Aged 11, Sam had learnt to swagger. He had perfected swaggering, his head held high, chin jutting, his face gleaming with self-satisfaction. He swaggered into after-school club, hands in pockets, arms akimbo, hips swinging as he approached a group of children already involved in activities. As he reached his best friend in the group, he thumped him hard on the back with his elbow (though without removing his hands from his pockets). His friend responded with a sharp backward kick on the shin - almost at once two play leaders marched over and pounced on Sam, aggressively reprimanding him for being aggressive.
Why do we worry so much about boys' aggression, which, let's face it, can often be less hurtful than the vituperative tongues of some girls of this age? As an observer, it seemed clear to me that Sam and his friends were about to have a play fight. Play fight is exactly what it says, a time when boys experiment with aggression and practise their strength and power.
They seem to do this instinctively, as soon as they reach school age, in rough-and-tumble play with each other and any other male who will take them on. They roar around kicking, hitting, swinging and climbing. So why do adults rush in to stop play fighting? 'Well,' said Sam's play leader, 'play fighting can lead to real fighting and then someone gets hurt.'
Recent research (London Metropolitan University) has shown that boys in nurseries who are allowed to fight and play with guns, on the whole, do not hurt each other too much and also develop close friendships. But adults worry about boys fighting. Could this be because in play children reflect how men and women behave towards each other? Stopping boys' aggressive play may be our way of saying, 'We don't want you to grow up to be like us - prone to violence and aggression.'
demonstrating affection During the 1960s and 70s there was a huge growth in the feminist and pacifist movements. At this time, qualities such as sensitivity and kindness were identified as female. Why? Can males not also be sensitive and kind? Boys have inherited a fundamental dilemma. They have a mother and a father. They want to be like both parents. It has become quite a task for them to find a way of being like their mothers, when feminine qualities can be experienced as compromising their masculinity. How, for example, can boys show each other affection?
Girls of this age are famous for their intense friendships, in which they share secrets and are physically very affectionate. Boys are just as fond of their friends but tend to be more awkward and embarrassed about expressing affection. Sam was typical, greeting his friend with a shove.
Boys may show affection by pushing, shoving, thumping and rolling all over the floor like puppies. So often what looks like aggression is actually the boys' equivalent of girls walking around with their arms round each other.
The fact that this affectionate play fighting may lead to real fighting in which someone gets hurt is not necessarily a bad thing. For in play fighting, boys are also trying to find the limit and extent of their body power. They are acting out their serious anxieties at this age - how strong am I? Who is stronger than me? How does it feel to hurt and to be hurt - to be the conqueror, to be the victim? To see this play only in terms of male competitiveness is mistaken. Boys learn to be boys by being allowed to practise being male.
The fact that play fighting is not as pretty or as endearing a sight as the affectionate whispering and cuddling of girls' friendships is our problem, not the boys. Girls find their pecking order much more subtly, by choosing with whom they will and will not share secrets. The more secrets a girl carries, the higher she is up the pecking order. The risk of constantly asking boys to stop fighting or being rough is that they may begin to feel that there is something bad about being a boy. They are behaving as nature intended, but they may get a message that it is better to do things the girls' way. So boys may be left with a problem of how to be a good boy and be male.
What we call aggression we can also call vitality. Asking boys not to be so aggressive can feel like asking them not to be so alive. And it is interesting that girls twittering in huddles can be just as irritating to adults as boys rolling all over the floor knocking over the furniture.
Sam's swaggering irritated his play leader. She saw it as aggressive, sullen, rude and even threatening. 'You have to come down hard on him,' she says, 'you can tell by the way he swaggers in, he's out for trouble.' Later in the year, a male student was spending time in the club. At the end of his first week, Sam swaggered up behind him (almost into him!) and, raising his hand, he greeted the turning Dave with a meeting of palms in a five, shouting, 'Yo! Sup, Dave?' 'Yo! Yo! Sam,' replied Dave, 'sup Sam?'
Naughtiness is very much a matter of how behaviour is construed. Dave regarded Sam with a mixture of amusement and affection as he watched him trying to swagger and be a cool man. His play leader was astonished at both Dave's management and Sam's response. Boys will sometimes put on a tough, aggressive front as a way of trying to cover an anxiety and insecurity about being liked and likeable. At this age, boys want to be admired for being male.
Sam wasn't being rough or a bully, or even looking for trouble, he was practising being a man. And during this exuberant rehearsal he was bound to knock people over accidentally and even hurt them. He was also bound to knock things over and even break them. But demonising him as his play leader did, and meeting his aggression with aggression, simply reinforced for him the idea that there was something wrong with being a boy. When Sam's play leader was tough on him, he understood this as an invitation to take her on. He became more male in his behaviour in an unconscious attempt to show her what a man he was becoming. In the same way, an 11-year-old girl told not to wear eye shadow in club, may well appear the next day wearing lip gloss to prove she is female.
Rare species We can sympathise with the behaviour of Sam's play leader. The lack of male play leaders in clubs means boys often only have women on whom to test out their masculinity. Boys of this age can feel very threatening to women workers. Consciously, or unconsciously, their behaviour can say, I'm rejecting what you stand for - ie all things female. It is then all too easy for women play leaders to get caught up in the boys' struggle.
Responding aggressively to aggressive boys' behaviour can be a way of insisting women are valuable, too.
Boys are naturally high spirited and boisterous. They need to be provided with activities that allow them to let off steam. Years ago this used to happen naturally as children ran free and played outside. Another restriction is that sport has been downgraded in importance in schools. In some areas, club may be one of the few places where boys can find a safe environment to develop their male identities. We know that boys who are allowed to expend energy in some rough-and-tumble play concentrate better and are better behaved later in quieter activities.
Of course, in club, the adults are there to protect the children. Boys'
rough-and-tumble play needs to be carefully monitored and there should be zero tolerance on bullying and viciousness.
Maybe our focus on boys' aggressive behaviour is missing the point. We seem to have developed the idea of delegating life into boys do this and girls do that. We would argue that vitality and sensitivity are issues for both boys and girls. We can argue that if boys were freer to be gentle, sensitive and kind, then girls would feel freer to be more ruthlessly aggressive. Perhaps we should not worry so much about persuading boys to be less aggressive, but rather worry more about encouraging girls to be more vital.
Andrea Clifford-Poston is a child, family and educational therapist. She is also author of The Secrets of Successful Parenting published by How to Books (10.99).
