Subject:
|
Re: Children and Violence
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 30 Sep 2001 19:28:13 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
224 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Maggie Cambron writes:
> Perhaps, but I'm not ready to take away the plastic outlet covers.
> Risk of electrocution is NOT something children need to be exposed
> to in order to build a sense of autonomy (nor is risk of injury in
> car accidents because they are not in proper car seats). And in
> these cases we created the risks of electricity and automobiles, so
> I think we have the responsibility to offer our children protection
> from them. Also, in the past people had a lot more children than
> they do today, and the odds of making it to adulthood were
> substantially lower-- in this area I think we have progressed.
For the record, I used outlet covers when my son was little and I imagine that
I'll use them with the next one (due in only ten weeks!). And we have very
high quality car seats -- the best that were available when we did our
research, and installation checked by state safety officials. (By the way,
many auto insurance policies will give a big rebate on carseats, so call them
and find out, if you're shopping for one.)
But there are less clear examples. You can get plastic corner protectors and
buffer every corner in the house, including: walls, tables, counters, drawers,
stairs, etc. Even bicycle helmets are less clearly good in my mind. Most kids
when I was young rode bikes without helmets. Most of us crashed doing daring
and stupid stunts on our bikes. And most of us didn't end up paralyzed. Not
just most, but a staggering majority. I haven't done the cost-benefit
analysis, but I wonder if bike helmets really make sense most of the time.
> Children need to be given the props they need to practice dealing
> with situations and conflicts they may face in their real lives. Therefore,
> while I am against video games that graphically depict violent acts,
> particularly when they are without consequences, I do think it is
> counterproductive to shelter kids from the tools they need to develop skills
> they need to cope with the world or to simply provide an outlet for impulses
> they may have.
What, in your mind, is the difference between playing graphically violent video
games and playing cops'n'robbers or cowboys'n'indians as far as that goes?
Particularly in the latter example, isn't it just celebrating the abuse of
others? I guess at least you're getting excercize...
> I have been reading the Harry Potter books to my kids at bedtime. We just • read
> a scene in which Harry has the opportunity to kill someone he perceives to be
> the murderer of his parents. Harry takes the time to labor over what to do • and
> ultimately decides against killing him, even though his decision puts both
> Harry and his friends in immediate danger. Without opportunities to think
> through possibilities such as these, both in play and in literature, children
> are deprived of a valuable opportunity to develop fully as individuals capable
> of thinking and making decisions for themselves.
I agree. And I think that I don't oppose violent games (video included)
because it gives the kids a chance to see the world that would exist if
violence was fun. And they get to see that the world of Doom, Streetfighter,
or Cops'n'Robbers isn't actually pretty. They can compare it to the world of
learning, love, and building and see that that is the shining light.
Chris
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Children and Violence
|
| Hello Chris, in general, I agree with your posting, but this one example seems odd to me: (...) Bike helmets will not prevent kids from learning that certain practices are dangerous, just limit the effect such dangerous practices can have. I think (...) (23 years ago, 30-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Children and Violence
|
| (...) This is a great question! A few days/weeks back Dan J, when asked about Hamas and Hezbollah training kids with tinfoil wrapped wooden knives to kill Israeli soldiers, responded that it was the same (or essentially the same) as American kids (...) (23 years ago, 30-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Children and Violence
|
| (...) And the less control they feel they have over their own environment. (...) Violence may be the expression of a pent up desire to control one's environment. It seems those most likely to commit egregious acts of violence are those who have been (...) (23 years ago, 30-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
18 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
