I haven't heard about it, and a mutual friend of ours, Gaia, is the supervisor of a local day care centre for the College.  I will check with her.

I think that it would be logical to have training for staff  about gun play.  The reality is it is going to happen.  Better to have staff aware of what their options and expectations are than winging it.

I would not be happy with that either. Yes kids will be kids, but we adults can then use opportunities to teach and set them straight. My girl is in fourth grade and there's a guy in her class she doesn't get along with. She told me they were mortal enemies. I explained to her what that meant and told her flat out that they were not mortal enemies (such drama). She explained what was going on and I said they were just being snarky to one another and so she said they're snarky enemies. That's not great but it's within the range of what's tolerable.

Gun play in day care!    I'm agin it! 

First off, if I'd run a day care and a child was chasing another child (or two on two, or whatever) with a toy gun, or with a finger pointed like a gun, and shouting about killing, or threatening to 'kill', I would call the offending child aside, explain that this was inappropriate and give a warning.  Second offence - time out.  Third offence - talk to the parents.  Fourth offence - expelled  (parents could appeal - but the parents need to know that the daycare takes this very seriously).   I would also talk to the other children and reassure them that they are safe, and that we don't allow that type of violence, or threat of violence, at the daycare. 

Training in gun play - I just don't understand.  Guns are just not acceptable at daycare.  Certainly the staff shouldn't provide them:  kids who bring them should have them taken away and sent home at the end of the day (second offence in a short period ot fime and they are kept until the parents request their return). 

Talking to kids about gun safety - possibly, especially if the subject comes up.  If it is likely that guns are kept in the child's home the first safety rule should be that the child should never, ever touch the gun.     Just as other safety might occasionally be talked about:  always use a booster seat and seatbelt in the car; look both ways when crossing the street; don't touch pills or medicine unless your parent or the doctor tells gives it to you.  Safety that could mean the difference between life and death.   We don't practice taking toy pills / we don't play with toy guns.

hmmm.  I grew up with Star Wars.  We had toy laser guns.  My son is one of the sweetest, gentlest (usually) kids and all his friend's parents really like him and he does well in school, and he has made guns out of lego or paper rolls or barbie dolls etc all his life.  Now, his favourite is Nerf guns and he just bought himself a new one.  We all chase each other around laughing ourselves silly.

But most of the time when  he was growing up, I'd ask him with wide eyes, "OOhh I hope you're shooting them with the Good Ray, that makes them nicer!!" and he would roll his eyes and say "yes mom". 

I've never allowed him to say "I'll KILL you" to his sister etc and usually gun play included some stern mom-warnings about guns being used for killing and that was very sad and he should remember that.  And he says, "Yes mom" with more eyerolling. 

It might not be up there with building a hospital out of lego.  But remember, if he builds a hospital out of lego, its for the little lego dudes that got blown up on the spaceship by the other evil lego dudes on the other spaceship. 

My kid is perfectly fine.  I think at a daycare, other games can be encouraged, and the providers can be helped to understand how to do that.  But in general, compassion is sometimes learned through exploring the other side.  Otherwise, we're sugar coating the world for our kids and that has some very disturbing side effects too.

double post

I'm with Birthstone: my experience with kids is somewhat  more limited, but from what I remember being a kid myself, gun play will happen. And I remember having lots of games with water pistols that were superfun and had minimal risk of injury (of course there is always some risk if you are going to let your kids outdoors: they may trip on a rock etc.)

I see these as games for older kids, not daycare. Yes, kids (and not just boys) will make guns out of anything. I seem to recall zapping some of my young classmates with carrots at a lunch table once-upon-a-time. I like your response Birthstone about shooting with the "good ray" and setting clear boundaries around using words like "kill" to discourage violence.

In any childcare environment, perhaps the best response is to define limits on what is acceptable behaviour, keeping in mind the principles of what we want children to learn and what is safest.

To be clear, the training that I percevied would be welcome, was training in how to deal with gun play.  It will happen.  There will be parents who are upset by it beingdisallowed, as there are parents that are upset with it being allowed.

Training staff in what is and what is not acceptable is reasonable.

Birthstone, yup....we had a no gun rule in our house.  Watched "good " tv.   The guys made guns out of lego, sticks, branches, etc.

Interesting thread - my kids & our household approach were much as Birthstone described.   I do agree that facilities need to develop a policy about how to respond to gun/weapon play in their own settings, so I would support staff discussion about this - based on evidence and thoughtful reflection, to make informed decisions.

Last week, when away on vacation, we drove past a yard where some presumably loving and dedicated parent had built a playstructure in the back yard.  But what caught my attention -  the elevated "fort" position had two "machine guns"  permanently fixed there - this really took me aback.  It looked rather like a prison guard's tower.  It got me wondering who had built this and why ... questions that won't be answered, since I didn't go knocking on the door.

I read this interesting article today on the web about gun play ... gave me a bit of a different perspective -  "Bang Bang - Gun Play and Why Children Need it". 

http://www.richlearningopportunities.co.uk/pdf/bang%20bang%20gun%20play%20and%20why%20children%20need%20it.pdf

ps...before gunplay, it was sword play (aye-aye, captn'), arrows (sneek through the long grasses), swords (saving lasses from tall towers), and i am sure way back clubs.

Yes, back in the dark ages I played with toy guns:  actually cap pistols that looked, sounded, and smoked like real guns.  We played cowboys and Indians constantly (nobody worried about being politically correct in those days either.)   I also played with toy nurses kits that included a bottle of candy pills, and smoked candy cigerettes.  No I didn't grow up and use a gun to kill anybody.  With a sick mother in the house we quickly learned the difference between real and pretend medicine, and I don't think those toy cigerettes had anything to do with my smoking from age 14 to 23. 

By the time I had children, I had heard that children shouldn't play with toy guns, and for several years I didn't buy any.  But if Seelerboy came home from a birthday party with a toy waterpistol I wouldn't take it from him.  Eventually I did allow him to pick out a toy rifle that he wanted very bad.   He didn't grow up to be violent.  In fact he never had any desire to own or use a gun - he's never hunted.  He did learn a bit about them the one year that he was in cadets.

Now little grandson plays with toy guns.  His father is a bit of a hunter - rural NB.  He also does quite a bit of sword play.  Come to think of it, I played with toy swords too - reinacting the French Foreign Legion as a kid after watching the movie Beau Geste.

I still say that toy guns and gun play has no place in a public daycare. 

ok - not in daycare, but please make sure that a wee kid doesn't get villified or banned because he was shooting stormtroopers with a tinkertoy.   That would surely mess up a poor kid doing a perfectly reasonable thing and being treated like a criminal. 

Nothing wrong with some good clean innocent play with toy guns. My brother and I used to play toy guns all the time, cowboy and indian mostly, and we ended up okay. My brother, who has his PhD, is a neuroscientist and I'm... well... I'm me.

Jae - its quite possible I had a colouring book similar to that one.  I loved it.  But I wouldn't give it to my grandson today.  I'd permit it, if someone else gave it to him, but I wouldn't promote it.  And I don't think it has a place in daycare.

True, but swords and arrows aren't being used on the streets and in people's houses to kill people in this age.  Guns are.

It's not that I object to training about how to handle gun play and how to respond to it if during craft time two kids put paper towel tubes and toilet rolls and taped them together to make a gun and were running around in cardboard combat... that's one scenario.  But what I'm talking about is intentionally introducing guns i.e. bringing in realistic looking plastic guns into a daycare setting. 

I think it's a different issue that a child making something and acting out what he or she has seen in a book or movie or game... I still have problems with that but it's different than a child educator putting their stamp of approval on gun play by being the one to approve it in the first place.

And why does gun play have to be a given?  There are lots of ways to act out adventure and good vs evil and power struggles and such without weapons?  Just because it's "always been that way" and most of us don't grow up to use weapons in destructive ways, doesn't mean as a society we should be happy about watching kids run around talking about killing each other.

How are we to talk about peace and justice and responsibility if we condone games or toys which in their very nature are violent?  And although it might seem different for a 5 year old to play out bad guys with guns and that that in itself hasn't been proven to be any threat., there have been lots of studies that link violent video games with violent behavior in teens and adults because after a while, it just seems normal.

I don't want that kind of "normal" world for my daughter to grow up in.  Some of the ways I can help make that happen is by teaching her non violent ways to resolve conflict, treat herself and her friends and yes, non violent ways to play.  Note, I'm not saying she should be staying in her room colouring pictures of daffodils all day, her play is often very physical and imaginary and full of adventure....

Before I had a son I too thought that there was no place for guns as a toy.

But then I had a son.  No bought guns so he used sticks, made lego ray guns, water pistols were great fun from birthday parties.

I eventually came to see that there was a role for playing with these toys.  There was an objective to his games whether it was huge water blasters, the hose, .....

Swords too.  The boys loved to play knights of the round table, robin hood, slashing the tall grass, star wars ( he even had a lazer sword that lit up).....

I dont' see anything wrong with it.  I dont' agree that this somehow makes them more likely to shoot someone any more than i think playing house makes him tidy or playing doctor makes him want to go to medical school. ( if only)

At the day care, I think I would be concerned that the two boys were threatening to kill your daughter.  Two kids out of 5?  That is alot of kids to decide to pick on someone.  This "very good day care worker" of yours should have pulled them aside, given them time alone, explained the facts of life that you don't threaten to kill someone even in a game.

The parents also should have been told so they could reinforce this very simple rule.

What legislation is this introducing this crap into our daycares? I'm currently an ECE student, and I can promise you that in my school program we are not taught about how gun play is a good thing. On the contrary, we are taught how to intervene under any circumstance of violence or violent play because it's not good. We need to teach our kids how to use their words or find creative outlets to express aggressive feelings. At least, that the ECE program I signed up for. Whoever thinks gun play is okay shouldn't be in this field of work - goes against everything ECE stands for.

Learning to handle conflict appropriately is excellent.  And, through a LOT of talking and explaining and talking and yelling and punishing with time outs and restrictions on toys later, my two boys are ...boys.  We never had guns, or swords or weapons but they'd be created out of whatever was about: lego, sticks, lumber, you name it.

The only rule I'm able to enforce now (they have their own money and purchasing power) is that the gun must not look real, as that can get you into some real, police-type trouble here in TO. Luckily, some of the 'cool' weapons are very cartoon: nerf, particularly.

Wouldn't it be GREAT if we could all raise children that didn't play these games, or chase each other around with threats? But I'm convinced that this is built into the DNA of humans; our hockey and football and soccer are all modified combat games that we all love (and not only the professional level, but at the school or recreation level).

Ensuring  kids are aware of what Real Guns do, and what that means for kids and families that lose friends and family to gun violence; that it isn't a game in real life, is critical. It's awful in real life. And guns on a farm, or in a house, or on your 'friend' mean you need to be really careful about the choices and decisions you make about those things, and those friends.

I learned this week that guns take as many rural children's lives as urban. The rural kids tend to have accidents, or suicide; the urban ones are more likely to be murdered. Great.

Of course that's what she did... and then she told me about it when I picked my daughter up.  That kind of behavour is not tolerated from any child.

kids are also, believe it or not, learning about justice & power & responsibiltiy & peace when they play guns. It depends on the encouragement of adults around them, the tv viewing they are permitted and their sense of their own power.  I bet a confident kid who feels loved by their family, and has learned compassion will still play guns, but they'll be the good guys defending the poor ones.  At some point, the diplomacy & negotiation starts to pop up in their games because their parents model it for them. 

Guns are real in the world, and our kids need to explore their ideas.  Maybe we just need to work hard to make sure we say "oooh poor bad guy!! I bet he has family that will miss him!! He  needed a second chance".  talk about building guilt trips into our kids' play time!

Your posts have resonated with me gaiagrrl. Guns (swords, any weapons) are not a part of our family/home. Playing games that ‘pretend’ to shoot, hurt, kill, track down another person does not fit for me (or my partner). Our 12 year old son understands our perspective and has never asked for a toy gun or shown any interest. At supper I mentioned this thread - I said “On wondercafe there are people talking about children playing with toy guns” to which my child quickly responded “They shouldn’t”. I said “Can you tell me why?”. He said “Because when they get older (or not) they may think it’s okay to use real guns” …. The conversation continued for a few minutes.

Personally I believe there are many ways for my child to explore and play out themes such ‘good’ vs ‘bad’ without playing with ‘toy’ weapons and in fact, it is important to learn ways of dealing with conflict and negative experiences in non-violent ways. In my opinion, playing with weapons normalizes violence and aggression. My partner and I have consciously centred our family life around the virtues of gentleness, peacefulness and kindness and weapon play doesn’t fit with that.

And I know many here have played with guns/weapons when they were a child and didn’t become a violent adult – I still do not think that makes it okay. Just as I do not think it okay to have cowboys hunting down “Indians” because we did it when we were children.

At an individual level, most children (I hope it's most) who play with toy guns will not go out later in life with a real gun and shoot someone. However, at a societal level what are we saying when we allow children to run around and shoot each other and call it play?

(deleted)

The danger is more that that. There was a case in Tenn. not too long ago where a child (4 or 5 I think) died playing with a gun.  The kid was accustomed to playing a video game with a controlled made to look like a gun. The dad thought he heard a prowler, got the gun out to check and no one was there. He didn't put it back up (they usually kept it locked up properly) immediately and their child found it and ended up shooting himself. As near as anyone could tell the kid didn't know it was real.

I have to disagree with most of the sentiments expressed here.  There's no evidence of gun-play leading to a greater propensity to violence, just like there's no evidence that violent video games or violent movies make kids more violent.  I grew up playing games that invariably involved guns, and neither I nor any of my cousins turned out to be prone to violence. 

Martial-like games encourage strategy, cunning and risk in a way that "let's all be friends" games don't.  When kids grow up and stop playing with guns, it's very useful to transition to a game like Risk or Diplomacy or Chess, where the objective is to eliminate the other player.  In all of these games, there's a martial theme.  I know we're all good communitarian folk, but these are useful skills to have.  People who don't ahve them will be at a disadvantage to those that do when they enter the real world.  

Kids can't play outside because there's paedophiles.  Gun-play makes for mass murderers.  Strategy games lead to not nice feelings.  And so on.  This aversion to risk has led to a generation that can't take initiative and is afraid of any kind of confrontation.  It's unhealthy.  It's a competitive world, and we might as well teach the next generation how to compete with dignity and moderation.   

"The danger is more that that. There was a case in Tenn. not too long ago where a child (4 or 5 I think) died playing with a gun.  The kid was accustomed to playing a video game with a controlled made to look like a gun. The dad thought he heard a prowler, got the gun out to check and no one was there. He didn't put it back up (they usually kept it locked up properly) immediately and their child found it and ended up shooting himself. As near as anyone could tell the kid didn't know it was real."

Is that the fault of toy guns or an idiotic parent who doesn't know the first rule of gun safety?  Also probably the fault of the State of Tennessee, for allowing such idiots to own guns. 

I've been thinking a lot about this thread and have been hesitant to post bc I'm not a parent.  I worked with preschoolers for many years but not as a daycare provider.  And none of that is close to being a parent.

Free Thinker when I read your post I guess I would question what we want the "real world" to be.  Do we want to continue with the real world that we live in - or do we hope for something better?  Personally I would hope for something better.

Just thinking that teaching children to be gentle and peaceful does not mean teaching children to be door mats.  I don't think it means teaching children to avoid conflict or melt when it happens either.  It shouldn't anyways.  There are so many ways to learn to deal with conflict.  There are options when you need to stand up for yourself that will serve kids well as they grow up.  And lots of opportunities to practise these skills in day to day life.  Just as there are many ways to learn strategy etc.

I would be very much against introducing gun "play" or any "play" that has its base in some sort of violence.  I played with a toy machine gun and a gun and holster set as a child and that was common at that time - but it doesn't mean that it was a good idea in my opinion. 

TL

"Free Thinker when I read your post I guess I would question what we want the "real world" to be.  Do we want to continue with the real world that we live in - or do we hope for something better?  Personally I would hope for something better."

Yes, of course, we want something better.  But if you want something better, you don't give up on political and strategy skills.  You need those skills to help achieve the kind of world you want, because people who don't want your "better world" are going to have those skills, and they're going to use them.  Politics isn't going to go away, and its persistence requires that people know how to strategise, take reasonable risks and compete. 

"Just thinking that teaching children to be gentle and peaceful does not mean teaching children to be door mats.  I don't think it means teaching children to avoid conflict or melt when it happens either.  It shouldn't anyways. "

In that case, you accept the possibility that conflict can happen.  And when it does, they need to know how to handle it.  That's where these skills become useful.  And that's why The Art of War and The Prince make for very useful reading even if you're not a head of state.  

If you want to abolish the need for these skills, then you'd have to abolish power.  That's not going to happen. 

Also, I'd like to see a study showing a correlation between gun play and violence.  I really don't buy the fluffy symbolic arguments about "the message we're sending," whatever the hell that means, short of hard evidence showing that these toys are actually harmful.  I'm not holding my breath.    

Actually, I have been a parent who has kept guns (even water guns) out of the range of pre-schoolers completely and I've been quite strict on it even as they got older. I played all sorts of games such as you've described as well as war games (I lived near the Maginot line in Germany).

However, I need to address the matter of good clean innocent fun being "cowboys and indians" juxtaposed with the image you posted, jae. For aboriginal people, the horrific reality of their brutal treatment, and genocidal policies of governments in North America, is far from good, clean, innocent fun. We may have been innocent of any malice but the cultural mindset of the day was far from benign with regard to our aboriginal brothers and sisters. As we socialize our children into cultural norms, perhaps we don't need to include war and killing.

All of the above in my opinion.

You makem good point. We smokem peace pipe.

I'd like to see the study showing a correlation between toy guns and actual violence.  It would be useful to have this kind of information before singling out toy guns. 

Furthermore, and I should have mentioned this earlier, but there's something to be said for creating a healthy outlet for aggression.  Our potential for aggression will not going to go away, so might as well channel it into healthy competition.  That's why competitive sports are so beautiful, because you have two teams trying to absolutely destroy one another but doing so peacefully, governed by rules that are meant to ensure fairness. 

Let's remember our Freud people.  The id isn't go to disappear, no matter how polite and genteel we are.  It' there, and it's when we most deny it that it comes forward.  Let's come to terms with it.  Just because someone likes playing with toy guns and enjoys Discovery Channel documentaries on the Romans does not mean they will become school shooters.  We are evolved to be violent predators, and that is a part of our nature that we can't pretend doesn't exist.  It's the people who keep this stuff bottled up, who sit in a corner and sulk while all the other kids are playing cops and robbers, that we need to be worried about.

This is speculation, but part of what makes gun play so much fun is the sense of risk.  Being shot by a gun is more ominous than a "friendship ray", so you try really hard to hide, run and strategise better.

"Actually, I have been a parent who has kept guns (even water guns) out of the range of pre-schoolers completely and I've been quite strict on it even as they got older. I played all sorts of games such as you've described as well as war games (I lived near the Maginot line in Germany)."

I think it's inconsistent that you didn't go ahead and ban fairytales as well, because if there's one area of childhood more violent and disturbing than gun play, it's fairytales, particularly traditional fairytales.  You have poisonings, people being eaten alive by wolves or even worse, by other humans.  There's politics, jealousy, seduction (date rape, anyone?), black magic, dragons....it's all in there. 

You don't see the racist nature of this response, Jae?

Yes, it was racist.  I've learnt not to take what Jae says too seriously.  Now can we please not derail the discussion with a long round of denunciation of Jae's racism?  We were on to something.  

Free_thinker, I wonder how such studies could be structured in order to be useful. Would you include only those who watched TV violence (almost everyone) and then make a correlation to those who go into their places of work will rifles to kill? Would you include those who are convicted of violent crime of any kind? Would you include those who salivate at the sight of guns? Those who join the military for the express purpose of serving in combat to kill legally? I don't know how one would go about doing this and even if we can agree on what constitutes violence so that the possibility of correlation could be explored and examined.

With respect to children's play and violent fairy tales, well, it's rather more difficult to see since the obvious signs such as toys guns and shouts of "bang, you're dead" aren't there. However, I'm sure that on many occasions the opportunity to speak about violence/war/killing did present itself, either in relation to "fairy tale play" or in other contexts, and where appropriate, I would have had those conversations. That's all part of socializing our children. I don't happen to believe that I should passively socialize my children into the cultural norms but rather offer guidance and direction, in the hope that doing that in my small way is part of assisting children in developing their value system and, in the larger picture, assisting society in change. That's just not the specific topic of this thread.

Ah, but this is a related concept to the one I've just posted so it's not derailment. Also, sorry, I'm not prepared to let it stand given that it could be very offensive to aboriginal people participating or reading this board and, therefore, doesn't speak well of us if we don't challenge it.

Mother of Five - thank you for challenging Jae's racist comment.  I too noticed it and was offended by it.   I played Cowboys and Indians as a child 60 years ago and didn't see anything wrong with it.  Now, as I read in the Bible, I've put away childish ways.  I would like to take my childish self aside and discuss it with her - pointing out her prejudice - perhaps watching "Custer's Last Stand" (a b-grade movie we all saw and acted out) with her and pointing out the prejudice portrayed in it. 

"

Free_thinker, I wonder how such studies could be structured in order to be useful. Would you include only those who watched TV violence (almost everyone) and then make a correlation to those who go into their places of work will rifles to kill? Would you include those who are convicted of violent crime of any kind? Would you include those who salivate at the sight of guns? Those who join the military for the express purpose of serving in combat to kill legally? I don't know how one would go about doing this and even if we can agree on what constitutes violence so that the possibility of correlation could be explored and examined."

A useful place to start would be to actually interview violent offenders and see what made them snap.  In the cases of serial killers, it rarely starts with good, innocent people who watch a few violent shows and then decide to act them out.  It starts with familial dysfunction, and then finds its way to things like a fascination with death and the torture of animals.  Then of course arson.  With more garden variety offenders, familial dysfunction and social isolation are the big factors.  From what I've read on the subject matter, I haven't come across a profiler or criminologist who singles out TV or gun play as the precipitating factor, or even a major factor.  Just look at the profile of these people.  

Also, it's worth considering the amount of people who grew up with gun play and action movies and didn't turn out to be prone to violence.  Clearly, the positive factors at play in their upbringing were not compromised by an exposure to gun play and violence.  So if parents do their job right, the kids will probably not turn into school shooters even if they do end up preferring cops and robbers over "Community Monopoly," which mind you is completely boring because there's nothing at stake, unlike the aggressive game of real Monopoly.  

"With respect to children's play and violent fairy tales, well, it's rather more difficult to see since the obvious signs such as toys guns and shouts of "bang, you're dead" aren't there."

So in principle, you support censoring violent fairytales but you think in practice it's too hard to do because the violence is subtle.  I don't support this principle at all.  In fact, I think it's a good thing for kids to be exposed to traditional fairytales, which are actually very disturbing in their subject matter.  The people who created these fairytales were on to something.  They realized that a kid's imagination can haunt them, and take a morbid turn.   You can't avoid that just by sanitizing their environment.  So they did the opposite, they used fire to fight fire.  They created fairytales where the imagination is used to create situations of danger and then find an escape from them.  That is why the prince eventually triumphs, but not before a confrontation whose outcome is uncertain.  This was Freud's point about fairytales, and it's been backed up by quite a few psychologists.

Exposure to violent fairytales or even gun play does not make people violent.  The human mind is capable of dwelling on the morbid even without that kind of specific stimulus.  I think it's the height of progressive social engineering naivete to believe that if we just sanitize people's surroundings, we'll all eventually become pacific golems who are incapable of violent thoughts.  It doesn't work that way.  The unconscious is there.  Might as well confront that and not just pretend otherwise.  Gun play, and fairytales do just that by creating a make-believe environment where kids can confront their fears of death and danger.  You can pretend those fears aren't there, or can be rationalised away, in which they'll just come back in another form.  Or you can go ahead and confront them, and slay the proverbial dragon.  

I agree that all of that is also useful however, my point is that, while TV violence or gun play may not be directly considered precipitating factors, my view is that they are part of creating violent norms within society, some of which are precipitating factors.

We are a community, whose overall culture has a major effect too. "If parents do their job right" isn't necessarily possible for all parents on our own, for starters. And, you keep mistaking my comment about violence as being about "school shooters" and "violent offenders", whereas my actual comments are directed as the culture of violence in which we are all immersed. If that was not so, we would not be permitting ourselves and governments to be engaged in violence anywhere. We have Canadian mining companies killing labour activists in Central America and we aren't (except in small numbers) pressuring our government to pass laws about the behaviour of those companies. We have troops fighting in struggles that have their origins in defending corporate interests. We have prisoners in institutions abroad that aren't being granted human rights and we aren't demanding that our government take a stand. Our own prisoners are not treated humanely, either, and our prisons and penitentiaries foster more violence rather than offer rehabilitation. I could go on but I think you get my point.

Who said anything about censoring? As a parent, I consider it my responsibility to make every effort to provide guidance and yes, play does provide an opportunity to provide a place from which to interweave positive and peaceful socialization. That doesn't mean eliminating any trace of darkness that presents itself -- I'm not sure how you read that into what I said.

Interesting that you use the term "progressive social engineering" as a way of marginalizing active parental involvement in my children's socialization that takes a direction that's different from the theoretical one from which you speak. I don't pretend "those fear aren't there" etc, yet I can and do try to teach my children that, while violence exists and they aren't in a bubble with respect to exposure to it, it doesn't have to be dealt with by succumbing to violent cultural norms.

"

I agree that all of that is also useful however, my point is that, while TV violence or gun play may not be directly considered precipitating factors, my view is that they are part of creating violent norms within society, some of which are precipitating factors."

This is purely speculative at this point.  I'm not a big fan of the kind of analysis which tries to link societal problems back to the kind of cultural entertainment we enjoy.  If you recall, we've heard this kind of argument before about pornography, that exposure to porn makes men more likely to rape.  Despite very ardent efforts by pro-censorship feminists, there's been no evidence of such a connection and in fact there might be evidence of how porn creates a pressure valve for aggression.  

You might also recall the furor over violent video games.  No connection has been proven between exposure to video games and violence, and there's actually a study that came out which shows that role-playing games can improve spatial orientation skills.  These games are definitely a more involved and intellectually stimulating medium than television. 

So no, I don't buy any of this.  We shouldn't ban an activity that has a lot of benefits, like physical exercise, teamwork and strategy, in the absence of harder evidence about its harms.  

"And, you keep mistaking my comment about violence as being about "school shooters" and "violent offenders", whereas my actual comments are directed as the culture of violence in which we are all immersed."

I struggle to think of one human society where violence wasn't an issue, whether it was internal or directed at an out-group.  We're a very violent species.  In comparison to most other societies today, Canada's actually a lot less violent despite easier access to entertainment violence than say the Congo.  A society that deals with even less violent crime than ours and also has non-aggression written into their Constitution is Japan, which to you ought to come as a surprise considering how Japanese entertainment is very violent, beginning with their cartoons.  Their porn is notorious for its BDSM and fetish niches.  Somehow, all that exposure hasn't translated into a violent culture.  

So, once again, Mo5, evidence instead of speculation would be nice.  I could make the argument that entertainment violence gives us a medium in which the unconscious can act out its violent tendencies in a non-destructive way, but I've given you quite a few arguments and some counter-examples to prove my point. 

I sruggle with the we don't have this in our household nor do we allow xyz...therefore our children __________.

Why?

That presumes that some things are only learned behaviour and that there is no valid usage for exploration of such topics.

1.   Teatotaller parents do have children who are alcoholics, social drinkers and teatotallers

2.   Families without violence in thier homes can end up with violent children.  Homes with violent parents can end up with childen who are not violent.

My  2nd child taught me certain things about nurture & nature.

I also do feel that there is a need for physicality in some people. .  I remember Rev John talking about going & chopping wood to work through intense grief. 

When we remove an element of our human-ness, instead of allowing for positive paths orusages, then, I don't feel we are being solid parents

FT and pinga, with respect, censoring is not what I said or suggested. I don't permit play guns and nor do we have real guns in the house -- I'm not sure how far one wants to push the "well, we have violence anyway so let's just let it go its course" argument and if that's not what you're saying, please clarify.

I'm under no illusions that my children never have played with toy guns or ones they've fashioned themselves. I do believe that children learn what they live to a large extent and cannot see what purpose socializing children to guns serves. If, as a parent, I don't exercise some judgement over what I believe is appropriate then perhaps parental modelling is useless as well?

In terms of evidence, FT, you have no evidence either...this is a values question and I do believe that violence begets more of it. That doesn't mean that I don't recognize the tendency in human beings for it, nor do believe that nurture is everything. However, it does have an effect and can make the difference in a person with certain more aggressive tendencies to fully immerse themselves in that world or to figure out ways to deal with it, as they mature.

"

FT and pinga, with respect, censoring is not what I said or suggested. I don't permit play guns and nor do we have real guns in the house -- I'm not sure how far one wants to push the "well, we have violence anyway so let's just let it go its course" argument and if that's not what you're saying, please clarify."

That was not my argument at all.  My intent was to challenge the assertion that being exposed to something in the context of cultural entertainment will make you more likely to do that thing.  I doubt that's the case with gun play and violent movies, especially when it's a situation where a person is knowingly immersed into an imaginary enviroment that is apart from civilized society and for that reason provides an opportunity for them to overcome their fears and live out their fantasies of heroism. 

"In terms of evidence, FT, you have no evidence either."

I don't have to prove a negative.  You're the one who asserted they're a harm.  I want to see why. 

Gun play is probably the easiest lesson in "power over/power under/reactionary/bullying. 

It could be all of that but for kids it's generally about the acting.  Acting out dying scenes ( the longer the better) . . . getting shot is actually the priviledged position because said child claims the spotlight.

For adults, guns mean, crime, hate, power trips, sexual abuse, physical abuse, mind fucking.

We  don't have guns in our house either; however, if I lived in N. wisconsin where my sister does...then we might.  There...the gun puts food on the table from the deer population.

I'm going to step away from gun conversations...and talk about pirates for a moment.

My oldest loved the swashbuckling of the pirates.  We had a pirate birthday party, and the kids walked the plank.

He also loved another party, where he & his friends were giants.  (we used baby toys, and other things to transform rooms so they were big people in a little people's space.

Now, neither being a pirate or a giant resulted in him being a pirate or a giant.  They were fun.   The pirate stuff lasted a while, with sword play, and ships, and plundering for gold.   

I also read fairy tales, the scary ones, where children are eaten by terrible giants, or kids are lost.....why?  because in those tales, the kids end up overcoming the odds.   They find their own unique strengths and gifts and turn the world upside down.

I know this is an age-old question, there will be folks who strongly disaree.  (It reminds me of the co-operative game movement where no one could ever win.  I like scrabble.  sometimes i play for points, sometimes for the beauty of the board/play.  Generally, it is a combination of both........a co-operative scrabble just doesn' t have the same appeal...

Yes, I hear what you're saying, Pinga. As I said above, this is a values question and my choice of how I want to reflect the values our family holds since both my husband and I are pacifist. I do believe that there are culturally encouraged or, at least acceptable, ways of raising children that have an effect on our greater society in regards to violence and war...gun play, in my view, normalizes war, rather than giving children a way to process conflict in different ways.

FT, I don't have to prove anything...I do believe that how we raise our children influences them and society at large in ways that are sometimes measurably, sometimes not, harmful and/or violent. Let's take another example: I have raised my chldren that, although it is less common than what they generally see, another valid and equal aspect of humanity is to be in a same-sex relationship. Is this something that I shouldn't be doing, in light of the, until very recently, the dominant practice and norm against it? It's not OK for me, as a parent, to engage in influencing my kids to teach them about equality for LBGTTQ people and I should just allow the cultural norm to play out, knowing that my children will develop as they will within our social context? Is it not OK to assist them as seeing women as equal to men, in spite of the cultural influences teaching them that we're not or should we just let that norm play out?

"

It could be all of that but for kids it's generally about the acting.  Acting out dying scenes ( the longer the better) . . . getting shot is actually the priviledged position because said child claims the spotlight.

For adults, guns mean, crime, hate, power trips, sexual abuse, physical abuse, mind fucking."

How much do you want to pursue this train of thought?  For kids, being a pirate means fun and adventure.  For adults in the Gulf of Aden, piracy is a danger and a nuisance.  Kids imagine slaying dragons and saving princesses.  In real life, dragons are probably not that easy to slay and princesses demand pre-nuptials.  And so and so on.  

Play and real life are not the same.  I think that's the idea. 

"Yes, I hear what you're saying, Pinga. As I said above, this is a values question and my choice of how I want to reflect the values our family holds since both my husband and I are pacifist. I do believe that there are culturally encouraged or, at least acceptable, ways of raising children that have an effect on our greater society in regards to violence and war...gun play, in my view, normalizes war, rather than giving children a way to process conflict in different ways."

I respect that, and I hope I didn't come off as attacking your parenting.  If that is how you want to raise your kids, it's entirely your prerogative.  My problem is when the sanction of toy guns is made mandatory, with the clear implication that parents who tolerate it find violence more acceptable than those who don't.  As I've tried to explain, this is far from the case.  

Regardless of whether we do this through gun-play or not, I think it's important for a culture to create spaces, even if they exist only in the imagination, where the rules of normal civilized behaviour are suspended and fantasies can be played out.  That was the idea behind the Medieval festival of Carnivale, a day when norms were turned upside down, and peasants could pretend they were nobles and treat actual nobles like peasants.  It's also the idea behind the Halloween, where we get to play out some of our darker tendencies by assuming the role of zombies, vampires, mob bosses, etc.  

Hi mo5 & others -- i understand you are teaching pacifism.  

When my kids play pirates, swashbucklers, dragon-slayers, harry potter, star wars, lasers, etc....i think you are suggesting that they are playing out violence.

Yet, i see it as imagination playing out....

i think this one is the age -old dialogue, where we will see past each other, as our base assumptions are different.  Free-thinker places some of my thoughts above, when he discusses how children see pirates versus how adults see it.

I also do not see the correlation between homophobia & openness regarding children's play. 

Sigh....

We had dolls, male & female in our household. I would encourage such play; however, unless the one cousin came over, rarely were they used.   Yet, the lego would be turned into swashbuckling swords.  You might say, well, you could totally lock out that area of knowledge of their brains -- ie, control tv, books, etc so that they never see any such thing.  My sense is that type of control is the similair control to homophobia -- it leads to unhealthy behaviour.  I would rather have it played out, explore where it is going -- and why, and then encourage thoughts.   I say the control is similair to homophobic behaviour, in that, when a child has two mommies or two daddies in their play, a parent who is homophobic will block it. ...they will ensure it is never seen on tv or in books..nor allow that possibility -- it's about control.

An open parent acknowledges all sorts of families and encourages children to have their opportunities open.  Ditto with play.  An open parent provides opportunities to arts, sports, team, individual, books, music, games, play toys...culture, foods, relationships & so on, and provides guidance within a child's natural directions.

my son's get sick of me being non-specific in their choice of relationship, but i am adamant to be clear that it is a choice....their choice.

We have the same conversations about war, guns, good, evil, and the difficulty of tellign what is good /evil.

playing with sabres, reading fairy tales has allowed for those conversations...within their interest areas.

ps....back to the original thread -- that doesn't sound like good play, period -- as it wasn't a balance, and we have victim setup.

It reminds me of the " cooties" from when we were kids..and there would be chasing or other such chasing games.....sadly, we  used to say that they only do that if they love you...seems to me that is a setup for future victim mentality.

 Back to the orignial post, I think the issue was that two boys out of 5 children were picking on one child.

that is something to be dealt with.

I agree that gun play, water gun ambushes, pirates, star wars, lazer tag, paint ball tag......  are fun, and great fantasy play for groups of kids.

My daughter was on a coed ski team when she was 17.  All the boys wanted to go one day after practice to paint ball.  She was the only girl who went.  She felt it important to be part of the team.

She had a fabulous time, was the last man standing on one game and also got alot of paint ball size bruises on her thighs.

The guys had a blast.

My kids would build elaborate forts to defend, complex games with wildly complex rules as they played galaxy or star wars.

On our current farm we have a 22.  Everyone has taken a gun safety course and is licensed to fire.  None of us hunt but we are pretty good with tin cans'

I acknowledge we all have different parenting styles and rules we follow.  I try to not ban soething but to monitor it's use.

Of course I did ban"stupid"  as in "you are soooo stupid"   as it is just one of those insults that bugs me

I guess that's the point, lastpointe...we all have value systems built on a sense of right and wrong that we hold and we all have places beyond which our children aren't permitted to go, within our walls, don't we? Repression doesn't help children grow but what's the difference between that and active teaching of values?

Pinga, the connection of homophobia is related to how I hear the use of toy guns used in play being presented. I'm hearing that human kind has violent and dark tendencies and play helps children process that. I'm saying that I don't necessarily see that as valid. Human kind also has homophobic tendencies, as history has demonstrated time and time again. Is it therefore OK for children to be anti-gay in their play or do we assist them in seeing people as equal regardless of their sexuality? The same holds true for sexism...it's pretty dominant...do we just allow play that's reflective of it or do we use it as a place of guidance?

human kind has gay tendencies....one chooses which side to support...the homophobic or open. 

you are making a judgement on play which allows hcildren to act out their winning -- as pirates, xena warrior princess or as sorcerors.  You consisently are lining up that play with the negative -- with homophobia, with sexism.

i also counter that what we once saw as sexist behaviour is wrong, but, also our gender-neutral is equally wrong.  Therearethings which people liketo do...there are patterns...one can deny them or allow them to exist in a healthy manner -- providing opportunities for youth to explore what their base tendencides are and develop well within them.

as an aside, my son got himself (with his own money) a new video game.  He turned in some others that he'd grown tired of and got a new one all about shooting 'hostiles'. 

He played for some time, and when I'd poke my head in, I'd make comments that basically irritated him & drove him bonkers while he was trying to play.  "Eww gross!"  "Will his family miss him?"  "You're hurt - oh wait, suddenly you're better, don't ya wish real life was like that?"  "poor guys - I bet they were nice people". 

My son would just grin, and groan, and say "aww mom its just a game, I'm not turning mean or anything."  And I believe him.  There are other kids who play in such a way, that I wouldn't be convinced they were 'not turning mean'.  But my son is ok. 

I think we have a culture of pacifism in our house mostly, certainly a sense of compassionate awareness about our world & our politics & the underdog.  And we  play fight too.  I think in playing with power & winning, we learn to understand its effects on others.  That is an important lesson that underscores the importance of justice & compassion.  My house is ok.  I trust that we're just fine.