15 ms·
Its been a genuine problem. I have heard people actually say that if a kid is playing outside by themselves, then the parent should be charged with child neglec
by danjoredd 4y ago
Its been a genuine problem. I have heard people actually say that if a kid is playing outside by themselves, then the parent should be charged with child neglect because the kid could get hurt. Any time a kid gets hurt on YouTube the comments are filled with people blaming the parent for not being outside with them. Thing is, playing outside by yourself gives you a strong sense of independence. The kid might get hurt, sure, but when the alternative is them never learning to be on their own and do things for themselves, the risk seems well worth it.
- andrepd 4y agoSure, a reasonable risk is tolerable. But, for instance, car-centric infrastructure has *intensely* exacerbated those risks: space is completely surrendered to cars, sidewalks are non-existent, crosswalks go across 8 lanes of 60+mph traffic. All of this, plus terrible public transport, makes it impossible to travel anyway except by car. This leads to lack of independence for children, and sedentarism.
- Icathian 4y agoThis is hyperbole at best. There are entire swathes of the country, both rural and suburban, with plenty of safe places for kids to exist.
- danjoredd 4y agoIt also depends on where you live. If you are a suburban or rural kid, playing outside all you want is fine. Let them explore the neighborhood. If you live near a highway though, or a high crime area, then you might want to reconsider what you want to allow. You still need common sense. My main worry is people who live in relatively safe areas, like a suburban neighborhood, but with neighbors that will STILL call CPS on you for allowing them a little freedom. When I was a kid living in a trailer park we had neighbors like that. Never called CPS, but definitely complained about us being unsupervised despite the fact that the speed limit was a mere 15 MPH, and that we made a point not to bother the neighbors because our parents told us not to. They just saw kids playing and having fun, and decided it was a crime against humanity.
- Aeolun 4y ago> a high crime area What exactly do you expect to happen to your 6 year old? They’re not a very useful target for anything I can think of.
- cafard 4y agoRecently, it seems that every year in Washington, DC, there are a few bystanders shot by groups quarreling with other groups. Some of those bystanders have been very young.
- doubled112 4y agoGive me your lunch money! No, that doesn't sound right. Other than gangs recruiting young and something accidental (kid caught in crossfire), I agree, I can’t see the very young being targeted.
- seanmcdirmid 4y agoMost schools have lunch accounts these days, stealing lunch money is no longer possible. We have a lot of unhoused neighbors in our neighborhood. When they are on bad fent trips, they can get pretty irrationally violent, though I've never heard of a kid being attacked before.
- trpv 4y agoIs “unhoused neighbors” your term for homeless people?
- idontpost 4y ago[dead]
- xkcd-sucks 4y agoIt feels like this infrastructural risk is media driven to the extent of "pedophile kidnappers" or "razor blades in apples". For example I grew up in an Eastern MA "suburb" in the mid 90s - early 2000s, characterized by narrow winding roads, fast drivers, and no streetlights. Everyone too young or unconnected to have car access bicycled or walked everywhere; parents were a bit fearful but ultimately acquiescent ("better dead than dumb, and if you're not dumb you won't die"), and cops only cared about trespassing with intent to vandalize. Over the intervening years, the town added nice wide sidewalks (previously none), fancy crosswalk infrastructure, lighting, and started enforcing speed limits extremely aggressively. Yet the number of people on foot and bike dwindled to almost nothing and now the only ones are older middle aged folk walking their dogs.
- sfpotter 4y agoI feel you, but this is clearly a “correlation is not causation” type situation. Infrastructure should be people-centric, and there’s nothing wrong with doing things to reduce car speed and make the built environment safe. It is unlikely that improved infrastructure resulted in people walking and biking less, which is what the wording of your post suggests. (Also, love your username… I thought I was the only one. ;-) )
- ummonk 4y agoThe wording of their comment did not suggest that.
- paulryanrogers 4y agoIt did to me as well.
- xkcd-sucks 4y agoPresumably the infrastructure development itself was not causative, but, the trend occurred nonetheless over roughly the same time course as the development.
- geoelectric 4y ago
- uulu 4y ago> crosswalks go across 8 lanes of 60+mph traffic Do such crosswalks really exist? Seriously. AFAIK, 60+mph speed is allowed usually (if not exclusively) on Controlled-access highways where pedestrians are not allowed at all. I highly doubt such crosswalks exist at all.
- californical 4y agoPeople easily go 60+ on 55mph roads
- voidfunc 4y agoIn what world do you live where people actually follow speed limits?
- tayo42 4y agoI grew up with a 6 lane highway with cross walks. I'm sure people hit 60+ even though the limit is 55.theres lights to cross at though
- nullc 4y agoThese risks have not increased substantially in the last 20 years, and in many ways they have decreased e.g. the mandatory backup cameras in new cars.
- oblio 4y agoCars are much bigger (easier to accidentally hit stuff with them), taller (harder to see things at street level) and heavier (take longer to stop and hit much harder) and smartphones greatly reduce driver attention.
- nullc 4y agoI went googling to find evidence to disprove your statement about cars, and I found that you are correct. Though the trend slope is pretty shallow in the graphs I found, I can believe small increases have outsized effects. ...and the smartphone part I obviously wouldn't dispute.
- evan_ 4y ago> Any time a kid gets hurt on YouTube Who's filming the kid getting hurt and putting it on youtube? Maybe that's what the comments are talking about...
- danjoredd 4y agoNo, its mostly news stories and channels like Code Blue Cam where I see people getting overprotective and blaming parents for letting their kids roam. Also sometimes kids will film each other doing stupid stuff and then those videos get added to compilations
- qball 4y ago>I have heard people actually say that if a kid is playing outside by themselves, then the parent should be charged with child neglect because the kid could get hurt. Giving concern trolls the ability to use the State's guns on whatever personally offends them always ends badly.
- zamadatix 4y agoWhy concern trolling in particular rather than good old traditional fake concern?
- samtho 4y agoI’m guessing that OP can’t even comprehend what reasonable person of rational mind would report a child in no immediate danger for being neglected. OP is calling it trolling because it’s hard to believe people are that stupid and therefore must be doing it simply to harass others.
- zamadatix 4y agoConcern trolling isn't the same as just trolling about being concerned it's a specific type of interaction around delegitimizing the other viewpoint via faking support of the view but raising concerns you don't actually have that may raise doubt about the view to others.
- geomark 4y agoIt's even in the YouTube algorithm. I've had a couple of videos taken down due to "potential child endangerment". They were videos of me and my kid doing things that are, realistically, safer than riding a bicycle. It's pathetic how fragile kids are being made these days.
- gsk22 4y agoOut of curiosity, what were the videos? The algorithm (advertisers?) is certainly picky...
- geomark 4y agoThe most recent was when my kid did a review of two different multitools. Within five minutes of uploading it YouTube had taken it down due to "potential child endangerment."
- iLoveOncall 4y agoYeah, it's child endangerment to put your kid on YouTube.
- geomark 4y agoAs long as it's something sterile like playing video games it's fine. But as soon as a kid does something with a bit of substance it becomes child endangerment.
- throw10920 4y agoThe YouTube rules are completely insane. Whoever makes them has totally lost their mind. For instance, YouTube recently implemented a policy such that they now demonitize videos that contain profanity in the first 15 seconds - AND THIS APPLIES RETROACTIVELY TO VIDEOS RELEASED BEFORE THE POLICY WAS CHANGED. Between that, the downvote count being removed, random demonetizations, mysterious channel shadowbans, the DMCA travesty, YouTube Rewind, and the "misinformation" rules, YouTube is a complete trash fire. Nobody sane believes that the YouTube rules are reasonable.
- makeitdouble 4y agoAs a general rule, parents seem to be blamed for anything happening to a kid under any specific setting. Kids playing outside is one of them, kids talking to strangers, kids browsing the internet will also be seen the same...and then kids using voice chat in online games, kids talking to strangers in VR, kids just playing in VR, kids watching youtube etc. It seem well accepted that pervert/criminal will go after kids at any occasion, the community can't be expected to police itself nor stop other people from hurting kids, and kids need to be locked away or under adult supervision 24/24 until adulthood or the parents are failing their job, and they shouldn't have kids if they're not up to the challenge. I think there is a real issue on what people perceive as society's role and what parent's role is.
- s1artibartfast 4y ago>I think there is a real issue on what people perceive as society's role and what parent's role is. Not only that, but you a society has become obsessed with risk mitigation over the last several decades. The problem is that people are poorly equipped to estimate risk with very low occurrences against low or unclear cost. You see it in all facets of society with a platitude of better safe than sorry. It shows up in increased medical licensing to reduce error, which means less accessible and more expensive care. It shows up in new parents who don't introduce their children to family for risk of covid. It shows up San Francisco city policy to reduce traffic death to zero even if it means reducing traffic to a standstill. At the end of the day, a life with zero risk is not a life worth living but people are scared into the safest option.
- cmurf 4y agoMeanwhile actual trauma, by way of active shooter drills that are not announced in advance, run rampant and unchecked. https://twitter.com/donnaprovencher/status/1628127839747772436?s=12&t=EjmauQjerGZUsb1UK4jGzw https://twitter.com/donnaprovencher/status/16281278397477724... Obsession with risk mitigation is too diplomatic for what's going on here.
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago
- MomoXenosaga 4y agoThat is all well and good for rich people with big backyards or nanny's but how about the rest of the country?
- danjoredd 4y agoLook man, I grew up in a trailer park. Very few people live alongside highways or in places where it is not safe to play outside. Currently, I live in a low income apartment complex, and I still see kids playing outside. three years ago I lived on the most violent street in our town because rent was so cheap there, and I still saw kids riding around on scooters and playing ball. A lot of it is mentality, and what you view as an acceptable risk. Has very little to do with income.
- tutorialmanager 4y agoI frequently go to a trailer park to help someone there. Young kids are often running around and playing with other kids. In the summer I’ve seen a group of 8-10 kids grade and middle school age (some very young) sitting in street after dark playing games and talking. It’s a very mixed group age/gender/race. In my own wealthy neighbourhood I never see kids playing outside.
- JanSt 4y agoBy that logic my childhood in Germany was 95% neglect. Also, I was hurt often and that was good.
- hef19898 4y agoThose people should take the subway in, e.g. Munich, when children go to school. A nice mix of people commuting to the office and 6 year olds commuting to school in the same crampted subway cars. Looking from the outside in, the US are just a wierd country.