Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

freerangekids.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 534 posts

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#301

Post by scandox »

Another massive freedom kids have lost is the right to have independent friendships with adults. Given what we have collectively understood about the behaviour of some adults this is perhaps understandable. However it is a big loss for the majority cases.

As a kid I spent whole days out on the farm with farmhands. Often just one on one. One of them in particular taught me to drive a tractor and all about plants and animals. Also I got all my ethics from him since my own father didn't do ethics.

So I am sad for my kids that they will be very unlikely to have that experience.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#302

Post by pbhjpbhj »

rimantas wrote: post #242
JammyDodger wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then why do corporations spend billions of dollars each year on advertising? Surely it's to convince you to buy something that may not be exactly what you want. A corporation's main goal is to drive up profits and if it's more convenient for them to manipulate a populace into acting a certain way than it is to give the populace exactly what they want then that's what they'll do. There is probably not a conspiracy fro…

It is to convince that you want this particular product by this particular company over the competition.

There are some adverts that sell a product against its competitors. But there are plenty that sell the idea that with a particular company's logo on a product you'll be fashionable. And, there are plenty that sell products that people don't need, at all, using the idea that the product will make your life more fulfilling.

We don't watch broadcast TV at home. 30 mins in front of a friend's TV and our kid suddenly 'need' a ton of new stuff. At the cinema "you should get that car Dad", etc..

It's psychological manipulation, it's rarely ever a helpful synopsis of a products comparative specifications.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#303

Post by CalRobert »

jon-wood wrote: post #295
jimmaswell wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wore my seat belt every day before that anyway, not even because I had to but because I wanted to. The only thing that really changed after that point was I didn't want to ride bikes anymore. I really can't be the only one who thinks brushes with death are not a good thing to have just because they can teach you a lesson when you're fortunate enough to walk away from them. Would you also say Russian Roulette is a g…

I can't help but think you're drastically overstating the danger of riding a bike, even in less than safe conditions. I was heavily into downhill mountain biking during my invincible teenage years and only even heard of someone doing major damage to themselves second hand (they managed to impact their spine flying head first off their bike into a tree trunk). Scrapes, bruises, cuts, and even bones heal relatively eas…

"I was heavily into downhill mountain biking during my invincible teenage years "

But those mountains probably didn't pose the risk of getting crushed by two tons of steel when somebody decides they'd rather look at their phone than the road.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#304

Post by pjc50 »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #174
pharrlax wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of the biggest reasons it was refreshing as hell to move to the big city, as paradoxical as that sounds. Rural/suburban life is like living in a barren wasteland marked by occasional oases you have to travel between in a metal spaceship. Living in an area where commuting to work and activities by foot is completely normal feels like rediscovering a lost sense of communal society, and there's a relief and…

>Rural >barren wasteland If you're a glass half empty person. Many people see it as freedom to do close to whatever you want without anyone caring.

What do you have the freedom to do that you can't do in a city, other than constraints of space and physical geography? Rurally you're still constrained by all that seemingly open land belonging to other people, plus the time constraints of getting to places.

You have fresh air, views, and quiet (provided you're not in the middle of an agribusiness rural area).

(Talking about "freedom" in the pure abstract is vague; freedom to/from what?)

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#305

Post by cel1ne »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #288
cel1ne wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see your point, but don't you think it's possible to teach children to cross traffic safely? When I was little, I regularly walked 3 or 4 miles to visit friends. I had to cross at least one "big" road on my way, where I just took extra care, because my parents had reminded me to.

If you're imagining a single kid, it sounds reasonable. Now think about the millions of kids across the country: what are the odds that in a year, none of them will make a fatal mistake while crossing a street? Even adults screw up, we can't reasonably expect kids not to when the consequences can be fatal. We could easily make our streets safer and more tolerant of user error if we actually cared, look at Sweden or t…

We were 5 children.

I posted some statistics: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13549214

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#306

Post by cel1ne »

facepalm wrote: post #298
cel1ne wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see your point, but don't you think it's possible to teach children to cross traffic safely? When I was little, I regularly walked 3 or 4 miles to visit friends. I had to cross at least one "big" road on my way, where I just took extra care, because my parents had reminded me to.

Traffic is already the biggest killer of kids (afaik). You can only teach kids so much. They are kids - sometimes impulsive...

I agree. And it's different if a child is 4 or 9 years old.

I posted some statistics: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13549214

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#307

Post by mschuster91 »

jpatokal wrote: post #215
erikpukinskis wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We have purposely designed our cities to maximize vehicle throughput and require car ownership This is just one specific example of the broader phenomenon, which is corporations seek to remove all of our abilities to take care of ourselves and our communities, so that they may resell those things to us as products. Requiring cars to move around is just the surface. We go to coffee shops and restaurants to see our f…

There is no evil corporation stopping you from dropping out of the rat race and moving to a farm to live life off the grid. What's stopping you from doing this and living the life you appear to desire? There is also no evil corporation ordering people to give up subsistence farming and move to cities. Why do people, all around the world, still do it?

> There is also no evil corporation ordering people to give up subsistence farming and move to cities

Good luck growing modern plants, they're mostly hybrid and massively drop in yield if you decide to plant part of your harvest next year. Not to mention that Monsanto will be all over your field if they get wind of you violating their copyright by doing so.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#308

Post by CalRobert »

greedo wrote: post #131
FrancoDiaz wrote: post #10

I have a 4 year old, in my mid 40s, and think about this a lot for some reason. In the 70s during the summer, when I was around 7, we would wake up, eat breakfast, go out and about wherever we wanted, come back for lunch, out again, come back for dinner, and then out again past dark to play flashlight tag. I think I would be charged with child endangerment these days if my kid (3 years in the future) was doing stuff…

When I was 12, I rode my bike three miles to the bus stop where I hitched it to the bus and rode from a small town in San Diego down to the El Cortez Hotel where Comic Con was being held. I paid my own way, stayed for about 7 hours, then rode back home. I can't imagine being allowed to do that today...

Unfortunately San Diego has been pretty opposed to making any safety improvements for bicycles, even as plenty of folks are killed by drivers.

Taxpayer-provided parking welfare is more important than keeping people alive. http://bikesd.org/2016/08/hba-hole-worrying-precursor-future...

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#309

Post by CalRobert »

scandox wrote: post #301

Another massive freedom kids have lost is the right to have independent friendships with adults. Given what we have collectively understood about the behaviour of some adults this is perhaps understandable. However it is a big loss for the majority cases. As a kid I spent whole days out on the farm with farmhands. Often just one on one. One of them in particular taught me to drive a tractor and all about plants and a…

I don't even talk to kids because you never know which ones have hysterical moms. Recently I was on a camping trip with a friend and a kid (about 13) came over and chatted about fishing, etc. . We wanted to talk more, and their dad seemed affable enough, but there was a definite "OK, we're going to stand on the opposite side of the campground from you and have this conversation loudly" vibe.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#310

Post by pjc50 »

m_mueller wrote: post #132
Reason077 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Swiss with a small child, this is the main reason why I couldn't move to the US or UK. There always seems to be plenty of children, of various ages, running around my London neighbourhood unsupervised. The noisy little blighters!

That's good to hear. Some of the things I hear from the UK sound at least as authoritarian as the US, so I thought that CPS has similarly harsh measures - apparently it's not that big of an issue?

There were a couple of highly publicised cases which I suspect may not be accurately reported in the newspapers, but generally UK child protection is under-funded and errs on the side of non-intervention. Which has tragic consequences of its own: Victoria Climbie, "Baby P" and so on.
Post reply on HN