Deep South

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_South

 

Approximate geographic definition of the Deep South and the greater Southern United States. The Deep South is consistently thought to include most or all of the states shown in red and extend into portions of those in orange. While the Census Bureau considers those in yellow to be part of the South, they are not typically attached to the Deep South geographic label.

Deep South
Cultural region of the United States
Country	United States
States	Alabama  Florida  Georgia (U.S. state)  Louisiana  Mississippi  South Carolina  Texas

The Deep South is a cultural and geographic subregion in the Southern United States. Historically, it was differentiated as those states most dependent on plantations and slave societies during the pre-Civil War period. The Deep South is commonly referred to as the Cotton States, given that the production of cotton was a primary cash crop.

Usage

Geographic range of the Black Belt

The term "Deep South" is defined in a variety of ways:

• Most definitions include the states Georgia, Alabama, South Carolina, Mississippi, and Louisiana.
• Texas and Florida are sometimes included, due to being peripheral states, having coastlines with the Gulf of Mexico, their history of slavery and as being part of the historical Confederate States of America. The eastern part of Texas is the westernmost extension of the Deep South while North Florida is also a part of the Deep South region, typically that area north of Ocala.
• Arkansas is sometimes included or else considered "in the Peripheral or Rim South rather than the Deep South."
• The seven states that seceded from the United States before the firing on Fort Sumter and the start of the American Civil War, and who originally formed the Confederate States of America. In order of secession they are: South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas. The first six states to secede were those that held the largest number of slaves. Ultimately the Confederacy included eleven states.
• A large part of the original "Cotton Belt". This was considered to extend from eastern North Carolina to South Carolina and through the Gulf States as far west as East Texas, and including those parts of western Tennessee and eastern Arkansas in the Mississippi embayment. Some of this is coterminous with the Black Belt, originally referring to upland areas of Alabama and Mississippi with fertile soil, which were developed for cotton under slave labor. The term came to be used for much of the Cotton Belt, which had a high percentage of African-American slave labor.

Origins

Though often used in history books to refer to the seven states that originally formed the Confederacy, the term "Deep South" did not come into general usage until long after the Civil War ended. Up until that time, "Lower South" was the primary designation for those states. When "Deep South" first began to gain mainstream currency in print in the middle of the 20th century, it applied to the states and areas of Georgia, southern Alabama, northern Florida, Mississippi, north Louisiana, southern Arkansas and East Texas, all historic areas of cotton plantations and slavery. This was the part of the South many considered the "most Southern".

Later, the general definition expanded to include all of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, and often taking in bordering areas of East Texas and North Florida. In its broadest application today, the Deep South is considered to be "an area roughly coextensive with the old cotton belt from eastern North Carolina through South Carolina west into East Texas, with extensions north and south along the Mississippi".

Major cities and urban areas

The Deep South is home to eight combined statistical areas (CSAs) with populations exceeding 1,000,000 residents, although the inclusion of these cities and exclusion of others is subject to varying geographic definitions of the region. Atlanta, with the nint eleventh largest CSAs in the United States, is the Deep South's largest population center by far. 

Metropolitan areas

Metropolitan areas with more than 1,000,000 people:

• Houston–The Woodlands–Sugar Land, TX CSA
• Atlanta–Athens–Clarke–Sandy Springs, GA CSA
• Birmingham–Hoover–Talladega, AL CSA
• Jacksonville-St. Marys-Palatka, FL-GA CSA
• New Orleans–Metarie–Hammond, LA–MS CSA
• Memphis–Forrest City, TN–MS–CSA
• Greenville–Spartanburg–Anderson, SC CSA

Rank	City	State	City (2017)	MSA (2017)	CSA (2017)
2	Atlanta	Georgia	486,290	5,884,736	6,555,956
4	Jacksonville	Florida	892,062	1,504,980	1,631,488
5	Memphis	Tennessee	652,236	1,348,260	1,510,162
6	New Orleans	Louisiana	393,292	1,275,762	1,459,766
7	Birmingham	Alabama	210,710	1,149,807	1,374,190
8	Greenville	South Carolina	68,219	895,923	1,364,062

People

2000 Census Population Ancestry Map, with African-American ancestry in purple.

 

In the 1980 census, of those people who identified solely by one European national ancestry, most European Americans identified as being of English ancestry in every Southern state except Louisiana, where more people identified as having French ancestry. A significant number also have Irish and Scotch-Irish ancestry.

With regards to people in the Deep South who reported only a single European-American ancestry group in 1980, the census showed the following self-identification in each state in this region:

• Alabama – 857,864 persons out of a total of 2,165,653 people in the state identified as "English," making them 41% of the state and the largest national ancestry group at the time by a wide margin.
• Georgia – 1,132,184 out of 3,009,484 people identified as "English," making them 37.62% of the state's total.
• Mississippi – 496,481 people out of 1,551,364 people identified as "English," making them 32.00% of the total, the largest national group by a wide margin.
• Florida – 1,132,033 people out of 5,159,967 identified "English" as their only ancestry group, making them 21.94% of the total.
• Louisiana – 440,558 people out of 2,319,259 people identified only as "English," making them 19.00% of the total people and the second-largest ancestry group in the state at the time. Those who wrote only "French" were 480,711 people out of 2,319,259 people, or 20.73% of the total state population.
• Texas – 1,639,322 people identified as "English" only out of a total of 7,859,393 people, making them 20.86% of the total people in the state and the largest ancestry group by a large margin.

These figures do not take into account people who identified as "English" and another ancestry group. When the two were added together, people who self identified as being of English with other ancestry, made up an even larger portion of southerners. South Carolina was settled earlier than those states commonly classified as the Deep South. Its population in 1980 included 578,338 people out of 1,706,966 people in the state who identified as "English" only, making them 33.88% of the total population, the largest national ancestry group by a large margin.

The map to the right was prepared by the Census Bureau from the 2000 census; it shows the predominant ancestry in each county as self-identified by residents themselves. Note: The Census said that areas with the largest "American"-identified ancestry populations were mostly settled by descendants of colonial English and others from the British Isles, French, Germans and later Italians. Those who are African-descended tended to identify as African American, although many of historically multiracial families also have ancestors of British Isles or Northern European ancestry.

As of 2003, the majority of African-descended Americans in the South live in the Black Belt counties.

Politics

From the 1870s to the early 1960s, conservative whites of the Deep South held control of state governments and overwhelmingly identified as and supported the old version of the Democratic Party. The most powerful leaders belonged to the party's moderate-to-conservative wing. The Republicans also controlled many mountain districts on the fringe of the Deep South.

At the turn of the 20th century, all of the Southern states, starting with Mississippi in 1890, passed new constitutions and other laws that effectively disenfranchised the great majority of blacks and sometimes many poor whites as well. Blacks were excluded subsequently from the political system entirely. The white Democratic-dominated state legislatures passed laws to impose white supremacy and Jim Crow, including racial segregation of public facilities. In politics the region became known for decades as the "Solid South": while this disenfranchisement was enforced, all of the states in this region were one-party states dominated by white Southern Democrats. Southern representatives accrued outsized power in the Congress and the national Democratic Party, as they controlled all the seats apportioned to southern states based on total population but represented only the richer subset of their white populations.

Major demographic changes ensued in the 20th century; during the two waves of the Great Migration, a total of six million African Americans left the South for the Northeast, Midwest, and West in order to escape the oppression and violence in the South. In some areas, white migration increased into the South, especially dating from the late 20th century. Beginning with the Goldwater–Johnson election of 1964, a significant contingent of white conservative voters in the Deep South stopped supporting national Democratic Party candidates and switched to Republicans. They still voted for many Democrats at the state and local level into the 1990s.

The Republican Party in the South had been crippled by the disenfranchisement of blacks, and the national party was unable to relieve their injustices in the South. During the Great Depression and the administration of Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt, some New Deal measures were promoted as intending to aid African Americans across the country and in the poor rural South, as well as poor whites. In the post-World War II era, Democratic Party presidents and national politicians began to support desegregation and other elements of the Civil Rights Movement, from President Harry S. Truman's desegregating the military, to John F. Kennedy's support for non-violent protests. These efforts culminated in Lyndon B. Johnson's important work in gaining Congressional approval for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965. Since then, upwards of ninety percent of African Americans in the South and the rest of the nation have voted for the Democratic Party, including 93 percent for Obama in 2012 and 88 percent for Hillary Clinton in 2016.

White southern voters consistently voted for the Democratic Party for many years, in order to hold onto Jim Crow Laws. Once Franklin Delano Roosevelt came to power in 1932, however, the limited southern electorate found itself supporting Democratic candidates who frequently did not share its views.

The weird thing about Jim Crow politics is that white southerners with conservative views on taxes, moral values, and national security would vote for Democratic presidential candidates who didn't share their views. They did that as part of a strategy for maintaining white supremacy in the South. (Yglesias 2007)

One opinion piece attributed the political and cultural changes, along with the easing of racial tensions, as the reason why southern voters began to vote for Republican national candidates, in line with their political ideology. Since then, white Southern voters have voted for Republican candidates in every presidential election except in the 1976 election when Georgia native Jimmy Carter received the Democratic nomination, the 1980 election when Carter won Georgia, the 1992 election when Arkansas native and former governor Bill Clinton won Georgia, Tennessee, Louisiana, and Arkansas, and the 1996 election when the incumbent president Clinton again won Louisiana, Tennessee and Arkansas. In 1995, Georgia Republican Newt Gingrich was elected by representatives of a Republican-dominated House as Speaker of the House.

Since the 1990s the white majority has continued to shift toward Republican candidates at the state and local levels. This trend culminated in 2014, when the Republicans swept every statewide office in the region midterm elections. As a result, the Republican party came to control all the state legislatures in the region, as well as all House seats that were not representing majority-minority districts.

Presidential elections in which the Deep South diverged noticeably from the Upper South occurred in 1928, 1948, 1964, 1968, and, to a lesser extent, in 1952, 1956, 1992, and 2008. Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee fared well in the Deep South in 2008 Republican primaries, losing only one state (South Carolina) while running (he had dropped out of the race before the Mississippi primary).

Ephebiphobia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephebiphobia

 

Teenagers in East London

 

A group of teens

 

Ephebiphobia is the fear of youth. First coined as the "fear or loathing of teenagers", today the phenomenon is recognized as the "inaccurate, exaggerated and sensational characterization of young people" in a range of settings around the world. Studies of the fear of youth occur in sociology and youth studies. It is distinguished from pedophobia by being more so focused on adolescents than prepubescent children.

Lexicology

Coinage

The word ephebiphobia is formed from the Greek ἔφηβος éphēbos, meaning "youth" or "adolescent" and φόβος phóbos, meaning "fear" or "phobia". The coinage of this term is attributed to a 1994 article by Kirk Astroth published in Phi Delta Kappan. Today, common usage occurs internationally by sociologists, government agencies, and youth advocacy organizations that define ephebiphobia as an abnormal or irrational and persistent fear or loathing of teenagers or adolescence.

Similar terms

The term paedophobia has gained popular acceptance in Europe to describe the aforementioned "fear of youth". Pediaphobia is the fear of infants and children. Hebephobia (from the Greek ἥβη, hḗbē, "youth, puberty") has also been proposed. Similar terms include adultism, which is a predisposition towards adults that is biased against children and youth, and ageism, which describes discrimination against any person because of their age.

History

The fear of youth, along with fear of street culture and the fear of crime, is said to have been in Western culture for "time immemorial". Machiavelli is said to have realized that a fear of youth is what kept the city of Florence from keeping a standing army. Ancient Venice and ancient Greece are also said to have had floundering public policy because of their fear of youth.

Early American Puritanism has been seen as reliant on a fear of youth, who were seen as embodying adventure and enlightenment, and therefore were viewed as susceptible to "decadent morality". During the Industrial Revolution, Western European and North American popular media was particularly driven to propagate the fear of children and youth in order to further the industrialization of schooling, and eventually to remove young people from the workplace when their labor became unnecessary due to mechanization and the influx of new labor.

Post-World War II France was said to have been stricken by concern for mal de jeunesse when they created policies that reflected their fear of youth. "Send them to summer camps, place others in reformatories, the rest should have some fresh air, build some athletic fields...". were the intentions of youth policies in that era. Following World War II the United States military identified the growing number of youth in the Deep South as a problematic scenario for national security. Analysts have suggested the upswing in the popular culture's fear of youth may be attributed to defense policies created in response to that threat.

"In the 1990s public fear of adolescents mounted", caused by the "increased youth access to handguns, the syndicatization of territorial youth gangs into illegal drug cartels, racist stereotyping of urban youth, academic and political pandering, media frenzy, and a spate of high-profile school shootings of students by their fellow students". The Seattle Weekly specifically cited the fear of youth as the driving factor behind Seattle, Washington's now-defunct Teen Dance Ordinance. The government of Prime Minister Tony Blair introduced the Anti-Social Behaviour Order in 1998, which has also been attributed directly to a fear of youth.

Causes

Media, marketers, politicians, youth workers and researchers have been implicated in perpetuating the fear of youth. Since young people in developed countries are expected to stay out of the workforce, any role for them outside that of consumer is potentially threatening to adults. Selling safety to parents and teachers has also been a driving force, as home security systems, cellphones, and computer surveillance usage is marketed to parents; and x-ray machines, metal detectors and closed-circuit television are increasingly sold to schools on the premise that young people are not to be trusted. These steps are in spite of the fact that experience consistently shows that monitoring youth does little to prevent violence or tragedy: the Columbine High School massacre occurred in a building with video surveillance and in-building police.

The very creation of the terms youth, adolescence and teenager have all been attributed to the fear of youth. As the western world became more industrialized, young people were increasingly driven from the workforce, including involuntary and voluntary positions, and into increasingly total institutions where they lost personal autonomy in favor of social control. Government policies outside of schools have been implicated as well, as over the last forty years curfews, anti-loitering and anti-cruising laws, and other legislation apparently targeted at teenagers have taken hold across the country. Courts have increasingly ruled against youth rights, as well. Before the 1940s "teenagers" were not listed in newspaper headlines, because as a group they did not exist. The impact of youth since World War II on western society has been immense, largely driven by marketing that proponents them as the "Other". In turn, youth are caused to behave in ways that appear different from adults. This has led to the phenomenon of youth, and in turn has created a perpetuated fear of them.

Effects

The fear of youth is thought to exist throughout the entire Western world. Sociologist Ray Oldenburg has attributed the generation gap and the "increasing segregation of youth from adults in American society" to "adult estrangement and fear of youth".

At least one major economist has proposed that the fear of youth can have grave effects on the economic health of nations. A growing number of researchers report that the fear of youth affects the health of democracy, reporting that the consequential vilification of youth has in the past, and continues to presently undermine public, social, political, religious, and cultural participation among current and future generations. 

As it affects young people themselves, ephebiphobia has been recognized as a barrier towards successful academic achievement, a barrier to successful social intervention programs, and as an indicator of the ineptitude of many adults to be successful parents.

Social discrimination

"Today citizens as a whole as well as people who work with children live in fear of youth in our homes and schools and on our streets". While "society loves their attractive bodies, youthfulness and commercial firepower", we also "vilify adolescents as a noncontributing drain on the economy and our democracy". In the mainstream media, young people are most often portrayed as self-absorbed and apathetic, uninterested in the common good or in advancing social goals.

Many social programs and social critics view the fear of youth as a condemning force against youth throughout society, particularly when coupled with racism. Poet Gwendolyn Brooks was applauded for her consciousness-raising work around the fear of youth, particularly young African-Americans. Popular contemporary beliefs about adolescents are different from historical narratives; in the past youth were portrayed as "the future" and the "leaders of tomorrow"; today they are seen as "a source of worry, not potential," contributing to a fear of adolescents, especially racial and ethnic minorities. In turn this racist and adultist perspective informs urban law enforcement, public schools, and social services. Sociologists have suggested that much of the current spread of the fear of youth is due to "adult anxiety over the shifting racial mix in the general population". The effects of sexism are similarly reported to be amplified by ephebiphobia. However, New York University professor Pedro Noguera has suggested that the fear of youth extends beyond color boundaries, as "skateboarders, punks, even straight-laced suburban teenagers can evoke anxiety among adults by congregating in large numbers in places deemed off-limits to youth".

The ability of youth to participate throughout society is seen as compromised because of the fear of youth, and is often disguised as a paternalism or protectionism among adults. Additionally, scholar Henry Jenkins, "links criticism of new media with fear of adolescents, who are the most eager adopters. Teen culture seems meaningless and dangerous without an appreciation of its context".

Commercial gain

Academics specifically acknowledge the force of ephebiphobia in the commercial sector, where this fear of youth has been extensively exploited for financial gain. This is elaborated on by researchers and social critics who claim that popular media, including cinema and television, specifically exacerbated society's fear of youth for financial gain, as one study reports, "Extreme fear of youth is an established media panic".

Pulp novels in the 1950s were mass-produced to specifically cash in on the growing fear of youth that was spreading throughout society. Ironically, it has also been said that popular media's effects on young people are not as powerful as the fear of youth, which drives the fear of technology and in turn perpetuates the fear of youth.

Governmental policy

Decision-making by government agencies, including public schools, policing and courts, have been found to be driven by the fear of youth. The fear of adolescents has been said to cause a disjunction between what is said about the value of young people and what is done to them in education and social services, and causes them to be seen, "primarily as threats—to persons, to institutions, to status quo". A number of observers have indicated the deliberate perpetuation of mass social ephebiphobia in order to elicit particular public and social responses. American sociologist Mike Males has identified trends among politicians and policy-makers of stoking the fear of youth among society in order to make headway in political campaigns and build popular support for otherwise "generate media sensation and public fear". Similarly, the fear of youth has been identified as the driving factor behind many governmental programs designed to combat so-called "youth violence," in which the actions of few youth are attributed to the population of youth in general. In a specific instance, "In Dallas, fear of youth led to accelerated surveillance and policing, particularly in its poorest area, Gaston". The fear of adolescents is also said to have caused many governments to lower their age of criminal responsibility and escalate the detention of young people from childhood through adulthood.

Education

Examining the Black Power movement of the 1970s, one researcher wrote, "The common adult dislike and fear of youth is compounded by the teacher's fear—fear of losing control in the classroom, fear of losing one's authority". A specific increase in the fear of youth in schools following the Columbine High School massacre of 1999 is seen as a particular cause in evidence suggesting an overall decrease in student engagement throughout high schools today. Fear of youth has led to the development of zero tolerance policies in many schools, which in turn is attributed as the cause of the increase in arrests for juvenile crime on school campuses, which has promoted the fear of youth and led school administrators to call police for infractions once dealt with internally.

Combating ephebiphobia

The American Library Association has developed a resource collection for librarians specifically to combat the ephebiphobia by promoting customer service skills specific to youth. However, sociologist Mike Males has suggested that ephebiphobia does not analyze the problem deep enough, as the fear of adult stereotype of adolescence, or kourophobia, is the core challenge facing young people today

Adultism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adultism

Adultism is "the power adults have over children". More narrowly, adultism is defined as "prejudice and accompanying systematic discrimination against young people". On a more philosophical basis, the term has also been defined as "bias towards adults... and the social addiction to adults, including their ideas, activities, and attitudes".

Etymology

Coinage

The word adultism was used by Patterson Du Bois in 1903, and appears in French psychology literature in 1929, describing the influence of adults over children. It was seen as a condition wherein a child possessed adult-like "physique and spirit", and was exemplified by,

A boy of 12 and a girl of 13 who had the spirit and personality of adults.... They were placed in institutions because of stealing and prostitution. These forms of precocity lead the individual into difficulties and should be recognized early in the development of the individual.

This definition was superseded by a late 1970s journal article proposing that adultism is the abuse of the power that adults have over children. The author identified examples of adultism not only in parents but in teachers, psychotherapists, the clergy, police, judges, and juries.

Usage

Adultism is defined as the "behaviors and attitudes based on the assumptions that adults are better than young people, and entitled to act upon young people without agreement". It is also seen as, "an addiction to the attitudes, ideas, beliefs, and actions of adults." Adultism is popularly used to describe any discrimination against young people and is distinguished from ageism, which is simply prejudice on the grounds of age; not specifically against youth. Adultism is ostensibly caused by fear of children and youth. It has been suggested that 'adultism, which is associated with a view of the self that trades on rejecting and excluding child-subjectivity, has always been present in Western culture'.

Fletcher suggests that adultism has three main expressions throughout society:

• Attitudinal Adultism: Personal feelings, assumptions, and beliefs that form a person's attitudes about young people. This is also called internalized adultism.
• Cultural Adultism: The shared attitudes, including beliefs and customs, promoting the assumption that adults are superior to anyone who is not identified as an adult, simply because of their age. This is also called social adultism.
• Structural Adultism: The normalization and legitimization of historical, cultural, institutional and interpersonal dynamics that routinely advantage adults while producing cumulative and chronic adverse outcomes for young people. This is also referred to as institutional adultism.

A study by the Crisis Prevention Institute of the prevalence of adultism found an increasing number of local youth-serving organizations addressing the issue. For instance, a local program in Oakland, California, describes the impact of adultism, which "hinders the development of youth, in particular, their self-esteem and self-worth, ability to form positive relationships with caring adults, or even see adults as allies", on their website.

Similar terms

Adultism is used to describe the oppression of children and young people by adults, which is seen as having the same power dimension in the lives of young people as racism and sexism. It is treated as a generalization of paternalism, allowing for the broad force of adulthood beyond males, and may be witnessed in the infantalization of children and youth. Pedophobia (the fear of children) and ephebiphobia (the fear of youth) have been proposed as the antecedents to adultism. Gerontophobia, or its antonym, gerontocracy, may be extensions of adultism.

Similar terms such as adult privilege, adultarchy, and adultcentrism have been proposed as alternatives which are more morphologically parallel. Some activists alternatively call adultism "youthism," or "childism" equating it to sexism and heterosexism. The opposite of adultism is jeunism, which is defined as the preference of young people and adolescents over adults. 

At least one prominent organization describes discrimination against youth as ageism, which is any form of discrimination against anyone due to their age. The National Youth Rights Association argues that ageism is a more natural and understandable term than adultism and thus is more commonly used among the young people affected by this discrimination. Advocates of using 'ageism' also believe it makes common cause with older people fighting against their own form of age discrimination. However, a national organization called Youth On Board counters this, arguing that "addressing adultist behavior by calling it ageism is discrimination against youth in itself."

 

Causes

In his seminal 1978 article, Flasher explained that adultism is born of the belief that children are inferior, professing that adultism can be manifested as excessive nurturing, possessiveness, or over-restrictiveness, all of which are consciously or unconsciously geared toward excessive control of a child. It has been associated with psychological projection and splitting, a process whereby 'the one with the power attributes his or her unconscious, unresolved sexual and aggressive material' to the child – 'both the dark and the light side...hence the divine child/deficit child' split. 

Recently, theologians Heather Eaton and Matthew Fox proposed, "Adultism derives from adults repressing the inner child." John Holt stated, "An understanding of adultism might begin to explain what I mean when I say that much of what is known as children's art is an adult invention." That perspective is seemingly supported by Maya Angelou, who remarked: 

“

We are all creative, but by the time we are three or four years old, someone has knocked the creativity out of us. Some people shut up the kids who start to tell stories. Kids dance in their cribs, but someone will insist they sit still. By the time the creative people are ten or twelve, they want to be like everyone else.

”

Evidence of adultism

A 2006/2007 survey conducted by the Children's Rights Alliance for England and the National Children's Bureau asked 4,060 children and young people whether they have ever been treated unfairly based on various criteria (race, age, sex, sexual orientation, etc.). A total of 43% of British youth surveyed reported experiencing discrimination based on their age, substantially more than other categories of discrimination like sex (27%), race (11%), or sexual orientation (6%).

Classification

In addition to Fletcher, other experts have identified multiple forms of adultism, offering a typology that includes internalized adultism, institutionalized adultism, cultural adultism, and other forms. 

Internalized adultism

In a publication published by the W. K. Kellogg Foundation, University of Michigan professor Barry Checkoway asserts that internalized adultism causes youth to "question their own legitimacy, doubt their ability to make a difference" and perpetuate a "culture of silence" among young people.

"Adultism convinces us as children that children don't really count," reports an investigative study, and it "becomes extremely important to us [children] to have the approval of adults and be 'in good' with them, even if it means betraying our fellow children. This aspect of internalized adultism leads to such phenomena tattling on our siblings or being the 'teacher's pet,' to name just two examples."

Other examples of internalized adultism include many forms of violence imposed upon children and youth by adults who are reliving the violence they faced as young people, such as corporal punishment, sexual abuse, verbal abuse, and community incidents that include store policies prohibiting youth from visiting shops without adults, and police, teachers, or parents chasing young people from areas without just cause.

Institutional adultism

Institutional adultism may be apparent in any instance of systemic bias, where formalized limitations or demands are placed on people simply because of their young age. Policies, laws, rules, organizational structures, and systematic procedures each serve as mechanisms to leverage, perpetuate, and instill adultism throughout society. These limitations are often reinforced through physical force, coercion or police actions and are often seen as double standards. This treatment is increasingly seen as a form of gerontocracy.

Institutions perpetuating adultism may include the fiduciary, legal, educational, communal, religious, and governmental sectors of a community. Social science literature has identified adultism as "within the context of the social inequality and the oppression of children, where children are denied human rights and are disproportionately victims of maltreatment and exploitation."

See also:

• Adoption of new parents
• Access to healthcare
• Age of candidacy
• Age of consent
• Age of majority
• Age-based segregation
• cohabitation with relatives/close friends
• Compulsory education
• The Draft
• Access to contraceptives
• Curfews
• Criminalization
• emancipation laws in each state/country
• Freedom of religion
• Drinking age
• Over-medicating children
• Child soldiers
• Policing
• Public school choice
• Voluntary employment when legal or approved by parent/the state
• Voting age

as well as:

• Legal issues affecting adolescence and
• Total institutions

Cultural adultism

Cultural adultism is a much more ambiguous, yet much more prevalent, form of discrimination or intolerance towards youth. Any restriction or exploitation of people because of their young age, as opposed to their ability, comprehension, or capacity, may be said to be adultist. These restrictions are often attributed to euphemisms afforded to adults on the basis of age alone, such as "better judgment" or "the wisdom of age". A parenting magazine editor comments, "Most of the time people talk differently to kids than to adults, and often they act differently, too." This summarizes cultural adultism. For examples see:

• Aesthetics
• Child abuse
• Academic misconceptions of youth
• Commercialization
• Online filtenrs
• Corporal punishment
• Children's literature
• Child labor
• Mass marketig to youth
• Peer pressure
• Child prostitution
• Controversy over sagging
• Scapegoating
• Stereotypes about Youth subculture
• Teen sex
• Drinking age
• Generation gap
• poverty
• unemployment gaps in ages 18 to 25
• Moralism
• Mental illness
• Runaways

Results

Social stratification

Discrimination against age is increasingly recognized as a form of bigotry in social and cultural settings around the world. An increasing number of social institutions are acknowledging the positions of children and teenagers as an oppressed minority group. Many youth are rallying against the adultist myths spread through mass media from the 1970s through the 1990s.

Research compiled from two sources (a Cornell University nationwide study, and a Harvard University study on youth) has shown that social stratification between age groups causes stereotyping and generalization; for instance, the media-perpetuated myth that all adolescents are immature, violent and rebellious. Opponents of adultism contend that this has led to growing number of youth, academics, researchers, and other adults rallying against adultism and ageism, such as organizing education programs, protesting statements, and creating organizations devoted to publicizing the concept and addressing it.

Simultaneously, research shows that young people who struggle against adultism within community organizations have a high rate of impact upon said agencies, as well as their peers, the adults who work with them, and the larger community to which the organization belongs.

Cultural responses

There may be many negative effects of adultism, including ephebiphobia and a growing generation gap. A reactive social response to adultism takes the form of the children's rights movement, led by young people who strike against being exploited for their labor. Numerous popular outlets are employed to strike out against adultism, particularly music and movies. Additionally, many youth-led social change efforts have inherently responded to adultism, particularly those associated with youth activism and student activism, each of which in their own respects have struggled with the effects of institutionalized and cultural adultism.

Academic developments

A growing number of governmental, academic, and educational institutions around the globe have created policy, conducted studies, and created publications that respond to many of the insinuations and implications of adultism. Much of popular researcher Margaret Mead's work can be said to be a response to adultism. Current researchers whose work analyzes the effects of adultism include sociologist Mike Males and critical theorist Henry Giroux. The topic has recently been addressed in liberation psychology literature, as well.

Addressing adultism

Any inanimate or animate exhibition of adultism is said to be "adultist". This may include behaviors, policies, practices, institutions, or individuals.

Educator John Holt proposed that teaching adults about adultism is a vital step to addressing the effects of adultism, and at least one organization and one curriculum do just that. Several educators have created curricula that seek to teach youth about adultism, as well. Currently, organizations responding to the negative effects of adultism include the United Nations, which has conducted a great deal of research in addition to recognizing the need to counter adultism through policy and programs. The CRC has particular Articles (5 and 12) which are specifically committed to combating adultism. The international organization Human Rights Watch has done the same.

Common practice accepts the engagement of youth voice and the formation of youth-adult partnerships as essential steps to resisting adultism.

Some ways to challenge adultism also include youth-led programming and participating in youth-led organizations. These are both ways of children stepping up and taking action to call out the bias towards adults. Youth-led programming allows the voices of the youth to be heard and taken into consideration. Taking control of their autonomy can help children take control of their sexuality, as well. Moving away from an adultist framework leads to moving away from the idea that children aren't capable of handling information about sex and their own sexuality. Accepting that children are ready to learn about themselves will decrease the amount of misinformation spread to them by their peers and allow them to receive accurate information from individuals educated on the topic.

Criticism

In its most extreme form, the target of the advocates of addressing adultism is "the more or less conscious, uncontrolled, and covert exercise of power over the child by the adult ... this wielding of power by adults" per se. Such an attack on any adult power may be fuelled by what has been called "the homunculus idea about children ... to many grown-ups a child is a Small Adult. They do not understand that a child carries different kinds of problems than an adult does".

In its milder form, "adultism is about the misuse of power and does not refer to the normal responsibilities of adults in relation to children". Therefore, "addressing adultism is not about reversing the power structure ... [or] completely eradicating it": rather, "shedding adultism involves a negotiation of decisions."

Convention on the Rights of the Child

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_the_Rights_of_the_Child 

 

Convention on the Rights of the Child

Parties to the convention   Signed, but not ratified   Non-signatory
Signed	30 November 1989
Location	New York City
Effective	2 September 1990
Condition	20 ratifications
Signatories	140
Parties	196 (all eligible states except the United States)
Depositary	UN Secretary-General
Languages	Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian, Spanish

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (commonly abbreviated as the CRC or UNCRC) is a human rights treaty which sets out the civil, political, economic, social, health and cultural rights of children. The Convention defines a child as any human being under the age of eighteen, unless the age of majority is attained earlier under national legislation.

Nations that ratify this convention are bound to it by international law. Compliance is monitored by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, which is composed of members from countries around the world. Once a year, the Committee submits a report to the Third Committee of the United Nations General Assembly, which also hears a statement from the CRC Chair, and the Assembly adopts a Resolution on the Rights of the Child.

Governments of countries that have ratified the Convention are required to report to, and appear before, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child periodically to be examined on their progress with regards to the advancement of the implementation of the Convention and the status of child rights in their country. Their reports and the committee's written views and concerns are available on the committee's website.

The UN General Assembly adopted the Convention and opened it for signature on 20 November 1989 (the 30th anniversary of its Declaration of the Rights of the Child). It came into force on 2 September 1990, after it was ratified by the required number of nations. Currently, 196 countries are party to it, including every member of the United Nations except the United States.

Two optional protocols were adopted on 25 May 2000. The First Optional Protocol restricts the involvement of children in military conflicts, and the Second Optional Protocol prohibits the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography. Both protocols have been ratified by more than 170 states.

A third optional protocol relating to communication of complaints was adopted in December 2011 and opened for signature on 28 February 2012. It came into effect on 14 April 2014.

Contents

The Convention deals with the child-specific needs and rights. It requires that the "nations that ratify this convention are bound to it by international law". Ratifying states must act in the best interests of the child. In all jurisdictions implementing the Convention requires compliance with child custody and guardianship laws as that every child has basic rights, including the right to life, to their own name and identity, to be raised by their parents within a family or cultural grouping, and to have a relationship with both parents, even if they are separated. 

The Convention obliges states to allow parents to exercise their parental responsibilities. The Convention also acknowledges that children have the right to express their opinions and to have those opinions heard and acted upon when appropriate, to be protected from abuse or exploitation, and to have their privacy protected, and it requires that their lives not be subject to excessive interference. 

The Convention also obliges signatory states to provide separate legal representation for a child in any judicial dispute concerning their care and asks that the child's viewpoint be heard in such cases.

The Convention forbids capital punishment for children. In its General Comment 8 (2006) the Committee on the Rights of the Child stated that there was an "obligation of all state parties to move quickly to prohibit and eliminate all corporal punishment and all other cruel or degrading forms of punishment of children". Article 19 of the Convention states that state parties must "take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence", but it makes no reference to corporal punishment. The Committee's interpretation of this section to encompass a prohibition on corporal punishment has been rejected by several state parties to the Convention, including Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom. 

The European Court of Human Rights has referred to the Convention when interpreting the European Convention on Human Rights.

Global standards and cultural relativism

Global human rights standards were challenged at the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna (1993) when a number of governments (prominently China, Indonesia, Malaysia and Iran) raised serious objections to the idea of universal human rights. There are unresolved tensions between "universalistic" and "relativistic" approaches in the establishment of standards and strategies designed to prevent or overcome the abuse of children's capacity to work.

Child marriage and slavery

Some scholars link slavery and slavery-like practices for many child marriages. Child marriage as slavery is not directly addressed by the Convention on the Rights of the Child. 

States party and signatories

Currently 196 countries are parties to the treaty (some with stated reservations or interpretations). This includes every member of the United Nations (except the United States), plus the Cook Islands, Niue, the State of Palestine, and the Holy See. The United States has not ratified it. South Sudan did not sign the convention, however ratification was complete in January 2015. Somalia's domestic ratification finished in January 2015 and the instrument was deposited with the United Nations in October 2015.

All successor states of Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Czech Republic, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Slovenia, and Slovakia) made declarations of succession to the treaty and currently apply it.

The convention does not apply in the territories of Akrotiri and Dhekelia, Gibraltar, Guernsey and Tokelau.

Azerbaijan

Azerbaijan ratified Convention on the Rights of the Child on 21 July 1992. In terms of the ratification of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, a significant number of laws, decrees and resolutions were approved in Azerbaijan by the President and the Cabinet of Ministers focusing on the development of the child welfare system. In this regard, the Convention №182 on "Elimination of the worst forms of child labour" and Recommendation №190 of the International Labour Organization and the Hague Convention on International adoption of children were ratified by Milli Majlis in 2004.

There is a concern over the administration of juvenile justice in Azerbaijan, mostly regarding compliance with articles 37, 39 and 40 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, as well as other relevant standards such as the Beijing Rules, the Riyadh Guidelines and the United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty. Therefore, international organizations assisted Azerbaijan to improve the situation in the field of juvenile justice. Juvenile offenders have been added to the Presidential pardons on a regular basis.

Azerbaijan has built cooperation with many international organizations, in particular with UNICEF in the field of child protection. In 1993, UNICEF began its activity in Azerbaijan. In 2005, Azerbaijan and UNICEF signed a 5-year country program. The country program for 2005-2009 was implemented in the field of child protection, children's health and nutrition, children's education and youth health, their development and participation. In addition, UNICEF supports Azerbaijan in developing juvenile justice system, establishing alternative care system and raising awareness among youth about HIV/AIDS.

Canada

Canada became a signatory to the Convention on 28 May 1990 and ratified in 1991. Youth criminal laws in Canada underwent major changes resulting in the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) which went into effect on 1 April 2003. The Act specifically refers to Canada's different commitments under the Convention. The convention was influential in the administrative Law decision of Baker v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration).

India

India ratified UNCRC on 11 December 1992, agreeing in principles all articles except with certain reservations on issues relating to child labor. In India there is law that children under the age of 18 should not work, but there is no outright ban on child labor, and the practice is generally permitted in most industries except those deemed "hazardous". Although a law in October 2006 banned child labor in hotels, restaurants, and as domestic servants, there continues to be high demand for children as hired help in the home. Current estimates as to the number of child laborers in the country range from the government's conservative estimate of 4 million children under 14 years of age.

In 2016, the Child and Adolescent Labour (Amendment) Act was introduced, which prohibited economic employment of children under the age of 14 years, and prohibited employment of adolescent (14-17 years of age) in hazardous occupations. Few exceptions exist in case of children under 14 years - they can aid in the family enterprise, and participate in the entertainment industry, provided that it doesn't harm their school education, and is not in between 7 pm to 8 am.

Iran

Iran has adhered to the convention (except for alleged child slavery) since 1991 and ratified it in the Parliament in 1994. Upon ratification, Iran made the following reservation: "If the text of the Convention is or becomes incompatible with the domestic laws and Islamic standards at any time or in any case, the Government of the Islamic Republic shall not abide by it." Iran has also signed both optional protocols which relate to the special protection of children against involvement in armed conflict and the sale of children and sexual exploitation.

Although Iran is a state party to the Convention, international human rights organisations and foreign governments routinely denounced executions of Iranian child offenders as a violation of the treaty. But on 10 February 2012, Iran's parliament changed the controversial law of executing juveniles. In the new law, the age of 18 (solar year) would be considered the minimum age for adulthood and offenders under this age will be sentenced under a separate law. Based on the previous Islamic law, which was revised, girls at the age of 9 and boys at 15 (lunar year, 11 days shorter than a solar year) were fully responsible for their crimes.

"According to Islamic sources, the criterion for criminal responsibility is reaching the age of maturity which, according to the Shi'ite School of the IRI, is 9 lunar years (8 years and 9 months) for girls and 15 lunar years (14 years and 7 months) for boys."

Ireland

Ireland signed the Convention on the Rights of the Child on 30 September 1990 and ratified it, without reservation, on 28 September 1992. In response to criticisms expressed in the 1998 review by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child in Geneva, the Irish government established the office of Ombudsman for Children and drew up a national children's strategy. In 2006, following concerns expressed by the committee that the wording of the Irish Constitution does not allow the State to intervene in cases of abuse other than in very exceptional cases, the Irish government undertook to amend the constitution to make a more explicit commitment to children's rights.

Israel

Israel ratified the Convention in 1991. In 2010, UNICEF criticized Israel for its failure to create a government-appointed commission on children's rights or to adopt a national children's rights strategy or program in order to implement various Israeli laws addressing children's rights. The report criticizes Israel for holding that the Convention does not apply in the West Bank and for defining as Palestinians under the age of 16 in the occupied territories as children, even though Israeli law defines a child as being under 18, in line with the Convention. A contemporaneous report by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development found that Israel's investment in children is below the international average and the actual investment had fallen between 1995 and 2006. In 2012, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child criticized Israel for its bombing attacks on Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, stating, "Destruction of homes and damage to schools, streets and other public facilities gravely affect children" and called them "gross violations of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, its Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict and international humanitarian law". It also criticized Palestinian rocket attacks from Gaza on southern Israel which traumatized Israeli children, calling on all parties to protect children.

New Zealand

New Zealand ratified the Convention on 6 April 1993 with reservations concerning the right to distinguish between persons according to the nature of their authority to be in New Zealand, the need for legislative action on economic exploitation—which it argued was adequately protected by existing law, and the provisions for the separation of juvenile offenders from adult offenders.

In 1994, the Court of Appeal of New Zealand dismissed the suggestion that the Minister for Immigration and his department were at liberty to ignore the convention, arguing that this would imply that the country's adherence was "at least partly window-dressing".

The Children's Commissioner Act 2003 enhanced the office of Children's Commissioner, giving it significantly stronger investigative powers. The Office of the Children's Commissioner is responsible for convening the UNCROC Monitoring Group, which monitors the New Zealand Government's implementation of the Children's Convention, it's Optional Protocols and the Government's response to recommendations from the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child. The monitoring group comprises members from the Human Rights Commission (New Zealand), UNICEF New Zealand, Action for Children and Youth Aotearoa and Save the Children New Zealand.

In May 2007, New Zealand passed the Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Act 2007, which removed the defence of "reasonable force" for the purpose of correction. In its third and final vote, Parliament voted 113 to eight in favour of the legislation.

Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia ratified the Convention in 1996, with a reservation "with respect to all such articles as are in conflict with the provisions of Islamic law" which is the national law. The Committee on the Rights of the Child, which reviewed Saudi Arabia's treatment of children under the Convention in January 2005, strongly condemned the government for its practice of imposing the death penalty on juveniles, calling it "a serious violation of the fundamental rights". The committee said it was "deeply alarmed" over the discretionary power judges hold to treat juveniles as adults: In its 2004 report the Saudi Arabian government had stated that it "never imposes capital punishment on persons ... below the age of 18". The government delegation later acknowledged that a judge could impose the death penalty whenever he decided that the convicted person had reached his or her majority, regardless of the person's actual age at the time of the crime or at the time of the scheduled execution.

United Kingdom

The United Kingdom ratified the Convention on 16 December 1991, with several declarations and reservations, and made its first report to the Committee on the Rights of the Child in January 1995. Concerns raised by the Committee included the growth in child poverty and inequality, the extent of violence towards children, the use of custody for young offenders, the low age of criminal responsibility, and the lack of opportunities for children and young people to express views. The 2002 report of the Committee expressed similar concerns, including the welfare of children in custody, unequal treatment of asylum seekers, and the negative impact of poverty on children's rights. In September 2008, the UK government decided to withdraw its reservations and agree to the Convention in these respects.

The 2002 report's criticism of the legal defence of "reasonable chastisement" of children by parents, which the Committee described as "a serious violation of the dignity of the child", was rejected by the UK Government. The Minister for Children, Young People and Families commented that while fewer parents are using smacking as a form of discipline, the majority said they would not support a ban.

In evidence to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, the Committee was criticised by the Family Education Trust for "adopting radical interpretations of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child in its pursuit of an agenda". The Joint Committee's report recommended that "the time has come for the Government to act upon the recommendations of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child concerning the corporal punishment of children and the incompatibility of the defence of reasonable chastisement with its obligations under the Convention." The UK Government responded that "the use of physical punishment is a matter for individual parents to decide".

Although child slavery is difficult to gauge within the UK, child slaves are imported into the UK and sold.

United States

The United States government played an active role in the drafting of the Convention and signed it on 16 February 1995, but has not ratified it. It has been claimed that American opposition to the Convention stems primarily from political and religious conservatives. For example, The Heritage Foundation sees "a civil society in which moral authority is exercised by religious congregations, family, and other private associations is fundamental to the American order". and the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) argues that the CRC threatens homeschooling.

The United States had in the past permitted the execution and life imprisonment of juvenile offenders, in contravention of the Article 37 of the Convention. The 2005 Supreme Court landmark decision in Roper v. Simmons declared juvenile executions to be unconstitutional as "cruel and unusual punishment"; in 2012, the Court held that mandatory sentences of life without the possibility of parole are unconstitutional for juvenile offenders.

State laws regarding the practice of closed adoption may also require overhaul in light of the Convention's position that children have a right to identity from birth.

During his 2008 campaign for President, Senator Barack Obama described the failure to ratify the Convention as "embarrassing" and promised to review the issue but he never did. No President of the United States has submitted the treaty to the United States Senate requesting its advice and consent to ratification since the US signed it in 1995.

The United States has ratified two of the optional protocols to the Convention, the Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, and the Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography.

Optional protocols

Two optional protocols were adopted by the UN General Assembly. The first, the Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict requires parties to ensure that children under the age of 18 are not recruited compulsorily into their armed forces, and calls on governments to do everything feasible to ensure that members of their armed forces who are under 18 years do not take part in hostilities. This protocol entered into force on 12 July 2002. As of 20 January 2020, 170 states are party to the protocol and another 10 states have signed but not ratified it.

The second, the Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography, requires parties to prohibit the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography. It entered into force on 18 January 2002. As of 20 January 2020, 176 states are party to the protocol and another 7 states have signed but not ratified it.

A third, the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a Communications Procedure, which would allow children or their representatives to file individual complaints for violation of the rights of children, was adopted in December 2011 and opened for signature on 28 February 2012. The protocol currently has 51 signatures and 46 ratifications: it entered into force on 14 April 2014 following the tenth ratification three months beforehand