Culturally contested corporeality: Regulation of the body in New Zealand and Japanese early childhood education

Abstract

Children's bodies occupy a culturally contested space in the early childhood arena. In New Zealand, children's bodies have increasingly become the focus of regulation. The early childhood centre has become a site of constant surveillance, turning teachers into 'disciplinary individuals' who are internally controlled by their own behaviour. This increased regulation mirrors that of other Western contexts. In contrast, Japanese early childhood education still places children's bodies at the centre of preschool life. Shared embodied experiences serve to consolidate certain traits and qualities identified as Japanese and intimate physical contact is valued. This article is based on ethnographic research conducted at an early childhood centre in New Zealand and a kindergarten in Japan. We argue that in New Zealand early childhood circles, the child's body has become the focus of civilising routines which limit physical touch between adults and children, and minimise attention to the body. Asian early childhood education contexts are often depicted as overly controlling. However, we suggest that while Japanese children's bodies may be subject to routine and management, they are viewed through a lens of nostalgia and innocence which allows for greater freedom of the corporeal.

Maneuvering suspicions of being a potential pedophile: experiences of male ECEC-workers in Sweden

“…They describe that this position is particularly important when the pedophile discourse is activated, for example, when abuse is reported in the media. The avoidance position is about an awareness of the risk of being regarded as a pedophile in ECEC work (Burke and Dunkan 2016) and acting upon it, since physical contact is seen as potentially abusive. The Prevent position is also about being aware of this risk.…”

“…As previously noted, the expressed awareness of being seen as a potential pedophile limits them in relation to physical contact with children, where physical contact is described as natural, good and necessary for the children's development (Burke and Dunkan 2016) and thereby also necessary for doing a professional job.…”

“…Bowlby 1969;Sroufe 2005). Self-regulation and brain maturation are facilitated by affective attachment (Schore and Schore 2008, 9), and confident and safe physical contact is assumed to be good for children's well-being (Burke and Dunkan 2016). However, a study by Brody (2015, 354) interviewed men in six countries and concludes that there is a difference in the view of what is good for children depending on who gives the physical contact, for example, parents or professionals, women or men.…”

“…The risk of increasing the distance to children in times where the fear of CSA is prevalent applies to all who work in preschools, but especially for men as they are, more often than women, suspiciously observed in their work with children, and this is when their actions are more likely to be misinterpreted (Cushman 2009;Piper and Stronach 2009;Sargent 2005). Burke and Dunkan (2016) discuss the ways in which children's bodies are regulated according to cultural constructs in the early childhood context. They argue that the child's body has become a site for anxiety and fear in western contexts:…”

“…(13) Children's bodies are thus increasingly subject to surveillance and regulation. Furthermore, the bodies of children have become more exposed through measures such as removing doors and installing mirrors (Burke and Dunkan 2016).…”