Why do children grow up learning differently than what their parents teach them?

Why do children grow up learning differently than what their parents teach them?

Introduction

Review

In this article Prieur expresses the power of class and gender that are capable of determining the environment of the individual where they are brought up and the way it results in developing strategies of those are lacking both the symbolic power and the economic capital to improve their social position, sexual fulfillment and achieving happiness. Prieur was able to analyze through a significant ethnographic detail that is basically a qualitative research about the boys who grew up to be vestidas and jotas and the way they have adopted the fashion of feminism as their public identities and the way they practice love and sex with the mayates, as they phrase their “masculine-appearing” sexual partners. Prieur also clarifies that even in the existing rule of the ironclad gender complementarity that shows being a homosexual is turning into a woman, where as the mayates who have sex with them are considering themselves as normal men.

Even though she's viewed to admire the inner and pluck resources of these homosexuals who are living at a danger and risk within the streets of the Mexico city, that are also continuing to face violence with the hands of these lovers and johns. But she just thinks of it as that they are portraying feminism and that is all. She also explains these as the choices of life that they have made that symbolizes of violence. While Prieur was performing this study she observed the difference that this took place in the working class community and she also visualized that they had a lot of courage and conventionality while adapting to a different sex. In this she also had look over the Latin America where she observed similar patterns and where male homosexuality was on rise which also related to the distribution of the power in the specific society. There was also an interesting comparison between the middle-class and the working-class sexuality that have significant implications on the future of mayate and jota identities where more Mexicans are being exposed. According to the study, Prieur identified that the parents are really not involved in shaping their children except for providing them with the genes. The Peers were the crucial and main factors that lead in shaping their lives and the way they grew up. There is this author Judith Harris, who proposed her argument against this where she studied the whole thing and kept in mind all the aspects of the book and because of which she won many prizes, where she challenged both popular assumptions and scientific researches about the growing up of children. Since the researchers are not capable of predicting the achievements and personalities of children with the evidence related to their parents so these effects are contradictory and weak on the children.

Hypothesis

Whether the children become what the parents teach them to be and the way they ...