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

The quiet disappearance of the free-range childhood

bigthink.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 303 posts

Re: The quiet disappearance of the free-range childhood

#151

Post by com2kid »

tayo42 wrote: post #138
borski wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can find your own problems on an abandoned farm too. A kid can always choose to get into trouble, but that’s not what we’re talking about here.

The type of trouble is different. Your not going to get robbed trying to buy drugs on a farm.

I grew up in a neighborhood that had a drug den next to the 7-11 that all the kids went to buy slurpees at.

The dealers didn't bother the kids, and the kids knew not to go into that yard.

There were plenty of street walkers on a particular stretch of streets. They weren't talking to anyone who wasn't looking to buy.

Of course I had the advantage of being a broke kid at the time, so I wasn't a mark for crime. I was just another neighborhood kid who was walking through. It was a working class neighborhood with a few sketchy parts. There was the occasional shooting or drive by, and property theft was common (every bike I had as a kid was stolen from me at some point), but it wasn't unsafe in regards to violence.

I almost impaled myself on a rebar pole while jumping my bike over hills at an abandoned construction site. That was the most dangerous thing that ever happened to me growing up there. (well aside from the time I almost died falling into a sink hole and managed to grab onto a nearby tree root and pull myself up in time, but that was in the middle of nearby woods, so not gonna blame that on societal problems!)

Re: The quiet disappearance of the free-range childhood

#152

Post by semiquaver »

neuroelectron wrote: post #129

>What changed? In a 2023 article for Psychology Today, Gray proposed some factors that began reshaping parents’ attitudes and children’s behavior around the middle of the century: “the arrival of television, the rise of adult-directed kids’ sports, the gradual exclusion of kids from public spaces, the declining opportunities for gainful employment or meaningful contributions to the family economy, and, finally, the i…

That paragraph bothered me. It gives a strong “assuming the conclusion” vibe. Oh, a factor reshaping parents attitudes is a “mandate that kids must be constantly monitored and protected” (in other words, parents’ attitudes)? You don’t say.

Re: The quiet disappearance of the free-range childhood

#154

Post by scelerat »

delichon wrote: post #18
scelerat wrote: post #12

My biggest fear of letting my young kid play alone outside is getting hit by a car.

That's why you have an emergency backup child for redundancy in case of failure of the main child.

Riight! I was wondering why some people had more than one. Like, I wonder that every single ever-loving day

Re: The quiet disappearance of the free-range childhood

#155

Post by ghaff »

pessimizer wrote: post #134
garbawarb wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do journalists live in bougie places? It's not a particularly well-paying job.

Yes. Journalists don't make a living from journalism, they live on family money. That's why working class journalists have disappeared along with working class perspectives. It was once a job where many if not most of the practitioners didn't have a college degree, now it is the most expensive graduate school program you can do. I think the median price is something like $250K. If you don't pay writers, you eliminate…

Don't disagree with the general point but I'm not sure J-School was ever a particularly good entree into journalism. Most of the journalists I know and knew didn't have the grad degree.

Re: The quiet disappearance of the free-range childhood

#156

Post by scelerat »

neogodless wrote: post #17
scelerat wrote: post #12

My biggest fear of letting my young kid play alone outside is getting hit by a car.

When I was a kid I was taught not to walk in the street. When you walk, you go in the opposite direction of cars and can see them coming and, if necessary, move off to the side more. I know it's survivorship bias, but it worked for me. Now I get that population density is increasing, and probably so is traffic. Though so are automatic safety features that cause cars to brake rather than hit things. Are there statisti…

It's not even "in the street" I'm worried about -- it's the lunatics who drive like they are the main character in a single-player RPG. Not looking for bikes or pedestrians, crashing into parked cars and houses.

Re: The quiet disappearance of the free-range childhood

#157

Post by ls612 »

semiquaver wrote: post #152
neuroelectron wrote: post #129

>What changed? In a 2023 article for Psychology Today, Gray proposed some factors that began reshaping parents’ attitudes and children’s behavior around the middle of the century: “the arrival of television, the rise of adult-directed kids’ sports, the gradual exclusion of kids from public spaces, the declining opportunities for gainful employment or meaningful contributions to the family economy, and, finally, the i…

That paragraph bothered me. It gives a strong “assuming the conclusion” vibe. Oh, a factor reshaping parents attitudes is a “mandate that kids must be constantly monitored and protected” (in other words, parents’ attitudes)? You don’t say.

No, the mandate is enforced by the government coming and taking away your children by force, for some indeterminate period of time, until your lawyer goes in front of a judge and (hopefully) the judge rules that the government is stupid and should give you your kids back. But by then the damage is done.

One has to think if a state wanted to eliminate individualism in society this application of surveillance and restraint to children would be entirely by design...

Re: The quiet disappearance of the free-range childhood

#158

Post by kube-system »

rao-v wrote: post #135
FloorEgg wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The average person's ability to acquire food from nature (farm, hunt, gather) and cook it for themselves. The average person ability to make and fix their own tools. Build and fix their shelter. Free range childhood. Average person getting dirt under their fingernails. Being in sync with sunlight cycle. Stargazing at night. These are off the top of my head (I'm not op).

I don’t think in 1926 more than 50% of global 15-20 year olds could: “acquire food from nature (farm, hunt, gather) and cook it for themselves.” Or “make and fix their own tools. Build and fix their shelter.” (Culturally, those tasks often specialize by vocation, gender etc.)

They absolutely could. A quarter of Americans’ primary job was agriculture in the 1920s. While job specialization was certainly a thing that didn’t mean people outsourced all of these tasks the way people do today.

Re: The quiet disappearance of the free-range childhood

#159

Post by QuarterReptile »

coldtea wrote: post #104
bojan wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cars are getting bigger. That means that the impact is more deadly, and the line of sight is higher - making it easy to overlook a child. The sensors often won't react at low speeds which are common for residential neighborhoods, and at high speeds they are late anyway.

> The cars are getting bigger Wasn't there a trend in the US away from pompous SUVs and towards smaller cars, people even starting to re-evaluate some European-favored "city" cars more? Also aren't cars also getting ligther, with less heavy / metallic exterior over time?

We have a regulatory regime that requires that SUVs be bigger each year. It saves the environment that way.

Re: The quiet disappearance of the free-range childhood

#160

Post by hawaiianbrah »

neuroelectron wrote: post #129

>What changed? In a 2023 article for Psychology Today, Gray proposed some factors that began reshaping parents’ attitudes and children’s behavior around the middle of the century: “the arrival of television, the rise of adult-directed kids’ sports, the gradual exclusion of kids from public spaces, the declining opportunities for gainful employment or meaningful contributions to the family economy, and, finally, the i…

Lakewood is a fascinating place, to be sure!
Post reply on HN