[PH95VuimJjqBqy]

your thought process is all over the place.

Gen-x was more independent because they were allowed to be, the family size doesn't have a lot of bearing on that, but more than that it's a non-sequitur that somehow gen-x is a counter-example to the idea that smaller families lead to higher value placed on child safety. child safety and independence are orthogonal ideas.

[lapcat]

> Gen-x was more independent because they were allowed to be

Correct.

> the family size doesn't have a lot of bearing on that

Correct.

> child safety and independence are orthogonal ideas.

Incorrect.

[PH95VuimJjqBqy]

your last statement is only true if you believe in a binary world.

In truth, a child can grab a can of soda out of the fridge without it being a safety concern.

[lapcat]

> your last statement is only true if you believe in a binary world.

That's basically a nonsensical reply.

> In truth, a child can grab a can of soda out of the fridge without it being a safety concern.

Nobody is talking about children grabbing cans of soda. That's a non sequitur. The submitted article: "Children need risk, fear, and excitement in play".

[PH95VuimJjqBqy]

I'm not going to play that game, the discussion had meandered over to safety and independence as orthogonal things.

we're done here.