Seems some public schools have 'outlawed' hugs... games like Tag, dodge ball... and other things to 'protect' them.
When I was a kid, I rode in the back of my father's truck, or stood in the back seat driving down the road. If it were a long ride, I might get a few minutes on his lap driving the car while he tried to avoid me spilling his beer.
When I played dodge ball, I was pretty good but didn't bean on the weaklings, I would go out of my way to protect some of them from the other kids and always went for the best players, or invited their attack on me. I hope you did the same, I wasn't the only one doing so.
Games being deemed too dangerous, or kids not being able to hug is a big problem I feel for growing children. It's gotten to a point also where EVERYONE gets a trophy like they won, regardless how poor they've done.
On the other side of a coin, I have a friend with kids who bought them a trampoline. Someone asked if they might should get a protective border they sell.
He said, "Eh, they wont learn anything unless they fall off and at least need stitches or something." This I think is idiotic, but his decision to make I guess. My wife thinks anyone who gets a motorcycle or trampoline for their kid WANTS them to die. I don't agree, but safety is a priority for sure.
So, where do you stand on this?
P-
Originally posted by PhlabibitFor something deemed to be too dangerous in todays world, all that is needed is for one person to get hurt in some way followed by legal action or the possibility thereof. It only takes one person to ruin everyone elses fun. I am just glad it was not taken from me when I was in school. In school, I lived for dodge ball!!
Seems some public schools have 'outlawed' hugs... games like Tag, dodge ball... and other things to 'protect' them.
When I was a kid, I rode in the back of my father's truck, or stood in the back seat driving down the road. If it were a long ride, I might get a few minutes on his lap driving the car while he tried to avoid me spilling his beer.
Wh t agree, but safety is a priority for sure.
So, where do you stand on this?
P-
As for such things as trampalines, statistically some activities are more prone to serious injury than others so I can understand limiting these activities. However, when is the last time someone died from or was seriously injured from dodge ball? One person in the last 15 billion year history of the universe perhaps?
As far as for everyone winning and nobody loosing, give me a break. I learn the most by loosing so as not to allow it to happen again. Chess is a prime example. It would not only take the fun away but it would take the motivation to learn to not let it happen again because the thought of loosing is repugnant. In fact, you might say that loosing is a successful way to find out how not to go about something.
Exactly! The problem is people suing instead of understanding that life is hazardous when you're a kid, especially if you do it right. There is no greater joy in childhood (a vague, relative term in this case) than riding in the back of a pick-up truck!
It's parents who think their children should be awarded for having a pulse. I've heard parents complain that kids didn't get some award just for participating in something. If you're in a competition, then there will be winners and non-winners. Period. Children and teens don't learn to handle disappointment if they're shielded from it until they're suddenly adults and can't adjust to the real world.
When I was playing dodge ball I did knock a kid's tooth out, and it was a bummer. He came down on the ball with his foot, and went over forward on his face. Broke a front tooth right in half and split his lip.
I also knew a kid who broke his leg on the pavement playing kickball. He was alergic to milk, and his thigh bone broke with a bad step to third base.
Come to think about it, I also saw a friend on the swings as the chain broke. It caught his jacket on the way down and spun him right into the dirt face first scraping him up pretty good around the eye, cheek, and ear.
I myself remember riding my bike once. Me and a good friend had a bit of an argument and ended up racing our BMX bikes down the road. I was cranking past him, and my chain broke. This sent my leg spinning to the ground and I went over the handlebars at about 15 or 20 MPH. I had a hole in my knee, and the heel of my hand that quickly filled with a lot of blood.
He got my bike out of the road, helped me out of the road... and we forget any problems we had at all before that. These are important things I feel, not sure what lessons they are... but I remember them all.
P-
i dislike parents who protect their children so much that they grow up to be panzies. like sending a child out into the world in steel armour plating would protect him. if sh/t happens, you could get killed by a bucket of sand as you walk by a constructing building. instead of giving the child a helmet how about teaching him not to walk near that building in the first place.
Originally posted by pawnhandlerand there is more. by awarding prizes for mediocrity you encourage mediocrity. what is the benefit of awarding a prize to the last in a competition since all that individual did is show up. are children so fragile that their feeling will get hurt and be permanently scarred? when should they deal with defeat and disappointment? when their 20?
Exactly! The problem is people suing instead of understanding that life is hazardous when you're a kid, especially if you do it right. There is no greater joy in childhood (a vague, relative term in this case) than riding in the back of a pick-up truck!
It's parents who think their children should be awarded for having a pulse. I've heard parents ...[text shortened]... y're shielded from it until they're suddenly adults and can't adjust to the real world.
Originally posted by ZahlanziI fully agree, threat children as adults, so they are good prepared when they are 20. That's why I suggest they start drinking (alcohol) at an age of five the cope with the possible threats. The know to handle a hang over when they are twenty. Perheps when they ARE twenty, they do not feel the urge to compensate for lost times.
and there is more. by awarding prizes for mediocrity you encourage mediocrity. what is the benefit of awarding a prize to the last in a competition since all that individual did is show up. are children so fragile that their feeling will get hurt and be permanently scarred? when should they deal with defeat and disappointment? when their 20?
When playing for my school's football team (real football, with a round ball), I curled a corker of a shot just past the goal (sadly) and it hit a kid, who was sitting behind the goal and just drinking from a bottle, square in the face. Knocked his front teeth out.
He learned his lesson. Lucky for him, they were still baby teeth.
The kids had been told by their coach to not sit behind the goals.
Originally posted by knightwestDave Barryesquely, I am not making this up:
When playing for my school's football team (real football, with a round ball), I curled a corker of a shot just past the goal (sadly) and it hit a kid, who was sitting behind the goal and just drinking from a bottle, square in the face. Knocked his front teeth out.
He learned his lesson. Lucky for him, they were still baby teeth.
The kids had been told by their coach to not sit behind the goals.
Recently, I was sitting on a beach and had just finished tying my shirt around my head, bandana-style, when my friend commented out of the blue that most stupid people are probably that way because they were afraid to get dirty as children. Just as she said this, a massive seagull flew over and shat on my newly, unintentionally protected head.
Children and other people should protect themselves as much as is minimally prudent and leave the rest to chance and curiosity.
EDIT Phlab gets props for starting a debate which gives few opportunities for people to talk lots of nonsense about things they don't know much about and have no effect on.
Originally posted by Phlabibit{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{public schools}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
Seems some public schools have 'outlawed' hugs... games like Tag, dodge ball... and other things to 'protect' them.
When I was a kid, I rode in the back of my father's truck, or stood in the back seat driving down the road. If it were a long ride, I might get a few minutes on his lap driving the car while he tried to avoid me spilling his beer.
Wh ...[text shortened]... t agree, but safety is a priority for sure.
So, where do you stand on this?
P-
Originally posted by PhlabibitI think we should step back and quit micromanaging and sexualizing our children's lives. The problem in America today is that kids just don't have time to be kids anymore. A lot of this is the result of the takeover of the public school system by liberals, whose agenda is anti-kid and anti-family. Furthermore, when you add psychiatrists into this toxic mix, it's no wonder our kids are unmotivated, unfeeling, underachieving failures bent on suicide or a drug-induced rampage against their teachers and classmates.
Seems some public schools have 'outlawed' hugs... games like Tag, dodge ball... and other things to 'protect' them.
When I was a kid, I rode in the back of my father's truck, or stood in the back seat driving down the road. If it were a long ride, I might get a few minutes on his lap driving the car while he tried to avoid me spilling his beer.
Wh ...[text shortened]... t agree, but safety is a priority for sure.
So, where do you stand on this?
P-
Originally posted by PhlabibitI totally agree that things have gone too far and got paranoid - a report yesterday, saying that kids mental as well as physical health was suffering because they weren't allowed out to play because parents were being overly protective, hopefully heralds the start of a backlash.
Seems some public schools have 'outlawed' hugs... games like Tag, dodge ball... and other things to 'protect' them.
When I was a kid, I rode in the back of my father's truck, or stood in the back seat driving down the road.
But I do object when people use the "I did X when I was a kid and I'm OK" argument. My gran smoked 40 a day until she died at 76 - that doesn't mean smoking hasn't killed millions of people just because she wasn't one. Thousands of kids are dead because they weren't wearing seatbelts - that's a good reason to make them compulsory. That there is a finite chance that a kid might brain himself playing tag isn't a reason to ban it. It about getting a balance and perspective.
Originally posted by Zahlanziagain, is it all bad or is it about getting the right balance. Rewarding someone for being the worst might demotivate people from trying to do better, but telling some kid at a young age "you came last, you're no good at this" will pretty quickly stop him from even trying. I guess what they're trying to do is not to polarise kids too early into winners and losers.
and there is more. by awarding prizes for mediocrity you encourage mediocrity. what is the benefit of awarding a prize to the last in a competition since all that individual did is show up. are children so fragile that their feeling will get hurt and be permanently scarred? when should they deal with defeat and disappointment? when their 20?
A stupid example - as a 6 year old we were drawing at school. The kid next to me was pretty good compared to my attempts, and when I realised this I decided that I couldn't draw, and because painting cotton wool sheep wasn't on the core syllabus from then on I never opted for classes in art. 25 years on I discovered that, considering I've never practiced, I'm a pretty good artist and wonder what I might have been capable of if I had taken a few classes as a kid.
It was probably just that the kid next to me in class had had more practice, or developed fine motor skills faster than I had, but all it took was for me to believe as a kid that I wasn't good at something to make me not want to do it any more.
So back to the original point - when you have the small or uncoordinated kid doing sports or whatever, trying hard and coming in last, I think you should say "hey, at least you tried - good job - keep practicing and you might get better". Just don't go overboard about it.
Originally posted by belgianfreakAgreed. You need to offer encouragement to all - not just the winners, and not necessarily via a tangible "award".
again, is it all bad or is it about getting the right balance. Rewarding someone for being the worst might demotivate people from trying to do better, but telling some kid at a young age "you came last, you're no good at this" will pretty quickly stop him from even trying. I guess what they're trying to do is not to polarise kids too early into winners d job - keep practicing and you might get better". Just don't go overboard about it.
I wanted to be good at XC at school (age 11-13 - XC was the only long distance running we did) - the top 6 runners were taken to the county champs, then national champs if succesful at county.
I was consistently 7th or 8th and got absolutely no encouragement whatsoever, so I lost interest and didn't bother with sport again until after university.
Aged 25 I trained for and completed the London Marathon, and within another 12 months I'd won a local 10k race, and come 3rd in another down south. Part of me wonders how much better I could have been if I hadn't spent 12 years away from the sport.
edit - people develop at different rates, and to be constrained by the schooling "funnel" system of you do this at this age, and that at this age means many people miss opportunities as the timing is just not right.