Victimhood culture and Stranger Danger

[Jolly_Penguin]

An excellent talk between Michael Shermer and Jon Haidt, two great minds, on Victimhood Culture and Stranger Danger. I wouldn't expect anyone here to listen to the whole thing, its long, but I very much enjoyed it.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE5qXeb2U5c [/youtube]

I have noticed this with my own generation and that of my nephews. When I was a kid, I would stay out from 9am and not see my parents again often until 9pm, and did all sorts of things on my own in between. There was no cellphone I had to carry with me everywhere. I didn't have to check in hourly or even ever few hours. I rode my little bicycle everywhere, right across the city. I settled conflict without often calling on any authority figures. When I came to Canada I heard stories from Canadians already living here that was pretty much the same experience I had, and is still the same experience back where I was born.

But it sure has changed over here in Canada (and the USA as well). Today there is so much more coddling and fear of Stranger Danger, when things are actually much safer now than they were then.

Haidt proposes that such coddling leads to youngsters and young adults who look to authority figures for redress and play into a victimhood narrative to get things done. Shermer makes the great point that in his day they protested against the vietnam war, but in today's age people actually protested against haloween costumes.

"Everything is against you. Everything is oppression. You are weak. You are fragile. " really is a message we have blasting at kids these days, in an day and age when things are better and safer than at pretty much any other time in history.

HeterodoxAcademy.org is Haidt's website. Diversity means more than just physical characteristics. Diversity of opinions and ideas is valuable too.

- - - Updated - - -

I just realized I had already posted about this in the Social Science section. Please delete or merge. Thanks.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

When I was a kid, I would stay out from 9am and not see my parents again often until 9pm, and did all sorts of things on my own in between.

Me too and a lot of bad things happened to me and other kids I knew.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Shermer makes the great point that in his day they protested against the vietnam war, but in today's age people actually protested against haloween costumes.

Yeah people never protest about anything important today. Like, I don't know, maybe the hundreds of thousands of people who were protesting for gun control? Truly, we live in coddled times.

 

[RavenSky]

An excellent talk between Michael Shermer and Jon Haidt, two great minds, on Victimhood Culture and Stranger Danger...

But it sure has changed over here in Canada (and the USA as well). Today there is so much more coddling and fear of Stranger Danger, when things are actually much safer now than they were then.

The bolded couldn't have anything to do with more precautions, right?

It's like insisting that a reduction in auto accident fatalities couldn't possibly have anything to do with improvements in auto safety features.

Shermer makes the great point that in his day they protested against the vietnam war, but in today's age people actually protested against haloween costumes.

Shermer clearly hasn't been paying any attention to current events.

 

[Worldtraveller]

If you use 'Shermer' and 'great minds' in the same sentence, you're already lost.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Today on "Jesus Fucking Christ - You Call That Logic?!" we talk about how teaching children about "Stranger Danger" was followed by a drop in kidnapping, therefore Stranger Danger is paranoia. And afterwards, we talk about unnecessary use of vaccines in light of the really low rate of occurrence of the diseases they allegedly fight. And tomorrow, stay tuned to our special episode where Dennis Prager explains how the AIDS scare for heterosexuals was completely unnecessary as evidenced by the non-epidemic rate of HIV cases (in the US). And finally subscribe to our online newsletter with October's headlining story, "Are seat belts really necessary with the drop in car related deaths?"

 

[laughing dog]

If you use 'Shermer' and 'great minds' in the same sentence, you're already lost.

That was my first reaction as well.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

When children are harmed, attacked, kidnapped, or abused it is almost always by somebody they know, not a stranger. There is extremely little risk in letting your kids roam free. Yet I have actually seen young children on leashes.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

When children are harmed, attacked, kidnapped, or abused it is almost always by somebody they know, not a stranger. There is extremely little risk in letting your kids roam free.

There are lots of people they meet and then get to know from roaming free.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

When children are harmed, attacked, kidnapped, or abused it is almost always by somebody they know, not a stranger. There is extremely little risk in letting your kids roam free.

Care to define "kids"?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

When children are harmed, attacked, kidnapped, or abused it is almost always by somebody they know, not a stranger. There is extremely little risk in letting your kids roam free.

There are lots of people they meet and then get to know from roaming free.

There are indeed and that's a great thing.

 

[Harry Bosch]

An excellent talk between Michael Shermer and Jon Haidt, two great minds, on Victimhood Culture and Stranger Danger. I wouldn't expect anyone here to listen to the whole thing, its long, but I very much enjoyed it.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE5qXeb2U5c [/youtube]

I have noticed this with my own generation and that of my nephews. When I was a kid, I would stay out from 9am and not see my parents again often until 9pm, and did all sorts of things on my own in between. There was no cellphone I had to carry with me everywhere. I didn't have to check in hourly or even ever few hours. I rode my little bicycle everywhere, right across the city. I settled conflict without often calling on any authority figures. When I came to Canada I heard stories from Canadians already living here that was pretty much the same experience I had, and is still the same experience back where I was born.

But it sure has changed over here in Canada (and the USA as well). Today there is so much more coddling and fear of Stranger Danger, when things are actually much safer now than they were then.

Haidt proposes that such coddling leads to youngsters and young adults who look to authority figures for redress and play into a victimhood narrative to get things done. Shermer makes the great point that in his day they protested against the vietnam war, but in today's age people actually protested against haloween costumes.

"Everything is against you. Everything is oppression. You are weak. You are fragile. " really is a message we have blasting at kids these days, in an day and age when things are better and safer than at pretty much any other time in history.

HeterodoxAcademy.org is Haidt's website. Diversity means more than just physical characteristics. Diversity of opinions and ideas is valuable too.

- - - Updated - - -

I just realized I had already posted about this in the Social Science section. Please delete or merge. Thanks.

I would agree that stranger danger is greatly overexaggerated. However, I've always thought that free range parenting is just lazy parenting! I believe in keeping kids busy. No computer games. Little "roaming". Education is number one priority by far. After education, people should get off their ass and take their kids on adventures. During the winter, we're taking kids skiing. Spring and Fall we're taking kids hunting and fishing. Kayaking. Sailing lessons. Sports. Science camp. Computer camp. And etc.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

An excellent talk between Michael Shermer and Jon Haidt, two great minds, on Victimhood Culture and Stranger Danger. I wouldn't expect anyone here to listen to the whole thing, its long, but I very much enjoyed it.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE5qXeb2U5c [/youtube]

I have noticed this with my own generation and that of my nephews. When I was a kid, I would stay out from 9am and not see my parents again often until 9pm, and did all sorts of things on my own in between. There was no cellphone I had to carry with me everywhere. I didn't have to check in hourly or even ever few hours. I rode my little bicycle everywhere, right across the city. I settled conflict without often calling on any authority figures. When I came to Canada I heard stories from Canadians already living here that was pretty much the same experience I had, and is still the same experience back where I was born.

But it sure has changed over here in Canada (and the USA as well). Today there is so much more coddling and fear of Stranger Danger, when things are actually much safer now than they were then.

Haidt proposes that such coddling leads to youngsters and young adults who look to authority figures for redress and play into a victimhood narrative to get things done. Shermer makes the great point that in his day they protested against the vietnam war, but in today's age people actually protested against haloween costumes.

"Everything is against you. Everything is oppression. You are weak. You are fragile. " really is a message we have blasting at kids these days, in an day and age when things are better and safer than at pretty much any other time in history.

HeterodoxAcademy.org is Haidt's website. Diversity means more than just physical characteristics. Diversity of opinions and ideas is valuable too.

- - - Updated - - -

I just realized I had already posted about this in the Social Science section. Please delete or merge. Thanks.

I would agree that stranger danger is greatly overexaggerated.

Well sure, unless your kid is kidnapped and never comes home again leaving a hole in your body and mind for the rest of your miserable life, then you think "stranger danger" isn't overexaggerated. Pretty much risk-benefit thing.

Sure, kids are much more likely to be killed by their own parents, but for the parents that aren't immature, suffer from rage management issues, or keep loaded guns just hanging around, the chances of their kid not coming home because of a person that wants to do unspeakable things... and then kill them rises a bit.

However, I've always thought that free range parenting is just lazy parenting!

What the heck is "free range" parenting. Is it letting your 8 year old go to the playground alone? Is it letting your 4 year wander about. Is it having your kids live in a tent miles from home?

I believe in keeping kids busy. No computer games. Little "roaming". Education is number one priority by far. After education, people should get off their ass and take their kids on adventures. During the winter, we're taking kids skiing. Spring and Fall we're taking kids hunting and fishing. Kayaking. Sailing lessons. Sports. Science camp. Computer camp. And etc.

I'm pro hamster ball myself. It might lead to adjustment issues once they get out at the age of 18, but you don't need to worry about teen pregnancies.

 

[southernhybrid]

I immensely enjoyed being a free range kid, but I grew up in the 50s and 60s, when children were almost always outside and children played or roamed in groups. It was rare to be roaming around by yourself, so in that respect, it was probably safer. My son was pretty much a free range kid, but he was always with a few other boys if he was roaming around. His roaming was far less adventurous than my roaming. I would have hated to have my parents dictate my activities to me. We played ball in the street, roamed around the woods discovering nature, and we even went sledding during the winter, in a large cemetery about a mile from my house, that had lots of hills.

The culture has changed drastically since those days. My son is far more protective of his children than my parents were of me and my sisters. Maybe part of the reason that today's parents are more protective is that most people are having children later in life. My parents were in their 20s when I was born and I was 21 when my son was born. Younger people tend to be bigger risk takers. I know I was. These days, you rarely see children outside playing. They are more likely to be inside playing with their electronic devices. Which is more harmful? Allowing your kids to roam the area with other kids or allowing kids to be alone while hooked up to electronic devices during much of their free time. I can't make a case for either, but for me, being outside and roaming freely was a wonderfully important part of my childhood. Plus, there are plenty of potential dangers that kids these days become involved with on the Internet. There is no easy answer.

You can be the most over protective parent in the world and bad things can still happen to your children. You can't protect your kids from everything. I think perhaps there could be a happy medium, where kids have some time to be outside unsupervised with friends while still being supervised by parents for much of the time.

I also think that our 24/7 news media has made people more fearful. As the saying goes, "you bleed, you lead." Much if not most of the news concentrates on violent crimes. That might be an influence on why parents feel more like they must protect their children these days, compared to my generation. I'm not judging anyone. Okay. I think most parents do the best they can to raise their children and we never realize our mistakes until our kids are grown up and we start wondering if there were things we should have done differently.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

When children are harmed, attacked, kidnapped, or abused it is almost always by somebody they know, not a stranger. There is extremely little risk in letting your kids roam free.

There are lots of people they meet and then get to know from roaming free.

There are indeed and that's a great thing.

But you said they normally get hurt by people they know, the implication being it's not from people outside their own immediate houses or whatever. Once the kids know people on the outside, those persons can also be dangerous, because as you point out, they are known, no longer strangers.

 

[southernhybrid]

I just read Jimmy's last post. I grew up just outside of NY City and my parents took us on plenty of adventures. We visited every museum, and zoo in the city. We visited lots of state parks and my father sometimes took me ice skating. Sadly, we were also forced to spend most of our Sundays in church, but that's not the point. I read lots of books as a child but I would have hated being confined all day so I could have more learning forced on me. I'm not saying that your priorities are wrong. I'm just saying that people who raised their children differently from you aren't necessarily wrong either.

I used to go to the corner store by myself when I was five. Maybe that was too young, but I was never afraid and nobody ever bothered me. I don't think I ever say a stranger, since we knew all of our neighbors back then. I've lived in the same house for 20 years and I only know a couple of neighbors. I don't even know what most of them look like because people don't spend much time outside anymore. Perhaps the culture in the US has just changed a lot since I was growing up, and that accounts for some of the differences. Can you imagine the freedom that my depression era parents enjoyed? "The Little Rascals" describes it quite well. I just don't think we don't have neighborhoods anymore where people look out for each other's kids. Maybe that's what changed.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I just read Jimmy's last post. I grew up just outside of NY City and my parents took us on plenty of adventures. We visited every museum, and zoo in the city. We visited lots of state parks and my father sometimes took me ice skating. Sadly, we were also forced to spend most of our Sundays in church, but that's not the point. I read lots of books as a child but I would have hated being confined all day so I could have more learning forced on me. I'm not saying that your priorities are wrong. I'm just saying that people who raised their children differently from you aren't necessarily wrong either.

I used to go to the corner store by myself when I was five. Maybe that was too young, but I was never afraid and nobody ever bothered me. I don't think I ever say a stranger, since we knew all of our neighbors back then. I've lived in the same house for 20 years and I only know a couple of neighbors. I don't even know what most of them look like because people don't spend much time outside anymore. Perhaps the culture in the US has just changed a lot since I was growing up, and that accounts for some of the differences. Can you imagine the freedom that my depression era parents enjoyed? "The Little Rascals" describes it quite well. I just don't think we don't have neighborhoods anymore where people look out for each other's kids. Maybe that's what changed.

This is why I hate the term "free range". Live in the city, suburbs, rural? Age of kids. What is the turnover in the area where you (impersonal person, not you personal) live? I grew up in the 80s and I was able to roam, but grew up in decent sized towns, but still out of the way-ish with plenty of woods and paths to explore (and I also had (have) a great sense of direction). Where I live now, isn't where I grew up so the limits I had aren't necessarily reasonable for my daughter (5 years old), as I struggle on determining the limits.

The thing that pisses me off the most are the idiots that want to judge parents. Idiots that know nothing about the children... or the parents... or anything about what they do and don't do. I wish people would shut the fuck up about how people should raise kids. There are so many variables.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Well sure, unless your kid is kidnapped and never comes home again leaving a hole in your body and mind for the rest of your miserable life, then you think "stranger danger" isn't overexaggerated. Pretty much risk-benefit thing.

The risk is negligible. You drive them in a car (far more dangerous). You walk across the street. You breathe. You drink tap water. You let your kids go without constant parental monitoring. Coddling kids does more damage than letter them roam.

What the heck is "free range" parenting. Is it letting your 8 year old go to the playground alone? Is it letting your 4 year wander about. Is it having your kids live in a tent miles from home?

It isn't a binary thing. It is more of spectrum, and modern families lean too heavily to the side of coddling and constant observation. Kids need time to play on their own without any adults around. It is vital to their development. That's what Haidt is saying in the video. If kids don't grow up with that experience, and first experience it in college, that's a recipe for much greater disaster.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I also think that our 24/7 news media has made people more fearful. As the saying goes, "you bleed, you lead." Much if not most of the news concentrates on violent crimes. That might be an influence on why parents feel more like they must protect their children these days, compared to my generation.

Haidt thinks this has a lot to do with it. In the late 80s and early 90s stranger danger became a thing, and that was as TV (and later, internet) became more ubiquitous. The world is a much safer and better place than most people realize. You'd never guess that we live in one of the most peaceful and prosperous times in world history, but we do. We have very few problems today as compared to earlier generations, at least not in the western world. I think this also explains why we make more and more out of smaller and smaller things (like Halloween costumes as Shermer noted). We hunt more for micro-aggression as aggression becomes less prevalent.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Well sure, unless your kid is kidnapped and never comes home again leaving a hole in your body and mind for the rest of your miserable life, then you think "stranger danger" isn't overexaggerated. Pretty much risk-benefit thing.

The risk is negligible.

Have you ever weighed risk? What is the risk verses what is the rate of the risk verses what is the cost of the remediation of that risk. The chances of your child disappearing because of a stranger is very low. The consequences of your child being abducted and never coming home are unfathomable. Telling your kids not to get into vans candy seems like a pretty small price to pay to mitigate the risk!

You drive them in a car (far more dangerous). You walk across the street. You breathe. You drink tap water. You let your kids go without constant parental monitoring. Coddling kids does more damage than letter them roam.

Who said anything about coddling... have you ever raised kids? There is about a continental wide gap between "stranger danger" and coddling children.

What the heck is "free range" parenting. Is it letting your 8 year old go to the playground alone? Is it letting your 4 year wander about. Is it having your kids live in a tent miles from home?

It isn't a binary thing. It is more of spectrum, and modern families lean too heavily to the side of coddling and constant observation.

According to...?

Kids need time to play on their own without any adults around. It is vital to their development. That's what Haidt is saying in the video. If kids don't grow up with that experience, and first experience it in college, that's a recipe for much greater disaster.

Who the heck is saying a 12 year old can't go out somewhere on their own?!