It totally sums it up, but not in the way you think it does. You think that drawing a shitty specious comparison to race is the Game Over card. Really it’s the “I don’t think there’s a future in continuing this conversation with you” card.
If that makes me the same as someone who hates Mexicans or whatever, so be it.
It’s not dysfunctional, though. It’s also not treating all strangers like criminals. It’s keeping an eye out for one’s kids in a way that mitigates risk.
The irony here is that folks who watch out for their children are being accused of overreactions, but almost all those accusations are tremendous overreactions themselves.
I consider children excellent company. In general, I mean. They do vary.
If I’m in a room that contains kids, the polite intelligent thoughtful ones usually pick up on the fact that I tune into them with interest in the same way that I tune into other adults. Many of them like this and interact with me.
I don’t spend a lot of time worrying what the adults may think of it. I look like a hippie. Interestingly, hippie-esque people who enjoy interacting with kids seem to set off fewer social alarms than shorthaired guys with neckties. It’s like it’s expected behavior of us, but weird if they do it. Totally unfair, but it’s nice to get some advantages from the appearance.
People aren’t generally working to further society’s agenda, they are working to their own. Nobody is thinking about embracing the (tiny) risk of allowing their children to talk to adults (who probably aren’t evil, but just might be), for the good of society.
It comes down to local, personal decisions - and in this context, the ‘right’ thing to do appears obvious:
if you allow the interaction and it ends badly, you lose
If you prevent the interaction, nothing happens.
There is no obvious, immediate, local, personal benefit to allowing your kid to interact with random strangers - so people are disinclined to do it. I’m not saying that’s right, but I do believe that’s how it is.
I understand what you’re saying - that it seems like nothing is lost in shielding your kid from strangers. But if a parent enforces an ongoing policy to prevent interactions between their kid and a large fraction of humanity - to the point of actively diverting their kid from strangers, and even calling the cops on some of them - then ISTM that they are instilling in their kid a neurotic level of distrust of adult men; he or she may grow up to have difficult ever fully trusting the intent of the men around them.
It’s fine to teach your kid to have some common sense (“don’t ever get in a stranger’s car,” etc.), but if you teach them to run away screaming any time a man simply speaks to them, they will suffer for it in the long run.
Seems to me that those numbers dictate more caution about the people you know than random strangers.
I think you’re right, but I believe this may be one of those ‘death of small cuts’ situations, where an undesirable outcome arises from a very large collection of small actions, where each action could only really be evaluated on its own, and when evaluated, seemed reasonable.
I don’t think it is specious at all.
Some kids get assaulted by strange men. Therefore, you are saying that one should fear strange men.
Some white people get assaulted by black people, therefore we should be suspicious of black people.
The parallels are obvious to me. If you want to admit to innate racism in your way of thinking as a way to explain your, to me, unnecessary fear of a strange man, then more power to you.
I do actually agree with you here. But keeping an eye out for one’s kids does not mean, to me, calling the cops on a guy doing nothing but talking to children at a playground.
If you had taught your children well, they wouldn’t be talking to a stranger anyway.
If the people I knew were trolling the playground asking kids if they like ice cream, I would be wary as well.
I am much more likely to initiate a conversation with a kid I don’t know than an adult I don’t know. Generally, I like kids better. As a parent, I spend a lot of time in places with kids. I don’t think it’s particularly weird to talk to them.
That can be a suspicious behavior. However, parents tend to minimize suspicious behavior of people they know and paranoia is at a maximum with strangers whether they are acting suspiciously or not. Which is why most kids are sexually abused by people they know, more often than not, family.
I grew up in the same time period. And in a rural area to boot. And yes, adults, including strangers, interacting with children would have been perfectly usual.
Maybe it’s the way I was brought up, but not allowing children to interact with other people, different people, seem like a huge loss to me.
And although I’ve been contaminated myself by the paranoia (in the sense that I would nowadays be wary of being seen interacting with a strange kid), I find it a very sad state of affairs. In fact I find this attitude dysfunctional. It’s the current norm, but I find this norm quite a bit pathological.
Whether this is an accurate summary depends on the meaning of “strange.” If you mean “men I don’t know,” you’re incorrect. If you mean “men acting in a way that violates social norms as I understand them,” and by “fear” you mean “pay extra attention to them,” you’re correct.
Perhaps your understanding of “social norms” is flawed and based on false premises you gleaned while watching alarming news stories?
The fact that you think an adult talking to a child violates “social norms” is most telling and quite saddening actually.
If kids are coming up to me as I’m walking the dog or around me like in a store or nearby me and my son then yes I will talk with them. But what I do not do (and for me this is where the weird guy in the original thread went over the line) is go up to an unattended (meaning parent right there) kid I don’t know and initiate conversation.
Why wouldn’t you? Don’t you think you should find out why an unattended child is at the store or whatever? Are you afraid you won’t be able to resist molesting them?
As pointed out, some predators use grooming or wait for opportunities. I don’t think anyone would abduct a kid in an obvious situation like that (although it has happened) but he could be setting it up so if he sees the kid alone later he can say “Hey come inside for some ice cream.”
Actually I would invite them to come with me and destroy some national or state monuments.
And “Where is your mom or dad?” to keep them safe is not chatting in the context of these threads, at least to me.
You persist in arguing with your imaginary enemy. Nobody thinks that. Certainly not me. Why do you do this–is it purely entertainment, or are you genuinely unable to understand what I and others are saying?