The Myth of Normal 150

In cultures with their priorities in order, young friendships blossom in a community setting, overseen by nurturing adults. In our society, peer interactions occur not in the context of protective adult relationships but away from them. When children spend much of their waking time away from caring adults, their brains are compelled to choose between competing attachments: the natural call of parental connection or the siren song of the peer world. If parents lose the contest, children must, by default, look to one another. Which means that they, too, lose. All this is exacerbated by the blandishments of a pop culture that holds up immature adolescent celebrities as idols to be “followed”—a telling word—on social media by multiple millions of children and teens. In a previous age, these young people would have seen mature adult figures as the ones to emulate. Some parents reading this may protest, “But my kid’s friends seem lovely, accepting, and open-minded!” Real and worth celebrating as those qualities may be, a child finding her primary succor and comfort in her peer group is more a sign of “cope” than a cause for hope, especially at younger ages. The noblest of peers are hard-pressed to supply the abiding connection that developmental safety demands. Among other shortcomings, children cannot count on each other to remain internally consistent: many of us can recall an unhappy first day of school when we were shocked to realize that our erstwhile friends had morphed over the summer into something far less friendly. Nor can they offer one another the unconditional positive regard that nourishes healthy growth, a quality even well-meaning adults often find challenging to provide. As a rule, immature peers are constitutionally incapable of accepting each other “as is”; or holding space for the vulnerable experience of emotion, let alone its open expression; or relieving one another’s stressed states; or celebrating or even tolerating temperamental differences. Left to its own callow devices, the peer group can offer only acceptance that is highly conditional and thus insecure, often demanding selfsuppression and conformity in place of true individuality. In more dire cases, peer orientation exposes children to the threat of rejection, ostracization, and bullying. According to a 2001 article by Natalie 171