Essay Instructions: TOPIC QUESTION:
Power and Resistance
?in recognizing the political oppression of children (on the basis of age and of gender, race, class and disability), a radical approach would also recognize children as resisters to those oppression? (Kitzinger, 1996: 176).
Why does Kitzinger use the concept of resistance rather than empowerment?
References to REVIEW and MUST include:
Kitzinger, J. ?Who Are You Kidding? Children, Power, and the Struggle Against Sexual Abuse? in A. James and A. Prout (eds), Constructing and Reconstructing Childhood, The Falmer Press, London, 1996, pp.157-183.
James, Jenks & Prout (1998). Theorizing childhood. Cambridge: Polity Press, especially chapter 8.
MacKenzie, I. ?Power?; Ashe, ?The Subject?; and Lloyd, ?The Body? in Ashe and others (1999). Contemporary Social and Political Theory: An introduction. Buckingham: Open University Press.
The focus is on the power structure which gives adults power over children. A discussion of the theories about children's place in the social world together with an analysis of the social institutions that influence how children live their childhoods.
This is not a paper about research, you are expected to 'research' the topic, in the sense of finding relevant material to discuss the theoretical issues. Relevant material will discuss 'theories', not 'findings'. It is a paper about sociological theory. About how recent sociological theory has treated the concept child. So, you start by identifying the theoretical concepts used, and the explanatory framework these concepts are drawn from. For instance, 'discourse' is a theoretical concept, drawn from poststructuralism; 'childhood innocence' is a theoretical concept associated with the socialisation framework (functionalism/developmental approach). 'Power' and 'resistance' are theoretical concepts which form part of the conflict perspective.
The theoretical issues raised in the articles considered at the beginning of the subject, especially the paper by Alanen (1990), 'Rethinking Socialization, the Family and Childhood'.
At the conclusion of the paper, Alanen wrote:
'a sociology of childhood .... must avoid the conventional view of children as objects and victims, granting them instead the status of participants and constructors in the processes that make up their, and our, world' (Alanen, 1990:26)
In other words, a good sociology of childhood will place children at the centre of theorising. Unlike the sociology of the past which treated the institutions in which children live their lives as being the theoretical focus, sociology of children has as its central interest the actions, interactions, negotiations, resistance and structural position of children.
James, Jenks and Prout (1998) categorise and review the major theoretical frameworks that have put children at the centre of theorising. These are the 'social structural child' (a theoretical approach which uses structural and demographic data to discover children's position in various societies); the 'minority group child' (a theoretical approach which treats children as a minority group, rather like ethnic minority groups, or women); the 'tribal child' (a theoretical approach which treats children as having their own culture separate from adult culture); and the 'socially constructed child' (which challenges the concept of an 'essential' childhood by exploring how childhood varies over time and between cultures). use these categories to sort out the various arguments.
The reference James, Jenks and Prout talks about the child and refers to the social world in the context of past, present and future. Jenks in particular in his analysis of childhood is associated with experiences of the topics we have covered already, the social construction of the child, the educational experience ; of which is crossing over with other disciplines like psychology. There is also four main themes structure and agency, identity and difference, continuity and change , local and global. Actually there is a diagram on page 206, figure two. Is the type of comparisons to make, and draw on different sociological approaches?
Alanen, Leena (1990). ?Rethinking Socialization, the Family and Childhood? in Patricia Adler and Peter Adler (eds), Sociologocial Studies of Child Development, JAI Press Inc, London, 1990,Vol.3, pp.13-28.
Kitzinger, J. ?Who Are You Kidding? Children, Power, and the Struggle Against Sexual Abuse? in A. James and A. Prout (eds), Constructing and Reconstructing Childhood, The Falmer Press, London, 1996, pp.157-183.
MacKenzie, Iain. ?Power? pp.69-87
Ashe, Fidelma. ?The Subject? pp.88-110.
Lloyd, Moya. ?The Body? pp.111-130.
- in Ashe and others (1999). Contemporary Social and Political Theory: An introduction. Buckingham: Open University Press.
The child's position is being regarded as the minority. Also the children and the state give some insight into this. Who has power and who is responsible. The power relations of government within society and the way certain institutions have the power and control over children. The way the laws are set up is another problem as adults become responsible for the actions of their children.
There is a (traditional) view of power that links it to position and/or resources, such as wealth, numbers, leadership, etc. This view suggests power is at the expense of the powerless (if I have it, you don't).
Another, more recent idea about power is that it is shifting between people in relationships. In families, for instance, patriarchy allocates power to men, but women can resist (traditionally by refusing sex). Or in more egalitarian families, perhaps, men can agree to share the housework but resist (eg washing woollen socks in hot water then drying them in the dryer).
Parents have authority over children, which gives them power. Children (as parents know) resist, which limits the power parents can exercise. Buckingham discusses this in the relaiton to television (who controls the remote!) (1994: 83-88). See his reference to 'the on-going guerilla warfare of family life' (p. 85).
