punches and pats on the back as it can cause actual physical pain and discomfort. Try explaining why exactly you literally run away from a friends hug and you suddenly realize just how accustomed we (as the general public) have become to casual human contact.
Perhaps I have somewhat gotten away from your point about a childs body and their right to dictate, but I felt strongly that if only everyone learned to both comfortably assert their right to their own body and whom touches it, and to also refrain themselves from automatically assuming that they have a right to touch others, than perhaps I would not have to navigate the world quite so cautiously.