Discussion of the film “Babies” by Thomas Balmes

(Available for streaming on Netflix)

After watching the film “Babies” by Thomas Balmer, I feel as though I have been given a greater insight into the differences in child rearing practices cross culturally. I knew going into the movie that the 4 different cultures shown throughout the documentary would be incredibly different, however I did not realize that there would be so many positives and negatives to each culture in terms of how different rearing methods and cultural beliefs and practices effect the development of the child. The film documented 4 different babies from birth to approximately 1 year of age. What I found interesting was that the documentary did not contain narration. At first I thought this was really strange and wondered how I would retain any of the information that was to be presented within the film, however, as I watched I realized that the lack of words made it simpler to interpret the film and the differences and similarities between the cultures. Sometimes words just complicate things because words can have different meaning and therefore can be interpreted differently depending on the person and their own beliefs. I felt that the method in which the film was shot eliminated a lot of bias and ethnocentric views because the sections of the film portray each of the 4 babies in similar if not the same situations one after another.

I also read some of the posts on a forum posted by some of my fellow university students. Many of the students argued that one or some of the babies held advantages developmentally more so than the other babies did. I agree with this to an extent however the film was not as I had expected. Coming from a Western stand point in my own developmental path, I initially believed that the baby Hattie from San Francisco, California and baby Mari from Tokyo, Japan would hold developmental advantages over baby Ponijao from Opuwo, Namibia and baby Bayar from Bayanchandmani, Mongolia. I believed this to be true because baby Hattie and baby Mari both had access to what I initially thought was more and better resources to rear an infant. I realized after watching the film that resources are important but to an extent.

Foods and shelter are of course resources that are necessary for development along with other aspects such as parental love. The extra resources such as toys, educational movies, baby classes, recreational parks etc, are not necessarily components in determining an advantage in development. Baby Hattie was exposed to many toys, books, and play groups for parental and infant interaction, however she did not appear to be any happier or healthier in her daily life. On the contrary, she seemed temperamental and discontented by her surroundings and cried often. Baby Mari, from Tokio was also exposed to play groups with other children, educational activities, toys, and books. She appeared to be extremely content in her daily life and cried very rarely. Both of these children had the same resources yet completely different temperament. This indicates to me that presence of materialistic elements is not necessarily a factor in positive healthy child development.

Then I took a look at baby Ponijao from Namibia. Ponijao appeared to be very content despite that fact that his conditions seemed a little unorthodox to me. Again, I’m coming from a Western point of view and I generally try not to be ethnocentric towards any culture but I found it a little difficult at first. When Ponijao developed the ability to crawl he was permitted to crawl all over the ground and used his mouth to explore his environment. In the society to which I was raised, my mother was extremely clean almost the point of OCD (Obsessive Compulsive Disorder). Because of her views on the importance of cleanliness especially to prevent the baby from digesting something that could be of harm (such as choking) or cause illness, I also believe that cleanliness is ideal especially for early development.

After watching the film I realize there are probably still some illnesses that babies such as Ponijao would encounter however the baby did not appear to be unhealthy in any way. I suppose everyone within the environment would be adjusted to the setting and the things that I view as issues would probably not be problematic for the inhabiting community members. It seemed unorthodox to me that the mothers in Namibia walked around topless, however I thought about it and came to the conclusion that there are reasons why this is unacceptable in Western society but not in Namibia. Being topless isn’t socially acceptable in Western society because society dictates that male and female bodies should be covered. I believe that it is because of the views on women in the Namibian culture that make it acceptable to be topless. 1) Breasts are exposed because they viewed as the primary method for feeding their infants. They are key to the community’s survival. 2) Having the breasts exposed allows for mothers to quickly feed their infants which is probably another reason why the infants do not appear to be upset very often. Their needs are satisfied and the society is not consumed by materialistic needs. 3) Namibia is a warm environment and clothes are not overly necessary in the hot climate. In Western society, breasts are not recognized primarily as a source of nourishment for infants, rather they are seen as sexual objects. Bottom line is that baby Ponijao appeared to be very content and very well nourished despite the appearance of the environment and judgements that I had initially made.

Finally, baby Bayar from Mongolia appeared to fairly content. The moments that I noticed the baby was not happy appeared to be when a slightly older sibling was picking on him repeatedly. Aside from the sibling rivalry, baby Bayar appeared to be contented and very much independent much like baby Ponjiao. Bayar was shown crawling along the ground and grassy fields alone which does seem dangerous however the baby seemed so happy. At one point, baby Bayar is shown playing amongst several large cows. My initial reaction was, “They are just animals! They do not know the child is there, and they could very easily trample him.” The more I watched the more obvious it became that these cows were lazy and both the cows and baby Bayar were adjusted to the presence of each other. As a matter of fact all of the humans and animals seemed much adjusted to the proximity in which they coexisted. In one scene, Bayar is taking a bath beside a window and a goat sticks its head inside the window and takes a drink out of the baby’s bath water. This seems unorthodox but the baby seems happy none the less and I can’t deny that the scene was cute. Again, the words of my mother come into my head and I can’t help but to be concerned about the cleanliness of the baby and the illnesses that animals could carry. Overall I still learned that material items and resources even parental attention do not necessarily indicate whether or not a child will have a positive or negative overall development early on.