When I was a kid, everyone let their dogs out to roam. It was a barely-urban neighborhood on the fringes of town, and no one thought twice about opening the front door and giving their dogs freedom to roam. It was just what was done. Kids, too; mothers opened the doors in the morning to let the kids out to play, and we roamed the streets freely, kids from three on up, crossing over to knock on our friend's doors; can Kylie come out to play?
It is a time that is still mimicked in rural and small-town arenas across the globe.
Nowadays, that concept is anathema to any urban dwellers. Dogs are to be contained, fenced, leashed, and children too. We no longer range freely to the yards and parks in our neighborhood, constrained only to be within hearing distance of our mother's front-porch calls of "Kylie! Sarah! Dinner!"
And we feel constrained, so we idealize the times of complete freedom, and circulate emails about the era when we were free, and demonize the terrible constraints we feel we have been put under.
But time and sensibilities move on, and we forget about the times that a neighbor's dog was hit by a car, that a child was brutalized, that our friends died because they were not under a watchful eye. We forget that, just as gunfights were penalized as civilization marched across the West, parents learned from the times children were bullied, brutalized, abducted, murdered, that we learned from the mistakes that created casualties among our peers, that it is not the best idea to let our dogs roam among cars, that it is not the best idea to put children out into our streets unprotected. We remember our parents as the ones who survived unharmed, and we forget their friends and siblings who drowned, died in traffic or tractor accidents, who disappeared or were left maimed, and we create a fantasy in which we all were free to do as we we wished and remained safe anyway.
So we demonize the culture of protection, and fantasize about an imaginary culture of freedom in which no one was harmed. We forget about growing up with car-struck dogs and kids who died or were beaten or vanished, and we pretend that everything, in that idyllic imaginary time when everyone was free, was actually perfectly okay.
I disagree. I never forgot the dogs that got run over and the kids that got bullied/maimed/whatever, but I think it's still a disservice to children to even attempt to protect them from all of that all the time. I know we all react differently when it's OUR kids that are being talked about, but the reality is that the ones that weren't quick/savvy/aware/whatever enough probably were better off getting out of the gene pool before they reproduced. the flip side of that coin is that if they're never given the chance/necessity to be that quick/savvy/aware/whatever, they're going to survive but never have developed those critical survival skills as well as they should have.
short version: no matter what, the culture of protection is totally fucking whack.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 30, 2010, 08:28:59 AM
I disagree. I never forgot the dogs that got run over and the kids that got bullied/maimed/whatever, but I think it's still a disservice to children to even attempt to protect them from all of that all the time. I know we all react differently when it's OUR kids that are being talked about, but the reality is that the ones that weren't quick/savvy/aware/whatever enough probably were better off getting out of the gene pool before they reproduced. the flip side of that coin is that if they're never given the chance/necessity to be that quick/savvy/aware/whatever, they're going to survive but never have developed those critical survival skills as well as they should have.
Uh...
Are you really suggesting that kids who get killed by cars are better off that way?
:facepalm:
no, I'm suggesting the rest of us are better off for them having died before they passed their unsuccessful genes on to another generation.
Oh good, because that's so much more pleasant a thought.
I didn't realize that the merit of a thought was judged on whether or not it was pleasant.
Um, OK
in regards to the rural/ out-side of townishness-ness. YES, that's where I grew up, and I remember a time when shit just wasn't fucked up and scary like it is now. Neighbourhood 'bullies' were essentially older kids who scared us but who didn't give a shit about us cuz they were thinking about spin-the-bottle.
HOWEVER
i do know for a fact that Nigel & i both grew up, basically in the fuckin woods, so we had to actually ride our bikes into town to encounter any newsworthy fuckupedness
AS RESPONSE
I'm with ECH, i haven't forgotten the auto screach n yelps or empty horror. Bodybags. horror. oh, yeah, is that a gun shot or...
It not being my intention to put words in other people's mouths, but the way I'm interpreting ECH's words is that nature often culls the weaker genes through selection. Like, the baby bird who can't fly soon ends up lunch to a cat, a cat that can't hunt will soon go hungry and die. Thus, the stronger, fitter, smarter beings live, while the weaker beings are taken out of the gene pool.
However, with regards to human children, the way I see it, is while we need to give them the freedom to learn from their mistakes and be put in "harms way" so that they can then learn to avoid the things which will harm them... at the same time, humans are idiots. Children especially so. but this isn't because they are "inferior" but rather because the adults (us) haven't taught them what is safe and what isn't.
when I was a child, I was taught to look both ways - twice - before crossing the street. I was taught to not talk with people I had never met, unless my mom or dad knew them AND they said it was ok. I was taught to NEVER go off with anyone, whether I knew them or not - unless, again, my mom or dad had told me beforehand that it was ok.
Kids aren't taught this now. Instead, they are shoved out the door right after breakfast and made to fend for themselves, or they are "imprisoned" inside their own home for fear that "something" might happen to them.
Somewhere, somehow, the current generation of parents "messed up" and decided to not teach their kids "common safety" rules. It's not the kids that are faulty/inferior - it's the adults.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 30, 2010, 08:28:59 AM
I disagree. I never forgot the dogs that got run over and the kids that got bullied/maimed/whatever, but I think it's still a disservice to children to even attempt to protect them from all of that all the time. I know we all react differently when it's OUR kids that are being talked about, but the reality is that the ones that weren't quick/savvy/aware/whatever enough probably were better off getting out of the gene pool before they reproduced. the flip side of that coin is that if they're never given the chance/necessity to be that quick/savvy/aware/whatever, they're going to survive but never have developed those critical survival skills as well as they should have.
I agree with your conclusion but not with your reasoning.
99.99% of the kids that get hurt/killed are genetically equal or superior to those that survive, Natural selection doesn't care how many innocent bystanders it kills to improve the genepool.(Kai: yes i am anthropomorphizing natural selection, yes i know this is a bad habit, no i don't actually think of NS that way, I just think it's a more effective way of bringing the message across)
There is no reason that these kids get hurt other than increased probability due to riskier behaviour.
It's just dumb luck.
My reason for letting kids take risks is that keeping them locked up does more damage(to their personality and immmune-system) than letting them roam free.
People should learn what are acceptable risks and what aren't.
To prevent a 1 in a billion chance of something horrible think about letting them risk less bad things whose chance is about 1 in a million, but don't let them take near guaranteed emotional and physical damage.
Quote from: Muir on March 30, 2010, 09:51:24 AM
It not being my intention to put words in other people's mouths, but the way I'm interpreting ECH's words is that nature often culls the weaker genes through selection. Like, the baby bird who can't fly soon ends up lunch to a cat, a cat that can't hunt will soon go hungry and die. Thus, the stronger, fitter, smarter beings live, while the weaker beings are taken out of the gene pool.
However, with regards to human children, the way I see it, is while we need to give them the freedom to learn from their mistakes and be put in "harms way" so that they can then learn to avoid the things which will harm them... at the same time, humans are idiots. Children especially so. but this isn't because they are "inferior" but rather because the adults (us) haven't taught them what is safe and what isn't.
when I was a child, I was taught to look both ways - twice - before crossing the street. I was taught to not talk with people I had never met, unless my mom or dad knew them AND they said it was OK. I was taught to NEVER go off with anyone, whether I knew them or not - unless, again, my mom or dad had told me beforehand that it was OK.
Kids aren't taught this now. Instead, they are shoved out the door right after breakfast and made to fend for themselves, or they are "imprisoned" inside their own home for fear that "something" might happen to them.
Somewhere, somehow, the current generation of parents "messed up" and decided to not teach their kids "common safety" rules. It's not the kids that are faulty/inferior - it's the adults.
I don't think parents are a lot worse now than they were xx years ago, they've improved in some ways and worsenend in other ways.
It just seems like they have gotten worse because of how the media treats the extreme cases.
The horrible accidents get highlighted and no one is talking about how the rest of the kids are doing just fine.
If you want to give your children more freedom and at the same time make them safe, get to know your neighbours and get them to look after the kids in the street.
Social cohesion is the answer, oppression rarely is.
This is a topic of some very heated debate in some of the highest parent organizations that I'm part of. We just had the bodies of two young women who WERE independent-minded enough to walk to school alone or jog in a beautiful city park alone. How dare they be alone? some asked. Who leaves their CELL PHONE in their CAR when jogging at dusk? they asked. When a predator comes, that cell phone really wasn't going to save them...but who can know for sure?
All I know is, my kids bike and walk to school in a VERY safe neighborhood (Suburbian Heaven, as I call it), where my neighbors refuse to let their own children walk or ride their bikes for fear of traffic, sexual/violent predators, lack of common sense of their kids, etc. We walk with our kids when we can, but for the most part, they go alone, for about a mile, uphill both ways. There is lots of traffic going to and from, but dammit, driving them is insane.
Maybe it's because I grew up in Suburbian Heaven myself, walking sometimes 3 miles to school, depending on where we lived at the time (I went to 11 different school districts we moved around so much). Maybe it's because my kids' father grew up in Afghanistan during wartime...the things we see as "dangerous" here in middle class America he laughs at for the most part, though he does make a nod at the fact that life everywhere can be dangerous if you're not equipped with common sense.
So our 12 year old is a brown belt in karate...our 9 year old purple. I hated letting them go to the BATHROOM by themselves, until they knew enough karate (remember THAT particular scare? letting your kids go pee in a restroom bathroom was like sending them down the 'Shaw at midnight). I like to think I equipped my kids with enough sense and understanding that the bad guys are not always a hairy stranger in a beat-up van, sometimes they're your neighbor or your Uncle Joe. Awareness is where your instinct can make up for a lot.
I don't think that "decreasing the gene pool" is a fine enough excuse or reason why one child's death isn't a tragedy. However, I don't believe schools should be prisons and kids should have GPS monitors. My kids don't have cell phones to let me know when they are walking home. I didn't have a cell phone before the age of 18, they don't need one until they can pay for it. It can be an accessory for the safety-minded, but we don't live where they need that kind of accessory.
I pay for the real estate I do for a reason, goddammit.
I just had a thought...
Take two neighborhoods.
N1 has a culture of protection. Children are indoors at dusk, dogs are leashed, the streets and parks are quiet. No one goes out at night unless they have to. It's very safe, because the doors are locked, and there are bars on the window, and all is right inside the fortress.
N2 has an opposite culture. Kids play until they are called home for dinner or they can't see the chalk marks on the sidewalk for hopscotch anymore. Pets are allowed to roam freely, and people sit on their porches, having shouted conversations across the street to one another.
Now, imagine you're a predator. Which neighborhood would be best for you to hide out in, waiting for an errant victim?
The busy, loud, boisterous one?
The quiet, empty, unobserved one?
Could it be that the very fear that drives people inside at night also engenders the conditions to bring that fear straight to them?
Predators prey everywhere. That's the lesson for the people who 1) don't think it will happen to THEM, but someone else or 2) the people that think it's CERTAIN to happen to them.
We are never as safe or as persecuted as we think we are, or perhaps it's just that we get used to a normative behavior and have trouble jogging ourselves out of it unless compelled strongly by outside events.
Regret: That was kind of the point I was trying to make. Parents aren't "bad" and children aren't really in any more danger now than they were 25 years ago (back when I was my son's age...damn i feel old now). The media has always and will always play up the bad things and make drama out of pincushions.
But adults (all adults - teachers, parents, grandparents,etc.) have stopped teaching kids "street smarts" for some reason. And that is where the problem lies. Take my neighbourhood, for example. There are 4 year olds allowed to play outside in the evenings in my estate without any supervision. That in itself isn't a problem - I was allowed to play out at that age. But I wasn't allowed to leave my front or back yard unless my mom knew where I was going. I was taught "street smarts/safety" from the time I could walk on my own. These kids aren't. I watched a four year old about to go off to the shops with a six year old the other night. (keep in mind that the local shops are across a VERY busy road with no zebra crossing or pedestrian lights) Before they were able to walk off the estate, I yelled to the kids "Do your mom's know where you're going?" The answer was "no" and I suggested to them that they better ask before setting off. They each went to their respectives homes and 5 minutes later one of the moms knocked on my door to thank me for stopping her 4 year old from going off.
On the radio today they were talking about some event in moscow that raised security in NYC. Apparently there were visibly armed cops on all the trains last weekend. It's a weird paradox, right? Because on one level, you're glad they're there protecting you. And on another level, you can't help but keep your distance from the guy brandishing an automatic weapon.
One of my best friends is a Discordian and a cop. I liked his insight on the dual nature of protection:
"We're out there to protect you. Cops' presence is supposed to make you feel safer. But when you see a cop behind you on the highway, you never think, Sweet, I feel really protected right now!"
You forgot the bit where the free roaming dogs attack the free roaming children.
Quote from: Muir on March 30, 2010, 03:32:58 PM
Regret: That was kind of the point I was trying to make. Parents aren't "bad" and children aren't really in any more danger now than they were 25 years ago (back when I was my son's age...damn i feel old now). The media has always and will always play up the bad things and make drama out of pincushions.
But adults (all adults - teachers, parents, grandparents,etc.) have stopped teaching kids "street smarts" for some reason. And that is where the problem lies. Take my neighbourhood, for example. There are 4 year olds allowed to play outside in the evenings in my estate without any supervision. That in itself isn't a problem - I was allowed to play out at that age. But I wasn't allowed to leave my front or back yard unless my mom knew where I was going. I was taught "street smarts/safety" from the time I could walk on my own. These kids aren't. I watched a four year old about to go off to the shops with a six year old the other night. (keep in mind that the local shops are across a VERY busy road with no zebra crossing or pedestrian lights) Before they were able to walk off the estate, I yelled to the kids "Do your mom's know where you're going?" The answer was "no" and I suggested to them that they better ask before setting off. They each went to their respectives homes and 5 minutes later one of the moms knocked on my door to thank me for stopping her 4 year old from going off.
FACT: just because you know a few kids whose mother's a wang doesn't mean ALL kids aren't taught street smarts.
Quote from: Cramulus on March 30, 2010, 03:35:25 PM
On the radio today they were talking about some event in moscow that raised security in NYC. Apparently there were visibly armed cops on all the trains last weekend. It's a weird paradox, right? Because on one level, you're glad they're there protecting you. And on another level, you can't help but keep your distance from the guy brandishing an automatic weapon.
One of my best friends is a Discordian and a cop. I liked his insight on the dual nature of protection:
"We're out there to protect you. Cops' presence is supposed to make you feel safer. But when you see a cop behind you on the highway, you never think, Sweet, I feel really protected right now!"
Yeah, I mentioned the same damn thing when I heard about the Moscow Metro bomging last night. Russia's one of those countries you really don't WANT the security "stepped up" in...they like their government to be thugs.
The powergrabs in the last decade by the US government were all done on the auspices of protecting us from another Moose-lim Terra-Attaq.
I really don't agree with ECH. The 3-year-old who got hit by a car on my street because no one was watching him was no dumber/less fit than his older brothers who survived and reproduced freely and wantonly with various neighborhood girls... he was just less fortunate. Being molested by adult neighbors at age six doesn't make me unfit, nor did it teach me any valuable survival skills beyond those that cause me to keep a watchful eye on my kids... my experience taught me to keep them safe, ie. led directly to my own household's culture of protection.
What is with these imaginary grownups on the porches watching everyone? That didn't happen. They were inside, and they wanted us to leave them alone. Nobody was watching. That is my point. This culture of freedom we think we remember through the lens of nostalgia was actually a culture of carelessness. Dogs attacking kids? That totally happened, all the fucking time. A kid getting bit by a dog was a weekly occurrence. "It teaches kids not to mess with strange dogs", you might say, "It's a survival skill".
Bullshit. You can teach kids not to mess with strange dogs without letting your fucking kids and dogs run the neighborhood. Who thinks it's responsible, somehow, to just open your front door and let your dog out in the city? Sure, it's illegal, for one thing. But it's also just... careless. Not carefree. There's a difference.
So some moms are overprotective. Those moms in the "safe" suburbs... news flash; they've always been overprotective. There has never been a time when the affluent did not coddle their precious offspring. But most urban parents are not being overprotective, they're just not being as bloody fucking stupid as the previous generation was. Teaching the kids safety rules and sending them to the store in twos and threes starting around nine or ten, not putting them outside to play, unarmed with common sense or forewarned of danger, at five or six. Letting them walk to and from school in groups once they've demonstrated basic responsibility and awareness of the route, rather than taking them a couple of times and then sending them off alone to walk to first grade.
The old way was like throwing an unprepared five-year-old in the river to teach him to swim. The new way is more like taking them to the pool once a week until they feel comfortable enough with the water to try to paddle around a bit. Too soft, you think? Not primal enough? Well get off the fucking internet, walk away from your central heating and your car and your vaccines and your refrigerator, go outside, kill something with a rock and eat it raw.
Not all progress is bad.
Crime rate per 100,000 population since 1960*
(http://www.monthlyreview.org/images/090601-hmfj-chart-5.jpg)
*Note: The FBI’s Uniform Crime Report uses property and violent crimes, which are referred to as “index crimes,” to construct the crime rates.
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2009 (128th Edition), No. HS-23, “Crimes and Crime Rates by Type of Offense: 1960 to 2002” U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Crime in the United States,” various issues in series.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 30, 2010, 04:10:05 PM
I really don't agree with ECH. The 3-year-old who got hit by a car on my street because no one was watching him was no dumber/less fit than his older brothers who survived and reproduced freely and wantonly with various neighborhood girls... he was just less fortunate. Being molested by adult neighbors at age six doesn't make me unfit, nor did it teach me any valuable survival skills beyond those that cause me to keep a watchful eye on my kids... my experience taught me to keep them safe, ie. led directly to my own household's culture of protection.
What is with these imaginary grownups on the porches watching everyone? That didn't happen. They were inside, and they wanted us to leave them alone. Nobody was watching. That is my point. This culture of freedom we think we remember through the lens of nostalgia was actually a culture of carelessness. Dogs attacking kids? That totally happened, all the fucking time. A kid getting bit by a dog was a weekly occurrence. "It teaches kids not to mess with strange dogs", you might say, "It's a survival skill".
Bullshit. You can teach kids not to mess with strange dogs without letting your fucking kids and dogs run the neighborhood. Who thinks it's responsible, somehow, to just open your front door and let your dog out in the city? Sure, it's illegal, for one thing. But it's also just... careless. Not carefree. There's a difference.
So some moms are overprotective. Those moms in the "safe" suburbs... news flash; they've always been overprotective. There has never been a time when the affluent did not coddle their precious offspring. But most urban parents are not being overprotective, they're just not being as bloody fucking stupid as the previous generation was. Teaching the kids safety rules and sending them to the store in twos and threes starting around nine or ten, not putting them outside to play, unarmed with common sense or forewarned of danger, at five or six. Letting them walk to and from school in groups once they've demonstrated basic responsibility and awareness of the route, rather than taking them a couple of times and then sending them off alone to walk to first grade.
The old way was like throwing an unprepared five-year-old in the river to teach him to swim. The new way is more like taking them to the pool once a week until they feel comfortable enough with the water to try to paddle around a bit. Too soft, you think? Not primal enough? Well get off the fucking internet, walk away from your central heating and your car and your vaccines and your refrigerator, go outside, kill something with a rock and eat it raw.
Not all progress is bad.
FUCK YEAH. :mittens:
Nigel, I'm starting to get the feeling you and I parent similarly.
Quite right, Nigel! My mom was the same way.... I was allowed to play in the yard and only there until I was 5, then I was allowed to go next door and directly across the street (we lived in a dead end, so there was no traffic). Once I turned 6, I was allowed to walk up the street to my cousin's (4 houses away) and into town with my older sisters (but only if it was with both of them). At 7-8 I could walk to and from school (one block away). I wasn't given permission to walk into town on my own (past school) until 10 years old. And that's good. I learned to be cautious without being paranoid or getting myself killed because I was too young to be out on my own.
Looking outside right now, I see 6 kids...all of them 8 years old and under. When I went to the shop earlier there were 3 kids "hanging out" in the area. None of them looked older than 7. Parents were nowhere to be seen. My neighbourhood is pretty safe (at least I like to think it is) because it has strict rules about who's allowed to move in (all the houses are owned by a housing association and everyone is police checked before they're offered a house), but the area where the shops are is well, not a place I would let my kids roam unsupervised. :/
You can never protect anyone or anything fully. Its a futile attempt.
One of the best parts of my childhood was sitting in the front seat of the car between my mother and father, which would today be considered (at best) child neglect, or (at worst) child abuse. Do kids die in car accidents? Of course they do, but I wonder what the numbers are concerning the numbers of childrens car-related deaths in the 1970s and today? My guess is a lot of kids still die.
Nobody wants their kid to be the kid that dies, that's obvious, but some kids are going to die. No matter what we do. Should everyone be hampered by what might happen to a very small percentage?
At what point do we stop wrapping kids in bubble wrap?
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 30, 2010, 04:10:05 PM
I really don't agree with ECH. The 3-year-old who got hit by a car on my street because no one was watching him was no dumber/less fit than his older brothers who survived and reproduced freely and wantonly with various neighborhood girls... he was just less fortunate. Being molested by adult neighbors at age six doesn't make me unfit, nor did it teach me any valuable survival skills beyond those that cause me to keep a watchful eye on my kids... my experience taught me to keep them safe, ie. led directly to my own household's culture of protection.
What is with these imaginary grownups on the porches watching everyone? That didn't happen. They were inside, and they wanted us to leave them alone. Nobody was watching. That is my point. This culture of freedom we think we remember through the lens of nostalgia was actually a culture of carelessness. Dogs attacking kids? That totally happened, all the fucking time. A kid getting bit by a dog was a weekly occurrence. "It teaches kids not to mess with strange dogs", you might say, "It's a survival skill".
Bullshit. You can teach kids not to mess with strange dogs without letting your fucking kids and dogs run the neighborhood. Who thinks it's responsible, somehow, to just open your front door and let your dog out in the city? Sure, it's illegal, for one thing. But it's also just... careless. Not carefree. There's a difference.
So some moms are overprotective. Those moms in the "safe" suburbs... news flash; they've always been overprotective. There has never been a time when the affluent did not coddle their precious offspring. But most urban parents are not being overprotective, they're just not being as bloody fucking stupid as the previous generation was. Teaching the kids safety rules and sending them to the store in twos and threes starting around nine or ten, not putting them outside to play, unarmed with common sense or forewarned of danger, at five or six. Letting them walk to and from school in groups once they've demonstrated basic responsibility and awareness of the route, rather than taking them a couple of times and then sending them off alone to walk to first grade.
The old way was like throwing an unprepared five-year-old in the river to teach him to swim. The new way is more like taking them to the pool once a week until they feel comfortable enough with the water to try to paddle around a bit. Too soft, you think? Not primal enough? Well get off the fucking internet, walk away from your central heating and your car and your vaccines and your refrigerator, go outside, kill something with a rock and eat it raw.
Not all progress is bad.
I think we actually are mostly in agreement, since when I was a kid we were never just utterly thrown to the wolves to fend for ourselves without being taught some basic common sense first. Apparently I misunderstood the degree of protection that you were advocating. Or I may have been responding more to what seems like the typical histrionics of current-day american parenting rather than your specific point, I dunno. I still think the culture of protection is fucking retarded, but that doesn't mean I think kids shouldn't be given the tools to protect themselves however possible.
Quote from: Cramulus on March 30, 2010, 03:35:25 PM
On the radio today they were talking about some event in moscow that raised security in NYC. Apparently there were visibly armed cops on all the trains last weekend. It's a weird paradox, right? Because on one level, you're glad they're there protecting you. And on another level, you can't help but keep your distance from the guy brandishing an automatic weapon.
One of my best friends is a Discordian and a cop. I liked his insight on the dual nature of protection:
"We're out there to protect you. Cops' presence is supposed to make you feel safer. But when you see a cop behind you on the highway, you never think, Sweet, I feel really protected right now!"
FACT: Police exist to protect public order, not to protect individual citizens.
When I was still with my ex, we lived in an apartment complex with a lot of families. There were probably about a dozen kids, maybe even two, in the area, ranging from preschool to middle school age. They would all come to play right in my area, and I know I was the only one who ever looked in on them. Some of those kids lived across a busy street, too. So its not all that much changed. Parents still want their kids to gtfo and leave them the hell alone.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 30, 2010, 09:15:23 AM
I didn't realize that the merit of a thought was judged on whether or not it was pleasant.
It certainly isn't, that was just my (admittedly snarky) reaction to that particular one. I'll explain more:
I'd be the first to say that Little Timmy blithely running out into an intersection is retarded. However, trying to rationalize his death by saying that it somehow benefits society is uncomfortably similar to victim blaming. Kids simply don't know better, and they aren't endowed with the same experience and logic as adults. So when they go doing something contrary to all rationality, it isn't because they're defects, it's because they're still children.
I'm sure we've all done something stupid as kids to put ourselves in danger. Is the fact that we're still here today more testament to our superiority or just dumb luck?
I want to clarify that the reason I drew the analogy between letting dogs out to roam the city and letting kids out to roam the city is because for the most part, people who do one will do the other. There's a lot less of both in most urban areas these days.
There are a lot of those email forward letters going around these days, extolling the virtues of the freedom kids used to have to get their heads stuck between crib slats, splatter against auto windshields, get molested at the public park, etc.
These forwards annoy the fuck out of me. They are, as far as I'm concerned, on par with homeopathy, anti-vaccine prop, and The Secret. Product safety standards are NOT A BAD THING, especially in an era when corporations could really give a flying fuck about whether their pursuit of profit hurts people. Parents keeping their eye on kids is NOT A BAD THING.
Kids are ill-equipped to process things like "fast moving cars + street = danger". It is the job of parents to guide them until they are old enough to remember how to navigate the world responsibly. Trailer trash kids are far more likely to die of accidents than upper-class kids; would you say it's made trailer trash smarter, overall?
Kids doing dumb things doesn't reflect on their intelligence, it reflects on their childhood.
Basically what I'm saying is that I hate those email forwards for the falsely idyllic image they present of neglectful parents, and I want you to hate them too.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 30, 2010, 08:29:40 AM
short version: no matter what, the culture of protection is totally fucking whack.
Depends. Some of it makes sense (helmets on bicycles), and some is ridiculous (no tag on school grounds, to avoid skinned knees).
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 30, 2010, 05:36:14 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on March 30, 2010, 03:35:25 PM
On the radio today they were talking about some event in moscow that raised security in NYC. Apparently there were visibly armed cops on all the trains last weekend. It's a weird paradox, right? Because on one level, you're glad they're there protecting you. And on another level, you can't help but keep your distance from the guy brandishing an automatic weapon.
One of my best friends is a Discordian and a cop. I liked his insight on the dual nature of protection:
"We're out there to protect you. Cops' presence is supposed to make you feel safer. But when you see a cop behind you on the highway, you never think, Sweet, I feel really protected right now!"
FACT: Police exist to protect public order, not to protect individual citizens.
THIS THIS THIS
Come now, my friends; Reverend Nigel would like us to join together in a moment of Hate.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 30, 2010, 07:44:46 PM
Come now, my friends; Reverend Nigel would like us to join together in a moment of Hate.
I am totally down with that.
PREACH ON!
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 30, 2010, 07:43:58 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 30, 2010, 08:29:40 AM
short version: no matter what, the culture of protection is totally fucking whack.
Depends. Some of it makes sense (helmets on bicycles), and some is ridiculous (no tag on school grounds, to avoid skinned knees).
YES
Safety regulations should be proportionate to consequences. Broken head & death = helmets worth regulating. Skinned knee & tears = tag NOT worth regulating, as the consequences are not severe enough to warrant it.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 30, 2010, 07:46:15 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 30, 2010, 07:43:58 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 30, 2010, 08:29:40 AM
short version: no matter what, the culture of protection is totally fucking whack.
Depends. Some of it makes sense (helmets on bicycles), and some is ridiculous (no tag on school grounds, to avoid skinned knees).
YES
Safety regulations should be proportionate to consequences. Broken head & death = helmets worth regulating. Skinned knee & tears = tag NOT worth regulating, as the consequences are not severe enough to warrant it.
It's hard to learn from an experience that involves brain death. However, skinned knees heal, and teach some valuable lessons in doing so.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 30, 2010, 07:43:41 PM
I want to clarify that the reason I drew the analogy between letting dogs out to roam the city and letting kids out to roam the city is because for the most part, people who do one will do the other. There's a lot less of both in most urban areas these days.
There are a lot of those email forward letters going around these days, extolling the virtues of the freedom kids used to have to get their heads stuck between crib slats, splatter against auto windshields, get molested at the public park, etc.
These forwards annoy the fuck out of me. They are, as far as I'm concerned, on par with homeopathy, anti-vaccine prop, and The Secret. Product safety standards are NOT A BAD THING, especially in an era when corporations could really give a flying fuck about whether their pursuit of profit hurts people. Parents keeping their eye on kids is NOT A BAD THING.
Kids are ill-equipped to process things like "fast moving cars + street = danger". It is the job of parents to guide them until they are old enough to remember how to navigate the world responsibly. Trailer trash kids are far more likely to die of accidents than upper-class kids; would you say it's made trailer trash smarter, overall?
Kids doing dumb things doesn't reflect on their intelligence, it reflects on their childhood.
Basically what I'm saying is that I hate those email forwards for the falsely idyllic image they present of neglectful parents, and I want you to hate them too.
Already there with you. Everytime someone comes up with
OH YOU KNOW THE
GOOD OLD DAYS! (meaning the 1950-60s era)
I usually come back with:
YOU MEAN WHEN BLACKS COULDN'T VOTE, WHEN WOMEN HAD NO RIGHTS AND JIM CROW LAWS RULED THE SOUTHERN STATES? YEAH, THEMS WERE THE
TIMES, MAN.
They sputter into silence after that.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 30, 2010, 07:43:58 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 30, 2010, 08:29:40 AM
short version: no matter what, the culture of protection is totally fucking whack.
Depends. Some of it makes sense (helmets on bicycles), and some is ridiculous (no tag on school grounds, to avoid skinned knees).
Please tell me thats a fucking joke. No tag? No wonder I see so many fat kids now, nobody lets them run anymore.
Shit, keeping the kids away from cars and child molesters is one thing, but you gotta have a least a couple scars before you get to high school.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 30, 2010, 08:55:55 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 30, 2010, 07:43:58 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 30, 2010, 08:29:40 AM
short version: no matter what, the culture of protection is totally fucking whack.
Depends. Some of it makes sense (helmets on bicycles), and some is ridiculous (no tag on school grounds, to avoid skinned knees).
Please tell me thats a fucking joke. No tag? No wonder I see so many fat kids now, nobody lets them run anymore.
Shit, keeping the kids away from cars and child molesters is one thing, but you gotta have a least a couple scars before you get to high school.
Yeah, I have no idea wtf is up with no running on the blacktop, except maybe they just don't hve enough staff to fix the booboos or insurance coverage or whatever it is. Makes no sense.
Parents who sue.
That's it in a nutshell.
Quote from: LMNO on March 30, 2010, 08:59:24 PM
Parents who sue.
That's it in a nutshell.
Naw. School districts that freak out nation-wide, because some judge in Wheaton, Illinois made a poor decision. It's driven by insurance, not because parents are lining up to sue in every district.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 30, 2010, 08:55:55 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 30, 2010, 07:43:58 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 30, 2010, 08:29:40 AM
short version: no matter what, the culture of protection is totally fucking whack.
Depends. Some of it makes sense (helmets on bicycles), and some is ridiculous (no tag on school grounds, to avoid skinned knees).
Please tell me thats a fucking joke. No tag? No wonder I see so many fat kids now, nobody lets them run anymore.
Do these schools just not have grass? We were told not to run on the blacktop (unless we were playing basketball or something) but were free to run around on the grass and wood chips.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 30, 2010, 09:04:52 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 30, 2010, 08:59:24 PM
Parents who sue.
That's it in a nutshell.
Naw. School districts that freak out nation-wide, because some judge in Wheaton, Illinois made a poor decision. It's driven by insurance, not because parents are lining up to sue in every district.
This. It's why schools don't have swing sets anymore, either.
Quote from: Hover Cat on March 30, 2010, 10:06:17 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 30, 2010, 08:55:55 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 30, 2010, 07:43:58 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 30, 2010, 08:29:40 AM
short version: no matter what, the culture of protection is totally fucking whack.
Depends. Some of it makes sense (helmets on bicycles), and some is ridiculous (no tag on school grounds, to avoid skinned knees).
Please tell me thats a fucking joke. No tag? No wonder I see so many fat kids now, nobody lets them run anymore.
Do these schools just not have grass? We were told not to run on the blacktop (unless we were playing basketball or something) but were free to run around on the grass and wood chips.
What is this "GRASS" you speak of? Are they gray-brown, hard, and poky? We've got lots, if so.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 30, 2010, 08:55:55 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 30, 2010, 07:43:58 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 30, 2010, 08:29:40 AM
short version: no matter what, the culture of protection is totally fucking whack.
Depends. Some of it makes sense (helmets on bicycles), and some is ridiculous (no tag on school grounds, to avoid skinned knees).
Please tell me thats a fucking joke. No tag? No wonder I see so many fat kids now, nobody lets them run anymore.
Shit, keeping the kids away from cars and child molesters is one thing, but you gotta have a least a couple scars before you get to high school.
See my daughter's rant in OKM.
Quote from: Professor Freeky on March 30, 2010, 10:53:42 PM
Quote from: Hover Cat on March 30, 2010, 10:06:17 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 30, 2010, 08:55:55 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 30, 2010, 07:43:58 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 30, 2010, 08:29:40 AM
short version: no matter what, the culture of protection is totally fucking whack.
Depends. Some of it makes sense (helmets on bicycles), and some is ridiculous (no tag on school grounds, to avoid skinned knees).
Please tell me thats a fucking joke. No tag? No wonder I see so many fat kids now, nobody lets them run anymore.
Do these schools just not have grass? We were told not to run on the blacktop (unless we were playing basketball or something) but were free to run around on the grass and wood chips.
What is this "GRASS" you speak of? Are they gray-brown, hard, and poky? We've got lots, if so.
And half crab grass, yes. Although in my bit of 1950s suburbia heaven, it was always semi-green except in the summer when the sun cooked the living shit out of it.
Quote from: Nast on March 30, 2010, 07:16:53 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 30, 2010, 09:15:23 AM
I didn't realize that the merit of a thought was judged on whether or not it was pleasant.
It certainly isn't, that was just my (admittedly snarky) reaction to that particular one. I'll explain more:
I'd be the first to say that Little Timmy blithely running out into an intersection is retarded. However, trying to rationalize his death by saying that it somehow benefits society is uncomfortably similar to victim blaming. Kids simply don't know better, and they aren't endowed with the same experience and logic as adults. So when they go doing something contrary to all rationality, it isn't because they're defects, it's because they're still children.
I'm sure we've all done something stupid as kids to put ourselves in danger. Is the fact that we're still here today more testament to our superiority or just dumb luck?
The first sentence there is at odds with the rest of the sentence, so I just want to clarify something.
"Retarded" means "slowed down" or "stopped." In the context of mental retardation, it means that the cognitive development of the individual in question has not kept up with his biological age. So a 10 year old with the mental abilities of a 4 year old has mental retardation. A 4 year old with the mental abilities of a 4-year old is developmentally normal (duh) and a 3 year old with the mental abilities of a 4 year old is
way ahead of the curve. But all three are stupid enough to run into the street or fall into a pool or stick a butter knife in a power outlet.
This isn't just a lack of experience - it's a lack of prefrontal cortex development and the corresponding abilities of foresight and decision making. 4 year olds possess neither the ability to grasp their own mortality, nor the inclination to stop and think things through every time they have a Really Fun Idea.
I meant that the act of running out into an intersection is retarded. And by retarded I meant stupid.
I know that kids don't/can't be expected to know better, hence the latter part.
Quote from: Hover Cat on March 30, 2010, 11:05:37 PM
Quote from: Professor Freeky on March 30, 2010, 10:53:42 PM
Quote from: Hover Cat on March 30, 2010, 10:06:17 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 30, 2010, 08:55:55 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 30, 2010, 07:43:58 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 30, 2010, 08:29:40 AM
short version: no matter what, the culture of protection is totally fucking whack.
Depends. Some of it makes sense (helmets on bicycles), and some is ridiculous (no tag on school grounds, to avoid skinned knees).
Please tell me thats a fucking joke. No tag? No wonder I see so many fat kids now, nobody lets them run anymore.
Do these schools just not have grass? We were told not to run on the blacktop (unless we were playing basketball or something) but were free to run around on the grass and wood chips.
What is this "GRASS" you speak of? Are they gray-brown, hard, and poky? We've got lots, if so.
And half crab grass, yes. Although in my bit of 1950s suburbia heaven, it was always semi-green except in the summer when the sun cooked the living shit out of it.
Green? Green... What's green? This is a desert, yo. We've got any shade of puke yellow and diarrhea brown you want, but I dunno what this "green" is.
Quote from: Nast on March 31, 2010, 01:38:29 AM
I meant that the act of running out into an intersection is retarded. And by retarded I meant stupid.
I know that kids don't/can't be expected to know better, hence the latter part.
That's not stupidity, it's ignorance.
Quote from: Professor Freeky on March 31, 2010, 02:03:39 AM
Quote from: Hover Cat on March 30, 2010, 11:05:37 PM
Quote from: Professor Freeky on March 30, 2010, 10:53:42 PM
Quote from: Hover Cat on March 30, 2010, 10:06:17 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 30, 2010, 08:55:55 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 30, 2010, 07:43:58 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 30, 2010, 08:29:40 AM
short version: no matter what, the culture of protection is totally fucking whack.
Depends. Some of it makes sense (helmets on bicycles), and some is ridiculous (no tag on school grounds, to avoid skinned knees).
Please tell me thats a fucking joke. No tag? No wonder I see so many fat kids now, nobody lets them run anymore.
Do these schools just not have grass? We were told not to run on the blacktop (unless we were playing basketball or something) but were free to run around on the grass and wood chips.
What is this "GRASS" you speak of? Are they gray-brown, hard, and poky? We've got lots, if so.
And half crab grass, yes. Although in my bit of 1950s suburbia heaven, it was always semi-green except in the summer when the sun cooked the living shit out of it.
Green? Green... What's green? This is a desert, yo. We've got any shade of puke yellow and diarrhea brown you want, but I dunno what this "green" is.
Bridge on Alvernon.
EEP! I forgot about that bridge. Gah.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 31, 2010, 02:51:16 AM
Quote from: Nast on March 31, 2010, 01:38:29 AM
I meant that the act of running out into an intersection is retarded. And by retarded I meant stupid.
I know that kids don't/can't be expected to know better, hence the latter part.
That's not stupidity, it's ignorance.
That's probably the right term, thanks.
Quote from: Nast on March 31, 2010, 05:02:07 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 31, 2010, 02:51:16 AM
Quote from: Nast on March 31, 2010, 01:38:29 AM
I meant that the act of running out into an intersection is retarded. And by retarded I meant stupid.
I know that kids don't/can't be expected to know better, hence the latter part.
That's not stupidity, it's ignorance.
That's probably the right term, thanks.
I am going to go a step further and say that ignorance implies
a missed opportunity to have learned. In children, however, it's a lack of teaching and/or a developmental inability to have learned, therefore it is naivete.
I'd also like to clarify that my responses ITT have been more in the context of kids that are, say, 8 years old or older. It seems fairly obvious that it's a bad idea to let the kids roam freely before they're old enough to have learned some judgement and decision-making skills.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 31, 2010, 07:37:14 AM
I'd also like to clarify that my responses ITT have been more in the context of kids that are, say, 8 years old or older. It seems fairly obvious that it's a bad idea to let the kids roam freely before they're old enough to have learned some judgement and decision-making skills.
QUOTE
of the day
OR
spiritual guideline for the board
EITHER/OR/BOTH
you choose. i say yes.
This leads to an interesting contrast.
When does an "individual young human" have a better survival chance due to learned skills and mind/body development than, say, a "pack of semi-literate 9 year-olds".......
Quote from: Telarus on March 31, 2010, 08:28:00 AM
This leads to an interesting contrast.
When does an "individual young human" have a better survival chance due to learned skills and mind/body development than, say, a "pack of semi-literate 9 year-olds".......
IME around 12. The mind changes a lot at that age.
See, my first instinct was to say "pack of 12 year olds" but then I realized how dangerous that actually was and lowered my example, lol.
There are some 12 year olds that don't have the sense of a box of hammers, and there are some that you'd trust your life, your other kids' lives, etc. with as well.
Kids, like adults, differ according to experience, ability to learn and maturity level. That being said, it's a good idea as a teacher and parent to expect a certain level of understanding and skill level by that age. 12 is good.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 30, 2010, 05:35:03 PM
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 30, 2010, 04:10:05 PM
I really don't agree with ECH. The 3-year-old who got hit by a car on my street because no one was watching him was no dumber/less fit than his older brothers who survived and reproduced freely and wantonly with various neighborhood girls... he was just less fortunate. Being molested by adult neighbors at age six doesn't make me unfit, nor did it teach me any valuable survival skills beyond those that cause me to keep a watchful eye on my kids... my experience taught me to keep them safe, ie. led directly to my own household's culture of protection.
What is with these imaginary grownups on the porches watching everyone? That didn't happen. They were inside, and they wanted us to leave them alone. Nobody was watching. That is my point. This culture of freedom we think we remember through the lens of nostalgia was actually a culture of carelessness. Dogs attacking kids? That totally happened, all the fucking time. A kid getting bit by a dog was a weekly occurrence. "It teaches kids not to mess with strange dogs", you might say, "It's a survival skill".
Bullshit. You can teach kids not to mess with strange dogs without letting your fucking kids and dogs run the neighborhood. Who thinks it's responsible, somehow, to just open your front door and let your dog out in the city? Sure, it's illegal, for one thing. But it's also just... careless. Not carefree. There's a difference.
So some moms are overprotective. Those moms in the "safe" suburbs... news flash; they've always been overprotective. There has never been a time when the affluent did not coddle their precious offspring. But most urban parents are not being overprotective, they're just not being as bloody fucking stupid as the previous generation was. Teaching the kids safety rules and sending them to the store in twos and threes starting around nine or ten, not putting them outside to play, unarmed with common sense or forewarned of danger, at five or six. Letting them walk to and from school in groups once they've demonstrated basic responsibility and awareness of the route, rather than taking them a couple of times and then sending them off alone to walk to first grade.
The old way was like throwing an unprepared five-year-old in the river to teach him to swim. The new way is more like taking them to the pool once a week until they feel comfortable enough with the water to try to paddle around a bit. Too soft, you think? Not primal enough? Well get off the fucking internet, walk away from your central heating and your car and your vaccines and your refrigerator, go outside, kill something with a rock and eat it raw.
Not all progress is bad.
I think we actually are mostly in agreement, since when I was a kid we were never just utterly thrown to the wolves to fend for ourselves without being taught some basic common sense first. Apparently I misunderstood the degree of protection that you were advocating. Or I may have been responding more to what seems like the typical histrionics of current-day american parenting rather than your specific point, I dunno. I still think the culture of protection is fucking retarded, but that doesn't mean I think kids shouldn't be given the tools to protect themselves however possible.
Seconded.
about biking helmets:
hmm i can't find what i was looking for(comparison between dutch bike accidents and american bike accidents compensated for population, bike usage(mileage for example). to see how helmet-use influences injury/death chances).
Oh well, here are some interesting statistics for the USA.
http://www.bhsi.org/stats.htm
QuoteAmong children and youth age 0 to 19 in 2000:
* Head injuries accounted for 62.6 percent of bicycle fatalities.
* Collisions with motor vehicles accounted for 75.7 percent of bicycle fatalities.
* 61.7 percent of motor vehicle collision deaths were due to head injury.
another interesting one.
QuoteOdds of Death vs. Injury in Crashes by Vehicle
Vehicle Deaths Injuries Odds
Bus 17 17,000 1 in 1000
Car, Station Wagon 21,969 2,378,000 1 in 108
Pickup, SUV, Van 10,224 768,000 1 in 75
Bicycle 813 58,000 1 in 71
Large Truck 717 31,000 1 in 43
Motorcycle, Motorbike 2,106 54,000 1 in 26
On Foot 5,307 77,000 1 in 15
Data From NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts 1997
It seems that biking is saver than walking.
Quote from: E.O.T. on March 31, 2010, 08:23:00 AM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 31, 2010, 07:37:14 AM
It seems fairly obvious that it's a bad idea to let the kids roam freely before they're old enough to have learned some judgement and decision-making skills.
QUOTE
of the day
OR
spiritual guideline for the board
EITHER/OR/BOTH
you choose. i say yes.
newsfeed?
One the OP themes, its an interesting situation. when I was a kid, I remember hearing about how Columbus was passing a leash law and we thought that was just crazy (Oh my god, you can't play Frisbee with your dog in the park?!?!?!). I remember kids running around outside, riding their bikes all over town, and I distinctly remember all the people that sat on their front porches and yelled at the kids, or called their parents when they saw the kid do something dumb. Ah, my one and only day of playing hooky. My parents knew by 9:30 AM, I was picked up and in class by 10.
I remember walking home from school and some bullies tried to pick a fight with me (but I didn't fight cause ya know, Jesus wants us to be pansies). Anyway, an old retired farmer who had moved into town saw what was happening and stormed out of his house across the street and scared the crap out of those kids.
Then again, I remember when I was 10 and visiting a family, their doberman bit my face open and I got 20 stitches and two permanent scars... and my parents were just around the corner of the house at the time.
When I went back to my hometown recently, it is still like that. There were still kids all over the place and dogs too. Here in Columbus, its as Nigel described, there in Roseville, its not really changed much. Though the old people on the porches are fewer cause they're dying... and younger people don't seem to care about porches.
Quote from: Professor Freeky on March 31, 2010, 02:03:39 AM
Quote from: Hover Cat on March 30, 2010, 11:05:37 PM
Quote from: Professor Freeky on March 30, 2010, 10:53:42 PM
Quote from: Hover Cat on March 30, 2010, 10:06:17 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 30, 2010, 08:55:55 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 30, 2010, 07:43:58 PM
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on March 30, 2010, 08:29:40 AM
short version: no matter what, the culture of protection is totally fucking whack.
Depends. Some of it makes sense (helmets on bicycles), and some is ridiculous (no tag on school grounds, to avoid skinned knees).
Please tell me thats a fucking joke. No tag? No wonder I see so many fat kids now, nobody lets them run anymore.
Do these schools just not have grass? We were told not to run on the blacktop (unless we were playing basketball or something) but were free to run around on the grass and wood chips.
What is this "GRASS" you speak of? Are they gray-brown, hard, and poky? We've got lots, if so.
And half crab grass, yes. Although in my bit of 1950s suburbia heaven, it was always semi-green except in the summer when the sun cooked the living shit out of it.
Green? Green... What's green? This is a desert, yo. We've got any shade of puke yellow and diarrhea brown you want, but I dunno what this "green" is.
Point still stands. It's not blacktop, it's not walk way cement, it's not a shit ton of rocks. They can (or SHOULD be able) to run around on it and not seriously injure themselves.
When I was a kid, we could run wherever we wanted, as long as it was on the playground.