An American problem created in the US. In almost any other country, if you dont aid the girl in some way, you'd be legally responsible. The incessant fads and hysteria that are periodically created in the US has led to a society that is totally dysfunctional.
She was not seriously injured nor in any immediate danger. Most likely she just needed comfort that her caregiver was not providing.
If you see a post that ought to have been moderated but hasn't been, the likeliest explanation is that we didn't see it. We don't come close to seeing everything that gets posted—there's far too much. You can help by flagging it or emailing us at [email protected].
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
Sharp-and-shallow putdowns of other countries are nationalistic flamebait. If it doesn't seem that way to you, it might help to imagine the same thing being said about a country (or some other group) that you feel strongly about.
> An American problem created in the US
Comment already starts off pointing flameward, but ok, it could go either way.
> In almost any other country,
A grand and shallow generalization, consistent with flamebait, but ok, still not dispositive.
> The incessant fads and hysteria
This swerve into pejorative language, given the frame already set, is definitely starting to look like nationalistic flamebait.
> a society that is totally dysfunctional
Ok, now there's no question about it.
Comments like this, which combine denunciatory rhetoric with a very low information/indignation ratio, are definitely not what Hacker News is for. This was not a borderline call!
In every single developed country leaving a child like that would cause everyone there to be prosecuted by law. I didnt hear any other country where trying to help a kid to find his mother by asking around people in a park could be considered child molestation and force someone who is helping to leave the child just like that. Feel free to provide a counter argument.
> This swerve into pejorative language
Are you contesting that there are incessant fads and hysteria in the US? We are living in a time when US is waging two wars on two different fronts and creating propaganda hysteria for the third war. American payment processors are being pressured to cut service to those who certain American groups dont see compliant with their views. The list of fads and hysterias are so long that it requires an entire topic to list.
> a society that is totally dysfunctional > Ok, now there's no question about it.
A society where people work two jobs and yet live in their car where 99% of people will will never buy a house....
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/homes-for-sale-affordable-housi...
...where people die if they cant pay the hospital, and cant feed their children even while working two jobs...
https://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/13/americas-dirty-little-secret...
...to the extent that the solution they find is escaping from the country...
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/american-dream-leave-most-us-...
...and you are saying that is not a dysfunctional society and pointing out all of these are 'nationalistic'.
> Comments like this, which combine denunciatory rhetoric with a very low information/indignation ratio, are not what Hacker News is for
Tech and tech economy are not exempt from a social collapse. You could make an argument that the collapse has not reached a point at which we should talk about it in every thread, maybe. But you were the one challenged the 'dysfunctional' argument. Delirious hysteria like the one the initial commenter posted is a good sign of collapsing societies. The US is one.
If it helps at all, we can assume that you're 100% correct in everything you say. It's still not what this site is for. We want curious conversation here.
This is one of the hysterias and fads that visibly come out of the US frequently as the US public opinion and even the political landscape change.
These stories were all over Reddit for years. I remember a thread asking for examples of things Reddit led them to believe that weren’t true, and the top voted comment was that Reddit made them think that going to the playground as a lone dad would cause women to view them as a predator. In reality, going to the playground as a dad in most places is a non-event. It’s common for dads to be there alone with their kids. When I go, it’s a mix of moms and dads and we all talk and interact.
Yet to a non-parent reading Reddit it seemed like going to the park as a dad was asking for trouble. The story was repeated so often.
I’m sure these events do happen some times. When it does, I wouldn’t be surprised if the accuser was reading their own Reddit equivalent social media website where stories about men being creeps at the playground get passed around as fact. To them, it’s just how they see the world working because they’ve heard it repeated so often.
Before my male friends had kids, they were tense and apprehensive around toddlers. They worried they would hurt them, etc.
Now, they act like Dads, even with kids who have nothing to do with them.
These guys weren't bad people to begin with. They just didn't radiate "dad energy" for lack of a better phrase.
That’s not what I was saying. I admitted that these things must happen somewhere.
The Reddit issue is that those isolated incidents were presented as common occurrences. It was talked about like any dad going to any park was going to attract dirty looks.
Instead, it’s a rare thing that happens when you come across someone problematic who sees problems where they don’t exist.
What I have encountered in the two countries I have lived in is the persistent expectation that the norm is for children to be with women, not with men. This makes suspicion of men with or near children more plausible.
I still find people are surprised a man is the primary parent. My daughter lives with me and people assume her mother must be dead. People have asked where mum is. Dads looking after their own kids are sometimes described a baby-sitting.
This is not as bad, but it does set things up for regarding men being around children as suspicious.
My wife, on the other hand, is the parent who will go over and play with all the children while the parents are on their phones. But she’s a woman, so it’s different.
Also, to be clear, the accusations the article is about are false and unsubstantiated according to the author. It's a "he said, she said".
He's managed to agree with a small number of signatories of the Open Letter that they acted on no evidence (in a jurisdiction where the burden of proof for libel is on the defense, so if they had decided not to agree they'd have had to prove this wrong), but not e.g. the original accusors. The fact that he wrote an epic blog post without being clear on this doesn't really make him look great, though I acknowledge he wanted to focus on a different aspect.
The court case (ending in a consent order, not a judgement) is an interesting story about "as a UK citizen, should you be signing an Open Letter if you merely believe accusers, but don't know them to be right, and can demonstrate how you know", but it has little to do with the accusations themselves.
Suburban East Coast US.
I still try to find those few people around me who aren't garbage, but it's a tough job.
I know what you mean, but he could also have said "fuck off, lady; that's a kid crying, so grow up" and thereby have made clear he was worried about the kid, not some creeper who she hoped to have just told off.
The insinuation was, "stay out of my business or I'm going to tell a lie that could ruin you". He was clearly not bothering the child, anyone could see that, she could saw it herself. Whatever her game was, it was completely deliberate.
Since the child wasn't actually in any real danger, we chose to simply remove ourselves from that situation and not involves ourselves with a crazy person. Unfortunately being a shitty parent isn't illegal.
Depending on the degree of injury, it could really be nothing and the mother is parenting to her standards with her child.
Personally, I’ve had to routinely counsel my own mother who would rush in with the overblown “OH MY GOD ARE YOU OK?! OH NO YOU SCRAPED YOUR KNEE!” Which in turn rile up my kids and cause a bigger scene overall. Typically my interaction with my kid is “Let me see… oh that no no big deal, you’re fine, get back out there,” and they calmly accept that it’s a minor injury, no big deal, and they keep playing. No screaming fits needed.
Just one comment thread up there's a person rushing to believe her and distrust the dad:
> "And don't get me wrong, I'm strongly inclined to believe women and I generally distrust men."
^ from the other comment thread above this one
If he called the cops and said "hey there's a crying kid and I can't find the parents" what power does she have over him there?
If she called the cops and said "I saw a man bothering this girl" what's going to happen in practice for the supposed crime of "talking to a kid who was crying at a playground"? Any asshole can make any false accusation against anyone at any time, here there's not even the slightest evidence of any harm, how seriously would it be taken? Cops drive out, see no man bothering anyone, drive off?
If she posted a video online of "man talking non-aggressively/non-threateningly to girl, then walking around talking to other adults" how much outrage is that going to generate?
The videos that generate huge amounts of outrage and get re-shared have disturbing contents, not just headlines.
I see so many online accounts of these "must walk on eggshells" worldview stories. Smells like an echo chamber, especially because when people self-report to things like "I avoid encounters with women because of this" then I'm not sure how much credence to put into the psychology of womens' behavior from someone with self-professed much-more-limited-interaction-with-them than I have.
This is a Dad who also frequently goes to playgrounds. Tbh, in my experience, most moms are super kind and generous to a man who's out alone playing with his kid because it's the sort of thing they want to encourage/reward.
The only times I've ever felt discriminated against as a male parent by female parents is in group play settings where the women form a clique and don't really want you to talk to them, but even then they're usually mature enough not to have the kids feel any of this, and nobody owes me letting me socialize with them, so it's whatever.
Because it's so uncommon is why my dad was even going around trying to help this girl in the first place, because he never imagined something like that happening. But then we got a hint of it, and decided to just disengage and not risk it.
Did you just jump into comments without reading the article in the post?
Just secretly record her - she then ultimately has less power:
1) She doesn't know
2) He can optionally choose to employ (or not) this information
3) Police may not be civilly liable for escalation afterwards, but she likely will be
Well, who would you believe? Who would the average person believe?
Then do it. Call 911, say there's an injured, unattended child at the playground, and you're getting a hostile response from folks as you try to locate the guardian so you'd appreciate it if a social worker collected the kid until the parents can be found.
There is nothing illegal about speaking to a child, and when you soft play people like this you empower them. Let them have to show a cop a DL to get their kid out a squad car to learn their lesson if they can't handle polite help.
(Also, what is this narrative around HN about being accused of nefariousness at playgrounds? I used to eat my lunch at one near me because it was the only park with a trash can nearby and I didn't want to lug my trash back to my apartment before going on my way towards the city -- nobody ever said a word to me aside from asking for a ball if it rolled over.)
> Then do it. Call 911, say there's an injured, unattended child at the playground, and you're getting a hostile response from folks as you try to locate the guardian
That is the same thing, though! ... very quickly escalating a probable mundane situation to very serious accusations!
I'm the father of a 3 year old daughter, who I take to the playground multiple times per week. This is in Brooklyn, NYC. I haven't had any issues. But I believe the horror stories, there are just a sufficient number of crazy people out there, overly concerned "karens", or reddit warriors, or whatever. People overly confident in their judgement based on a cursory one-sided description of events. It seems you want to "fight fire with fire" or "play hardball" because that seems fair or necessary, but ... jeez. This is why guys are cautious and disengage.
Absolutely, 100%, no.
A child could be playing out of sight of a parent, maybe a block away with friends, and get mildly injured in a way that requires minor treatment. Or just crying because of a negative interaction with a peer.
This DOES NOT mean children at a certain age and maturity level cannot be trusted to gain some independence and leave their parents line of sight for short but increasingly longer periods of time.
Once he reached 5 and showed they understood the boundaries and requirements, to go out there by himself.
And once he reached 6, he was trusted to look after his 4 year old brother in this space.
And these restrictions seem very strict compared to how I grew up and especially compared to how those older than me grew up. Or in some other places in the world, where e.g. in Japan it's not rare for 6 year olds to ride the subway and do errands and downright common for 7-8 year olds.
Perhaps the parents had clocked-on to this, and were just letting the girl self-soothe so she could learn resillience. Then, on-cue, in steps some member of the public with their own opinion on the child they're trying to raise. This would be kind of tiring for the fatigued parent of a toddler, and the frustration of the parent in the above scenario is justifiable, particularly as encounters like this could happen multiple times daily with a child like that.
Now they could also just be a shitty parent. There's plenty of them. But it's difficult for us to judge and make hard rules in cases like this.
Our society is not as safe as I would like, but it is probably safer than ever before, when children roamed, played, and did errands over wide ranges.
My world was orders of magnitude smaller than my parents'; despite my efforts, my children's world is orders of magnitude smaller than mine. In part, this is because of attitudes like yours, where a child being unwatched is not okay under any circumstance.
When I was a child, me and my friends were gone unattended all day every day.
What a terrible way to live life, always watched over.
I agree. If you think the child is in danger and you’re unable to find their parents after looking around then do what you need to do for the child.
But the other parent’s reaction shouldn’t be a factor. There’s no reason to call 911 and tell them you’re getting a “hostile reaction” from someone who isn’t involved.
This isn’t how serious people operate in the real world. It’s keyboard warrior talk and it’s very unhelpful.
Don't try to out-crazy a crazy person. That's not a game I'm going to play.
That's factually incorrect.
The recording device in my pocket comes into play, and afterwards my attorney seeks damages and fees.
Because these days with anything digital there's a risk of the other side claiming it's a genML fake.
Are there analog recorders with an "infinite" loop of tape so you get automatic overwriting without manual intervention?
> Because these days with anything digital there's a risk of the other side claiming it's a genML fake.
I think this type of thinking is quite cynical and overlooks an important factor: we have a presumption of innocence in this country, and these types of situations are adjudicated by reasonable, typically-intelligent, honest jurists - not computer programs.
If one party is asserting something is fake, they need evidence to do so: mere supposition isn't good enough, and if unsubstantiated, typically removes credibility from the accuser.
In this situation, no reasonable person is going to believe that believable video footage is going to be able to be fabricated on the fly - and to what end? Nobody was physically harmed, no property was damaged, and there are numerous witnesses who are very realistically risking their freedom and finances if they choose to corroborate an inaccurate restatement of facts.
If you never found the child's parents, you'd have to call CPS. Being prevented from finding the child's parents, just necessitates you move that step forward.
Of course, it's not 'your job' so technically you could abandon the child at any point but it does feel a bit heartless to give a kid hope, then say 'meh you're on your own, this is too troublesome'. As for just leaving the child with others who are complaining, I doubt that's a good idea. They were making no move to help, and bystander effect will probably keep them from ever doing a thing.
I'm not even saying you're wrong necessarily, but the whole situation is fucking cooked.
How do we learn to trust each other again?
The effects only get more pronounced in a society where literally every lunatic could have a gun and could therefore murder you at the drop of a hat. Trusting a strange situation will mean your death, eventually. It's inevitable.
This is therefore not a matter of distrust, because you don't need faith or trust to know certain things about the transformative effect this would have on people. They live under mortal threat every second they're outside in uniform. They're going to be monstrous.
They're ultimately good guys (well, as good as any random guy is, not worse not better) but their experience of the society turns them into distrustful, clanic semi-sociopaths. The fear of other people reactions is ingrained.
The one that marked me is that they were afraid of local teens chatting up with our teens and learning they were police children, and passed that fear to all kids by saying extremely weird and violent shit they probably believed, but were ultimately lies. They wanted the children, most of them orphans, to avoid talking to regular kids outside of the camp, and lie if they did.
Not bad guys inherently, but clearly fucked up by their job.
In the original post they had confirmed that they were the parents, and were aware of her situation. While their response was rude, that's not a reason to threaten them to call 911 with lies, or to actually do it. I suggest you reread the original scenario.
In my situation, a girl was stuck at the top of the highest climbing fixture I've ever seen at a public playground. She was crying for a couple minutes without aid, so I walked over to tell her that I'd try to find her parent. The mother sprinted over and yelled to leave her daughter alone, then left the playground w/ her daughter.
Once my parents were visiting me and we took my kids to a playground. While there, my dad noticed a girl sitting on the ground crying, and seemed to be hurt. He looked for a moment to see if anyone was coming, and then went over to her and asked if she was alright, if she needed help, and where her parents were. He didn't get a clear response from her so he started walking around to the various adults around the playground inquiring if the hurt girl crying was theirs. Finally he got to one group of women and after asking one of them said something along the lines of, "yeah, I saw you over there bothering her" in an accusatory tone. Seeing where it was going, he put his hands up and just walked away without saying another word. The girl remained there crying, alone.
It was actually kind of a scary because later that day I realized how in that moment that woman, who my dad had never met before, could probably have destroyed his life right then and there if she wanted to.
These days, in the back of my mind I'm always considering how my actions, particularly towards women and children, could be misconstrued. When I'm at the playground with my kids, I don't talk to kids I don't know, at all, for any reason, even if they talk to me. I just smile and make myself busy with my own kids.