Live data from Hacker News

Doubts creep in about wisdom of ‘no-kids zones’ in South Korea

cnn.com

81–90 of 114 posts

Re: Doubts creep in about wisdom of ‘no-kids zones’ in South Korea

#81
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Breed for the good of the nation" isn't the compelling argument it once was.

You might apply to that anything if you want to go full individualism - from taxes to vaccines but that is not how societies work. Only on paper for the libertarian types.

I don't think making choices about child-bearing in a world with 8 billion humans in it counts as either "full individualism" or libertarian adjacent. If you want to help the world in a concrete way, breed less.

Re: Doubts creep in about wisdom of ‘no-kids zones’ in South Korea

#82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s wrong with pitbulls? Every one I’ve met is a sweet little thing. And I know the stats on dog attacks. Something like 10 a year from pitbulls could easily be down to owners buying them specifically to use them as weapons and training them as such.

Since you're aware of the statistics, how can you reconcile that only pitbulls seem to have bad owners? Wouldn't we assume a more normal distribution of bad owners across breeds, making golden retrievers, great danes, or bloodhounds just as likely to maim and kill other pets or children?

If you’re an owner who wants an attack dog pitbulls will be on your short list along side German Shepherds. Now, there are definitely some breeds that don’t have it in them to attack (and if they do it’s less likely to be reported). Even if you get bitten by a chihuahua you’re not super likely to file a police report. And I will admit that you would be hard pressed to get a French Bulldog or Pug to hurt someone. But I don’t think pitbulls deserve to be singled out.

Re: Doubts creep in about wisdom of ‘no-kids zones’ in South Korea

#84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m happy to discuss what “pro social” means in another thread to prevent derailing this one, to be polite to the forum. My thoughts on the idea are that it means taking care of everyone existing first at a reasonable level of quality, before encouraging more folks to have kids with social or economic incentives because the economic pyramid scheme is at risk [1]. If you have the resources, the support network, and th…

The societal problem is elderly care will skyrocket.

Definitely sucks when liabilities come due and you can no longer kick the can down the road. Society will need to become comfortable with the additional go forward productivity drag incurred.

Re: Doubts creep in about wisdom of ‘no-kids zones’ in South Korea

#85
post #3

I find few things as obnoxiously childish as grown people that don't want to handle kids being around.

Societal norms have changed. It used to be if a kid was misbehaving or damaging property, you could, as a random adult, tell them to stop. Now, you can't dare speak without the potential of an ugly confrontation because you dared talk to their little price or princess. If that's the norm, I'd rather not have stranger's kids around in public spaces.

We could redress that norm, though?

Similarly, it used to be that a village raised the kids. We somehow shifted that so that the liability and work is to be borne by the immediate parents, and them alone.

Re: Doubts creep in about wisdom of ‘no-kids zones’ in South Korea

#86
post #3

I find few things as obnoxiously childish as grown people that don't want to handle kids being around.

I’m hypersensitive to noise and kids make a lot of noise. A cafe like this would be one of the few I could go to.

I'm somewhat sympathetic. Especially so as I know this can range heavily in impact on folks. Such that wanting a place reserved for low noise makes sense. Educating kids on how to act in those environments is important, and can't be done by forbidding them from being there. Often you are left with adults that then don't know how to act in those places, either.

Re: Doubts creep in about wisdom of ‘no-kids zones’ in South Korea

#87
post #3

I find few things as obnoxiously childish as grown people that don't want to handle kids being around.

It is nice to have spaces that include kids and spaces that are reserved for adults.

It is nice to have places reserved for lots of things. So, I am not stating that these things should not be allowed to exist.

I will assert that places which don't teach the younger generations to interact in them, and instead forbid them from being there, are doing themselves a disservice.

But if there are "quiet hours" or "adult swim" times, that makes sense. All the more so when there are kids around to see how that operates. :D

Re: Doubts creep in about wisdom of ‘no-kids zones’ in South Korea

#88
post #80

(Disclosure, I am a parent and a happy one.) There is something so bleak about the quiet child hate in the modern world. To me, it implies on some level a lack of hope for a better future. This is as far as I can tell, a systemic problem of the modern world. Yes, bad kids are annoying. We've all been there. The problem is the behavior, not the fact that the misbehaving human is young. I'd be perfectly fine with desig…

Where i live in Europe "quiet child hate" is not a thing. People take their kids everywhere and they are well behaved because the world takes them seriously here.

It really strange how american kids are so I'll behaved compared to most places here in Europe. Definitely systemic factors at play.

Re: Doubts creep in about wisdom of ‘no-kids zones’ in South Korea

#89
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m hypersensitive to noise and kids make a lot of noise. A cafe like this would be one of the few I could go to.

I'm somewhat sympathetic. Especially so as I know this can range heavily in impact on folks. Such that wanting a place reserved for low noise makes sense. Educating kids on how to act in those environments is important, and can't be done by forbidding them from being there. Often you are left with adults that then don't know how to act in those places, either.

I have on rare occasion asked parents of kids to be more mindful, I received the sort of vitriol one should expect from parents who have thus far failed to instil manners into their kids. Not once has any good come from it - so I have given up. There is no education happening there and there is clearly nothing I can do about it. Parents especially seem oblivious to noise of own kids. For the cafe, instead of making judgment calls on a case by case basis which can cause insult to the parents it's simply easier to have a blanket ban. I could see it being a problem if the cafe was the only place in existence, but children can practice their manners elsewhere, there are plenty of other places for them to go. I don't see how having one additional place would improve their manners.

Re: Doubts creep in about wisdom of ‘no-kids zones’ in South Korea

#90
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Societal norms have changed. It used to be if a kid was misbehaving or damaging property, you could, as a random adult, tell them to stop. Now, you can't dare speak without the potential of an ugly confrontation because you dared talk to their little price or princess. If that's the norm, I'd rather not have stranger's kids around in public spaces.

We could redress that norm, though? Similarly, it used to be that a village raised the kids. We somehow shifted that so that the liability and work is to be borne by the immediate parents, and them alone.

It used to be that children were the retirement plan, now that retirements are funded with pooled financial instruments that direct link has been severed. Now the benefit of educating children is pooled but the cost is individualized, some people are figuring that they can optimize their personal gain by minimizing their own investment in their children.
Post reply on HN