As I read Milton Gaither’s review of Jennifer Lois’ “Emotionally Layered Accounts: Homeschoolers’ Justifications for Maternal Deviance”, I sort of got stuck on the title and place of publication. While the article itself sounds interesting while it looks at how we as homeschooling mothers respond to social criticism (as opposed to leaders in the homeschool community), I just never pictured myself featured in the journal Deviant Behavior.
Homeschooling certainly isn’t the norm, but is it deviant behavior?
Adjectivedeviating from what is considered acceptable behaviour
Especially now that we have supposedly gone mainstream? I realize that we are a minority, but is every activity shared by a minority of the population deviant? Perhaps I’m stuck too much on the negative connotations of the word. After all, when you call someone a deviant, I don’t picture someone who perhaps is making some choices I don’t agree with. I see someone that I would not want to run into alone in a dark alley. Some synonyms, selected somewhat randomly:
degeneratepervertmiscreantreprobate
And that shortened list is ignoring the majority which emphasize the “especially in sexual behavior” part of the thesaurus’ definition of deviant.
At any rate, now that we are not merely weird and unsocialized, how do you justify your maternal (or paternal as the case may be) deviance?
(Some repressed part of me has the impulse to show my tongue ring–but alas I haven’t any.)
Interesting that she thinks attending homeschool groups and conventions, and immersing herself in “homeschool literature” is going to give her an adequate and representative base.
Personally, when I respond to the “charge” that my children should be in public school, I usually tell the person in question that it’s too stinkin’ bad for them if they don’t like it. Needless to say, I was not one of the 24 patient souls interviewed for this scholarly report.
:]
Dana, I prefer eccentric to deviant.
Adjective
Not having the same center; not terminating in the same point, nor directed by the same principle; deviating from stated methods, usual practice or established forms
Synonyms
Anomaly, unconventional. Okay, so screwball, nut case and crackpot are listed as synonyms too. But, that is only if you want to look at the negative side of things.
I have never been asked to justify how our family lives (though I suspect my youngest sister would like me too). Our family tried public school and it didn’t work for us. Truthfully, it didn’t work for our school district either. I think the principal did a happy dance when I pulled my daughter out of school after her seventh grade year.
Deviant implies abnormal behaviour, and from a historical perspective, what we’re doing isn’t abnormal at all.
So yeah – I don’t justify my behaviour at all. I don’t feel I have to.
This was a fun one to wake up with… I got to laugh with my coffee
I don’t consider homeschooling any more “abnormal” than choosing to eat healthy. Sure, many Americans don’t do it, but it’s a very good thing to do [smile].
~Luke
Luke, you deviant health nut! But of course, the big difference is that most of us think we should eat healthy, even if we don’t have the discipline to do so. (Why can’t raw carrots taste as good as Zero bars?)
I guess my question (and I have asked this of people who attempt to excoriate me for home schooling my sons); “What makes you think that I am required to justify my behavior to you? Have I asked you to justify sending your kids to public school?”
Perhaps my vehemence is deviant.
I actually thought it interesting that most of the mothers responded to criticism by appealing to American norms and values. Wondering if that indicates that they are not deviant. From what little I’ve read on deviance, it has to do with not identifying with society. Clearly these mothers do, or they wouldn’t appeal to these values to explain themselves.
I’ve never run into anyone who was really anti-homeschooling and required me to explain myself. I’ve certainly been asked questions, but I felt more like a novelty than an outcast by the tone of their questions.
And I’m glad you enjoyed it, Shawna. Glad no one is taking me too seriously!
On Thursdays and Sundays, we get a free copy of the local tabloid newspaper delivered to our house. I typically glance through it before tossing it into the recycling bin. This morning, there was an interesting but depressing op-ed piece entitled “Has the Right surrendered in the culture war?” Here are some excerpts:
“The resurgence of traditional Christian mores and culture that began in the late 1970s has ended….The fact that gay marriage is now a foregone conclusion is met with mostly a shrug. With Vermont’s move to pass a law allowing the practice, every state will eventually have to acknowledge the legality of gay vows administered elsewhere. Keeping local restrictions will seem pointless and out of date when the laws actually do nothing to prevent the practice. In much the same way, changes to the way the government treats abortion and embryos provoked some quibbling but mostly silence.
Exhausted by decades of the culture war and afraid of further economic setbacks, the silent majority hasn’t been roused by the issue. Perhaps it isn’t even a majority anymore.
The American Left is offering a new, less demanding version of civic religion, based on the common commandment of all major religions to aid the needy. Groups argue the idea that Christians, Muslims, Jews and others can unite to seek a more generous allotment of taxpayer dollars. This is more the role that the overtly religious minority still plays in Europe, rather than the American model of demanding that national policy not run afoul of widely accepted doctrine….
Not long ago, writing off Christian America would have caused wide offense. But the tenets of the faith that gave America its moral bearings and a sense of spiritual destiny don’t arouse much passion anymore.”
If this is the “new normal”, then I, for one, am proud to deviate from it!
Oops, I must’ve neglected to close the italic tag- the last sentence is my own words and not part of the op-ed.
Two thoughts:
First,remembering a few years ago in the NHEN forums, posting a link to a couple of pediatricians who decided that, in the face of so many differences in kids which parents and schools worried about and sought treatment for, the catchall term should be not deviant but “quirky.”
I like that. I am quirky. My kids are quirky.
Second, a futurist book I really like is The Deviant’s Advantage by Mathews and Wacker, in which the word and concept of deviant is definitely positive, profitable, desirable and important.
Dana,
I think JJ’s connotations are closer to what you’ll often find in that journal. For many academics being deviant is a very good thing. These scholars are typically political progressives whose research often emerges out of their own autobiographies, which frequently entail a rejection of a conservative upbringing. Words like “transgressive” and “deviant” have positive connotations, and words like “hetero-normativity” (to allude to Crimson wife’s comment) are negative. This makes homeschooling a very interesting test case for them I think. Homeschoolers are clearly transgressing conventional norms like schooling (good), but then of course many of them are doing so in the name of conventional morality (bad). So is homeschooling good or bad from a progressive point of view? It’s an unsettled question, which is one reason I love reviewing homeschooling research. I never know if the scholar is going to be for it or against it or a little of both.
Thank you, Mr. Gaither. And I suspected it wasn’t exactly deviant in the sense I use the word. I just found it sort of amusing.
It seems to me that homeschooling would be interesting to look at in that light because most homeschoolers I know, at least, are not doing so as any sort of anti-social or counter-cultural statement. If we’re reacting to anything, it is the extent to which liberal/progressive thinking has influenced the public schools. (Speaking only of some homeschoolers, obviously. JJ Ross definitely doesn’t fit in there!)
Interesting problem when the counter-culture mainstreams to the point that the values of the dominant culture slowly become deviant.
When confronted with such charges, individuals seeking to save face often respond by explaining how their feelings in fact are perfectly in line with societal norms. This was the strategy homeschooling mothers used in most cases.
Confronted with charges? Save face? Societal norms? Strategy?
How about natural maternal instincts and common sense that have been wired in the human psyche since the dawn of time, and it ain’t none o’ yer doggone business you nosey so-and-so? :p
I too am incredulous at some of the questions and statements made by folks who mind-boggled by the concept of homeschooling. Is it really so new and different that parents are seeking the best possible educational resources for their children? Our culture has always valued innovation and creativity, so why are homeschoolers under such a microscope when public education is still the new kid on the block in our society?
The whole premise of homeschoolers needing to ‘counter charges’ made against them makes me see spots. It isn’t a criticism of identity, IMO, but an unwarranted invasion into private family life. Public school families would feel exactly the same way if aspects of their private lives were being subject to criticism and fodder for ’studies’.
I like to tell people we homeschool because we want to be weird. Maybe now I’ll say we homeschool because we’re deviant.
Maybe we homeschoolers would prefer “creative iconoclasts”?
I don’t know…deviant is starting to grow on me.
Hmmm…”counterculture mainstreams…” It’s no longer the counterculture then, is it? It is the dominant culture. And there are hs’ers doing so for pedagogical reasons, not cultural ones. It’s impossible to generalize, isn’t it?
Milton Gaither: “This makes homeschooling a very interesting test case for [politically progressive scholars] I think. Homeschoolers are clearly transgressing conventional norms like schooling (good), but then of course many of them are doing so in the name of conventional morality (bad).
Yikes. “Political progressives” think “conventional morality” is “bad”? How are you defining “conventional morality”?
I can’t speak for “political progressives” (as I don’t really label myself as such) but I would guess that, if asked to express their concerns about homeschoolers, most “political progressives” would say something like:
1. too many homeschoolers are denying rigorous educations to girls who are instead groomed to be helpmeets.
2. too many are raising yet another generation to victimize homosexual human beings as “abominations” unworthy of equal treatment.
3. too many are teaching “young earth” misinformation (rather than 21st century science) in order adhere to historical timelines laid out in Bronze Age religious texts.
4. too many are misrepresenting American history in order to further entrench institutionalized, exclusivist Protestant Christian privilege, at the expense of the true majority of Americans who reject cries of religious nationalism.
So (in expressing concern on behalf of voiceless children), which “conventional morals” are political progressives rejecting?
CW:
Recently, I read an opinion piece similar to yours. Mine: “The coming evangelical collapse: An anti-Christian chapter in Western history is about to begin. But out of the ruins, a new vitality and integrity will rise.” It was really just a call-to-arms written by a social conservative. I got the same impression reading (conservative) Chris Stirewalt’s article, but I could be mistaken.
Is the full text of the journal article available online? I even asked my psychologist SIL if she could get it for me (Hey, sis, I’m looking for an article about people like me from Deviant Behavior. Do you get that in the hospital?) That was sort of awkward and in the end, not fruitful because they don’t get it.
Miscreant is okay, and I don’t mind reprobate. I draw the line at pervert!