Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Love, Joy, Feminism

Home
Nonreligious
TTUAC: Boys Don’t Need Book Learning

TTUAC: Boys Don’t Need Book Learning

Last updated on: February 5, 2018 at 9:17 am by Libby Anne

TTUAC: Boys Don’t Need Book Learning 2018-02-05T09:17:05-04:00 Libby Anne

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

To Train Up A Child, chapter 20, part 4

And here we are, once again looking at the letter to his sons that Michael Pearl included toward the end of his abusive child-training manual. This week Michael touches on the sort of education they should give their sons.

As the boys get older, make sure they are not too much confined to studies. By the time they are twelve or thirteen, they should be pretty well through with school and involved in an occupation with you. Continue to expose them to concepts and ideas; but, above all, provide real life problems that they must solve–bicycle, small engine, or appliance repair. All forms of building and maintenance are essential training.

And there it is—an open endorsement of educational neglect. And no, Michael is not suggesting that homeschooling should speed things up such that boys will be finished with high school level algebra, chemistry, history, and English by seventh grade. Instead, he’s simply flat-out stating that boys shouldn’t receive more than a seventh grade academic education. He makes this very clear when we go on.

So on top of advocating child abuse—advising parents to sit on their children and whip them until they are “totally broken”—Michael also openly and brazenly advises parents to educationally neglect their children.

Michael would probably take issue with the idea that he is advocating educational neglect, arguing perhaps that he’s simply advising a different sort of education—working with one’s hands—that is in fact better for boys’ temperament and their longterm job prospects. (There is absolutely a class difference going on here.) But part of the point of compulsory education is that the parent is not the one who gets to decide for his sons what sort of career they will be able to have; ideally, school should prepare a child to embark on any career path, leaving their future open.

There’s one more issue here—Michael isn’t just endorsing educational neglect, he’s also advocating child labor violations. He’s advocating putting boys of 12 or 13 to work full time in an occupation.

Michael then follows with this:

The concept you are seeking to convey is one of independence and confidence. A child who can do it, fix it, make it, will try new things and expect to succeed. The confidence in work will translate to success in education.

This entire book is about squashing independence and confidence. This entire book is about rendering children submissive and obedient. Giving kids’ access to a giant outdoor maker space doesn’t change that, particularly if that access comes hand in hand with having to work for a living at 12 or 13. If Michael gave a whit about independence and confidence he wouldn’t lean so hard on literally training children like animals.

For example, Michael advocates setting up scenarios with a toddler where you put something interesting in a room and tell them “no” and then smack their hand every time they try to touch it. “Some people say, ‘Child-proof your home,'” he wrote. “I say, ‘Home-proof your child.'” Way back when I was a brand new mother I thought this made sense. It would certainly make life easier to not have to move things out of the baby’s reach! But I very quickly realized that I wasn’t training my daughter to obey my voice, I was training her out of her curiosity.

My experience trying to train my crawling, furniture-creeping daughter out of touching things I didn’t want her into is what first sent um warning signals about the Pearls’ methods and promoted me to investigate further. Curiosity is a good thing, I told myself aghast, and here I was trying to train her out of it. I should want her to explore her world. It’s an important stage of child development! And how hard was it to move things, really?

If Michael cared about installing independence and confidence in children, he would have written a very different book.

Here, by the way, is his defense vis a vis educational neglect:

Remember the twenty-seven-year-old Amish fellow, with his first car, going off to college in a far away city, leaving all the things that were familiar, facing challenges never before considered. I was apprehensive about his ability to succeed in this new environment. He had none of the necessary skills. His educational ability was about equal to a sixth-grader.

When I tried to warn him of the difficulties ahead, he said, “I have always been able to do everything I tried to do, I can do this also.” It was hard on him, but he got a “B” average the first semester. Whether it was the product of his hands or his head, he had learned to succeed.

Yes, that really is his defense—that if you give your kids confidence instead of, you know, actually educating them, they can totally go to college and do just fine even if they only have a sixth-grade education.

I know someone who went to school until sixth grade and was homeschooled after that. She had a fairly pleasant experience, but received almost no instruction in math and science. She had to spend years at a community college making up for this lack before she could then transfer to a four-year college. It set her back years. I know someone else who wants to study a subject that requires math knowledge, and is currently stuck in community college trying to learn the math she didn’t get while being homeschooled, wondering if her dream is attainable.

In other words, I call bull on Michael’s story about the “twenty-seven-year-old Amish fellow.” For one thing, what year did this happen in? Maybe way back in the 1970s when things were a bit more in flux, sure—but times change. For another thing, what about all the Amish kids with a sixth-grade education who have tried college and failed? The fact that this one succeeded despite his lack of an education does not justify educationally neglecting kids on purpose.

And yes, plenty of kids go through the public school system and come out unprepared, or have to spend time in community college. But we generally recognize that as a problem, and try to fix it. Michael is saying it’s not a problem. If your kids want it enough they’ll make it happen, so don’t worry about providing them with an academic foundation.

Oh look, here’s more:

If you take a young child and burden him with studies to the point of making him feel inadequate, you are building a principle of failure into him. Teach your children to work with their hands first, and the education of the mind will come more readily. Don’t leave your boys at home with Mother and the girls in a classroom setting. They should be out with the men.

So I’m confused. Are boys supposed to be educated at all? Clearly Michael doesn’t mean boys should get a solid academic foundation by age 12 or 13 that puts them in good stead later and then head outside to work with father. Boys are supposed to be taught manual labor first, they’re not to be burdened with studies, and they’re not to be left inside with the womenfolk in a classroom setting. Are they to educated at all?

Actually. Much of this book is an exercise in the child psychology of Michael. We already know that his principal beat him, and that proving that he’s the biggest and asserting his dominance is very important to Michael. But I think we now know that Michael did not have a good experience in school.

Michael advises parents not to “burden [a son] with studies to the point of making him feel inadequate.” I totally agree! But what’s interesting is that while Michael argues that manual labor can inspire a child—showing him (and he does mean him) what he is capable of doing—he does not seem to realize that education can be the same way. To much education, Michael indicates, makes a child feel inadequate. Um, no—not necessarily.

There are all sorts of different school experiences, and our schools aren’t always set up to support every child effectively. But my own two children have had an excellent school experience—they come home confident, excited, and sure in themselves and what they can learn and do if they just put their minds to it. Education, done right, can do the sorts of things Michael sees manual labor doing—inspiring, building confidence, opening the world.

Michael, however, appears to associate education with feelings of inadequacy. As problematic as that is for this section—where he’s openly endorsing not educating boys—it’s fascinating from a psychological standpoint, and actually leaves me feeling like I understand Michael (and what drives him) slightly better.

Also, remember that this book was for years incredibly popular in Christian homeschool circles, and still has its loyal followers. How many Christian homeschooling families used this passage (and others like it) to justify not adequately educating their child? Even parents with good intentions might remember paragraphs like these when things got tough and their homeschooling wasn’t going the way they wanted it to.

There are lots of kids who receive a solid academic education in Christians homeschooling families—I count myself among them. But it’s worth bearing in mind that there are also Christian homeschool leaders (Michael Pearl foremost among them, but certainly not alone) openly teach that educationally neglect your children is okay. Until children started dying, there was no denunciation of Pearl in Christian homeschooling circles, despite passages like this.

I have a Patreon! Please support my writing!

Uncategorized

To Train Up a Child

Previous Post

February 4, 2018

Lesbian Duplex 157: An Open Thread

Next Post

February 6, 2018 Hey Creationists---Stop Arguing with a Strawman

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Atheism Evangelicalism/Fundamentalism Family Feminism Homeschool Meta Parenting Patriarchy Politics Purity Quiverfull Social Justice Uncategorized Worthwhile reads

Select a Month February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

How many people were saved from Sodom?

Select your answer to see how you score.

4 6 3 5