Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by b112 217 days ago
No? I grew up in a rural area, with fields and places to run... and run I did.

A nearby huge city had a mall. City being 30k people. Yet left in that mall, with 10 friends, I'd run there too.. until chastised. No real difference 50 years ago, in a rural area with a mall than now.

Groups of kids running tend to bump into things, fall into people, excited kids aren't known for taking care. It's been typical for at least going back to the 50s to stop that.

It's also why kids are typically told to stop running around a house.. and to go outside.

So strongly disagree that it is a symptom of no where else to run. Of course, I find it sad if kids have no place to go run.

Local parks can help with this in urban areas.

2 comments

I don't disagree with you, but the fact that something has been done since the 50s when it comes to child care is not necessarily an indicator that it's good. We imposed many things on children during that time that would be widely considered damaging and counter productive today.
Telling kids not to run around indoors where they can collide with objects or people, break things, injure themselves, and generally get in the way isn't damaging - or at least is significantly less damaging than the perception in this thread that telling kids not to do something is awful.
This is just standard manners and teaching children how to interact with an adult society. Why does anybody think telling kids not to run indoors is wrong?
No need to put words in my mouth. I specifically referred to the fact that just because something has been done since the 50s that it doesn't have automatic relevance when it comes to modern child raising, not that telling kids today to cut it out when running on public places is a bad thing.
Ok, no disagreement there, but that wasn't my point.
It does not even have to be urban areas. We have parks all around the city. Our schools have playgrounds. Everything is still there from when I was a kid, i.e. ~20 years ago.