Social scientists suggest that the conception of a latency period, a time of life without passion, may be something of a fiction. (Douvan and Adelson, 1966). This period is more complex than we have realized. Nevertheless, the contrasts between this period and other periods of development are impressive. Relative to what precedes and follows it, the preadolescent period is indeed low in drive and conflict; the child is absorbed in the quiet growth of ego capacities.
Erikson (1950) calls it a stage of life which is dominated by "industry." The child begins
to develop skill-reading and writing, of course, but also the myriad
opportunities of a complex culture-sports and games in an infinite variety,
the arts and crafts, collections and hobbies, and riddles and
jokes. Persons who have observed children on the verge of pubescence in
the children's groups of the Israeli kibbutz, for example, report that
the sense of shame developed at about the sixth grade is not merely a
shame phenomenon.
It also involves hostility toward boys; attempts to
create unisexual showers is, among other things, an expression of this
hostility. According to one nurse, the relationship between the sexes
at this time was "terrible." They practically "hated" each other, would
not talk to each other, and were constantly involved in petty altercations.
(Fox, 1962).
During late preadolescence friends focus on activity-on what they
are doing together-and not on each other as persons. (Douvan and Adelson,
1966). There appears to be little interest in a friend's personality
as such. Sexually precocious children are no more advanced in
general personality development than are other children. (Maccoby,
1966). Friendship is not yet relational; it is an adjunct to something
else, the partnership in work and play. Basically, the preadolescent's
emotional commitment is to his family, rather than to his friends. The
girl at this age has ordinarily not begun to date.
The sexes still meet
on the playground and judge each other by skill at running, at basketball,
at other activities, rather than by sex. The fact that one participant
is a boy and the other is a girl may be quite incidental to
the activity. Soon, however, most of the girls will secretly, or
openly, compete for the attention of boys, and a balance must be found
between ties of friendship and the demands of dating.
During recesses at school we used to play ball
together. I distinctly remember running up and
down that gym floor, Jim and I (a girl) trying
our best to beat another couple. We girls tried
to teach the fellows to dance, but they were not
much interested.1
1 All cases used throughout the book are actual case histories from the
author's files unless otherwise identified. Editing has been done only
to the extent that it was necessary to safeguard the identity of the
individuals involved.
Tom and I became the best of friends in fourth
grade. Throughout our grade school years we were
virtually inseparable. Ours was a typical
childhood relationship, one between two people
who, by chance, happened to be of the opposite
sex.
Our parents thought that everything was cute and
perfectly harmless. Actually from my standpoint,
all was quite harmless.
But, according to sociologists, if there is an innate period it can
be modified, for the notion of an innate predetermined psychological
sexuality does not correspond with existing evidence. According to a
social theory of sexual development, the individual begins life with a
biological capacity for sexual maturity and a psychosexual plasticity
capable of developing along a variety of lines depending upon the definition
of social roles in his particular culture and community as well
as upon his unique learning, especially during the formative periods of
life. (Brown and Lynn, May 1966).