5 ms·

Kids have been exposed to multiple consecutive years of social isolation due to the pandemic. They haven't been going to school or seeing their peers in person.

Kids have been exposed to multiple consecutive years of social isolation due to the pandemic. They haven't been going to school or seeing their peers in person. That's kind of the obvious hypothesis. To just completely write that off, you really have to have axe to grind against social media. As you said, "kids are glued to their phones anyway." That was already true before the pandemic. Which, again, suggests to me that the extreme factor here is the isolation, not the phones. Not that social media is good or healthy. But the way it's scapegoated reminds me of the way television and video games were demonized when I was a child growing up in the 90s. It was over the top.

vkou 5y ago
> They haven't been going to school or seeing their peers in person. I'm not sure there's a single family in the continental United States that has spent the entirety of the past two years keeping their children locked up in their basement. Even when school is closed, nobody has been stopping children from seeing their peers in person outside of school. And if our society can't figure out a way to make that a priority, then that may be the problem with it, not the school closures.
- formerkrogeremp 5y ago
  Anecdotally, yes, some children do get abused and neglected. Some are still locked up for years.
- Aerroon 5y ago
  >Even when school is closed, nobody has been stopping children from seeing their peers in person outside of school. Why do people always treat friction as something that is irrelevant? Shutdowns and kids being unable to hang out when they choose to creates a situation where they just lose touch with one another. You can't just deliberately flip a switch to turn it all back on. Social connections don't work like that. Social connections involve a whole series of spontaneous events. If those events don't happen, then social connections fall away. Adults have a hard time making friends, because they have a lot fewer opportunities for those spontaneous events that create friendships. Rolling the dice less often will give you fewer successes. Some amount of those successes is required for upkeep of a friendship.
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    - ericd 5y ago
      Well that's an extreme overreaction to human nature.
- jimmydorry 5y ago
  You may have missed the fact that many countries / localities in fact did do lockdowns on and off for the last two years that did prevent childrend from seeing their peers in person outside of school. Couple that with the non-stop fearmongering by the media, and it's not an unreasonable assumption to make that many kids were probably kept at home and away from their peers, even between lockdowns.
  - vkou 5y ago
    In the US, those on and off lockdowns[1] lasted for about a month per locale, and weren't even enforced during that time. What about the other 23 months? [1] 'Lockdown' is a completely inappropriate word to describe a world where the greatest practical impediment to your freedom is that you can't go to the theatre, the bar, or to Hawai'i. Or host a wedding.
    - ryandrake 5y ago
      Everything is exaggerated nowadays. “Unenforced suggestions to stay at home” = lockdown. “A minor inconvenience” = torture. “Sensible public health policy” = tyranny. No US state implemented anything close to what a reasonable, sane person could describe as lockdown. Nobody was locked into their homes. Stay at home was routinely broken with zero consequences. Business closures went unenforced outside of a handful of urban areas. Calling it “lockdown” is clown world logic.
    - jimmydorry 5y ago
      There is an entire spectrum on the scale of hard lockdowns to curfews to public health orders. The GP I was replying to made the assertion that they can't believe there would be even a single family that made the choice to keep their children isolated. Do you agree with their assertion that no portion of the population could have "over-reacted" to the prevailing health advice? Or that no family had vulnerable persons they were looking after that resulted in a higher level of isolation?
  - spookthesunset 5y ago
    I dunno why this is downvoted. I know several people who intentionally isolated their kids for at least a year. These kids couldn't even go outside... Instead of telling people to remain calm, these fucking "experts" intentionally scared the living daylights out of people. And for many people in my particularly liberal region, they took it all to heart and went well above and beyond what these "experts" were demanding.
germinalphrase 5y ago
I’m a high school English teacher. What you’re saying seems mostly right - but, anecdotally of course, the trend has been made more severe. Their ability to engage with in-person socialization is very obviously impaired, and their pre-existing tendency to snack on social media is compulsive for a whole bunch of them. At a much higher level than I’ve ever seen, kids will choose swiping over talking with their friends who are sitting right next to them. It’s getting better, but - man - it was bad when we first returned from distance learning.

vkou 5y ago

> They haven't been going to school or seeing their peers in person. I'm not sure there's a single family in the continental United States that has spent the entirety of the past two years keeping their children locked up in their basement. Even when school is closed, nobody has been stopping children from seeing their peers in person outside of school. And if our society can't figure out a way to make that a priority, then that may be the problem with it, not the school closures.

formerkrogeremp 5y ago
Anecdotally, yes, some children do get abused and neglected. Some are still locked up for years.
Aerroon 5y ago
>Even when school is closed, nobody has been stopping children from seeing their peers in person outside of school. Why do people always treat friction as something that is irrelevant? Shutdowns and kids being unable to hang out when they choose to creates a situation where they just lose touch with one another. You can't just deliberately flip a switch to turn it all back on. Social connections don't work like that. Social connections involve a whole series of spontaneous events. If those events don't happen, then social connections fall away. Adults have a hard time making friends, because they have a lot fewer opportunities for those spontaneous events that create friendships. Rolling the dice less often will give you fewer successes. Some amount of those successes is required for upkeep of a friendship.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  - ericd 5y ago
    Well that's an extreme overreaction to human nature.
jimmydorry 5y ago
You may have missed the fact that many countries / localities in fact did do lockdowns on and off for the last two years that did prevent childrend from seeing their peers in person outside of school. Couple that with the non-stop fearmongering by the media, and it's not an unreasonable assumption to make that many kids were probably kept at home and away from their peers, even between lockdowns.
- vkou 5y ago
  In the US, those on and off lockdowns[1] lasted for about a month per locale, and weren't even enforced during that time. What about the other 23 months? [1] 'Lockdown' is a completely inappropriate word to describe a world where the greatest practical impediment to your freedom is that you can't go to the theatre, the bar, or to Hawai'i. Or host a wedding.
  - ryandrake 5y ago
    Everything is exaggerated nowadays. “Unenforced suggestions to stay at home” = lockdown. “A minor inconvenience” = torture. “Sensible public health policy” = tyranny. No US state implemented anything close to what a reasonable, sane person could describe as lockdown. Nobody was locked into their homes. Stay at home was routinely broken with zero consequences. Business closures went unenforced outside of a handful of urban areas. Calling it “lockdown” is clown world logic.
  - jimmydorry 5y ago
    There is an entire spectrum on the scale of hard lockdowns to curfews to public health orders. The GP I was replying to made the assertion that they can't believe there would be even a single family that made the choice to keep their children isolated. Do you agree with their assertion that no portion of the population could have "over-reacted" to the prevailing health advice? Or that no family had vulnerable persons they were looking after that resulted in a higher level of isolation?
- spookthesunset 5y ago
  I dunno why this is downvoted. I know several people who intentionally isolated their kids for at least a year. These kids couldn't even go outside... Instead of telling people to remain calm, these fucking "experts" intentionally scared the living daylights out of people. And for many people in my particularly liberal region, they took it all to heart and went well above and beyond what these "experts" were demanding.

germinalphrase 5y ago

I’m a high school English teacher. What you’re saying seems mostly right - but, anecdotally of course, the trend has been made more severe. Their ability to engage with in-person socialization is very obviously impaired, and their pre-existing tendency to snack on social media is compulsive for a whole bunch of them. At a much higher level than I’ve ever seen, kids will choose swiping over talking with their friends who are sitting right next to them. It’s getting better, but - man - it was bad when we first returned from distance learning.