Interfering stranger lecturing my son about bike clothing

[Cyril Haearn]

I bet lots of kids tell their parents they met a nice uncle after meeting me

Just remembered buying the Guardian once, there was a cd of children's stories with the paper

I spontaneously gave the cd to a little girl who was pestering her mum for a magazine
Both were enchanted

[mjr]

You seem to have missed the post that started that subthread with its "insurance requirement" myth, which now stands unchallenged in this thread again!

I am under the impression from both this and his last CC that it is a requirement for CCs who run GoRide to have Insurance and this requires the wearing of certain protective equipment.
I will ask on Saturday to clarify this.

British Cycling will force that requirement to allow CCs to use BC insurance. The last time I checked, it did not seem to be a requirement imposed on BC by their insurance - the requirement is added by BC but only to some types of ride. I don't think you'd be able to tell by asking most CCs - I think very few of them have a full copy of BC's policy on file. Most just seem to have the contact numbers for who at BC HQ to report claims to.

[mjr]

It wasn't a joke, but I'm not offended if people think it's grin-worthy.

I had a lengthy career in the police, so my view of child abduction and worse is probably skewed quite badly. Nevertheless, I'd rather be paranoid than grieving, so I decide what is safe and appropriate for my 7 year old. I don't let strangers (real ones or the internet variety) decide on my behalf.

If people disagree, that's fine by me.

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/ ... -the-verse (not safe for work)

[Cugel]

I'd be furious if a stranger started lecturing my son on something which was none of his business.

........

A child is not a possession over which parents have the sole ownership rights ... although many do treat their children in this way, employing them as ideology or religion repositories in the worst cases. Some treat them as dollies, through which they attempt to act out the modes they themselves cannot achieve.

Others get bored with them, as they would a hoola hoop; and so they end up in a virtual attic or cupboard under the stairs.

Is the former preferable to the latter? I feel neither is any good and that children, like other humans, should be treated as people.

Cugel

I don't disagree with you, although I'd question what that has to do with my post. While my son is a child he is under my care and I would ensure he knew I was there to support and defend him against someone who was making him mentally or physically uncomfortable for no good reason.

What is the business of a casual encounter between a child and an adult? What falls ino the category "none of his business"? What degrees of physical and mental discomfort is educational and what damaging? I feel you aren't wanting to wrap your children in cotton wool (are you)?

Another poster has instructed his child to scream "STRANGER DANGER" if someone without identification as a friend of the daddy so much as looks at his fear-filled offspring. I suspect most don't feel this kind of extreme paranoia about passers-by. (Gawd, let's hope not - what a way to exist)! But where do you draw the line of "OK business" and "not his business"?

I'm the father of two daughters and four grandchildren (two of each gender). I encouraged them to talk to people they came across in everyday life; and to be well-mannered and responsive to those who come across them. This is how children learn the very necessary skills of socialisation and the ability to judge the intentions (hidden or otherwise) of others. Naturally my attitude and advice to the little darlings includes a few warnings about creepy folk - but frankly the daughters and grandchildren are far, far better at detecting creepy folk from the vast swathes of ordinaries than am I.

In reality, it comes down to this: how much control do you want to exert over your children? Control is not the same thing, necessarily, as your parental duty of care. In fact, over-controlling might be said to be very uncaring, across a whole host of circumstances involving the opportunities and restrictions on children. I wouldn't want to be a child of that paranoid bloke, for instance!

Cugel

[Cugel]

It wasn't a joke, but I'm not offended if people think it's grin-worthy.

I had a lengthy career in the police, so my view of child abduction and worse is probably skewed quite badly. Nevertheless, I'd rather be paranoid than grieving, so I decide what is safe and appropriate for my 7 year old. I don't let strangers (real ones or the internet variety) decide on my behalf.

If people disagree, that's fine by me.

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/ ... -the-verse (not safe for work)

Ha ha - my very thought when I read Lancelot's paranoid weird concerning the STRANGER DANGER screaming. But I suspect Mr Dopestrong is not really into poetry or in any sense a fan of uncomfortable alternatives to his suspicious-eye mode. As he himself mentions, he is "probably skewed".

Some professions can induce unfortunate mental states into the professional. Those with a large scope of authority, inclusive of the ability to arrange various stringent penalties, often find themselves ordering everyone around like Wackford Squeers with a toothache!

Cugel, a connoisseur of old tinpots and other strutty blokes.

[thirdcrank]

Anybody who thinks that there is no danger to children from strangers is deluding themselves and this danger has probably increased with the rapid increase in the use of motor vehicles in the last few decades. Statistically, the risk of being killed or injured by being hit by a vehicle is greater than the risk of some form of abduction, but the latter does occur.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Bl ... ial_killer)

[Cyril Haearn]

It wasn't a joke, but I'm not offended if people think it's grin-worthy.

I had a lengthy career in the police, so my view of child abduction and worse is probably skewed quite badly. Nevertheless, I'd rather be paranoid than grieving, so I decide what is safe and appropriate for my 7 year old. I don't let strangers (real ones or the internet variety) decide on my behalf.

If people disagree, that's fine by me.

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/ ... -the-verse (not safe for work)

Ha ha - my very thought when I read Lancelot's paranoid weird concerning the STRANGER DANGER screaming. But I suspect Mr Dopestrong is not really into poetry or in any sense a fan of uncomfortable alternatives to his suspicious-eye mode. As he himself mentions, he is "probably skewed".

Some professions can induce unfortunate mental states into the professional. Those with a large scope of authority, inclusive of the ability to arrange various stringent penalties, often find themselves ordering everyone around like Wackford Squeers with a toothache!

Cugel, a connoisseur of old tinpots and other strutty blokes.

When I am PM I shall introduce national service for police work, dealing with fatbergs, driving trains in shifts, soldiering etc etc

That seems to be fair, that the "disagreeable" jobs are shared out, might help youngsters grow up fast, then they could upgrade to web administration or whatever

What a shame Cugel and I are too old to be conscripted

I posted a while ago about police work, doubtless it is disagreeable to have to call on people at home late at night to inform them that someone has died in a RTA, - 99

[bovlomov]

Anybody who thinks that there is no danger to children from strangers is deluding themselves...

It's not that anyone thinks there is "no danger". It's a question of the actual risk compared with the perceived risk. In the case of child abduction, perceived risk is somewhat higher than actual risk. I know parents who won't let their children out of their sights for fear of abduction. That can't be good for the child.

Of course one could say "you wouldn't think that if your own child was abducted" - and that's probably true. But we can hardly run our lives or our children's lives on that basis.

[thirdcrank]

... It's not that anyone thinks there is "no danger". It's a question of the actual risk compared with the perceived risk. In the case of child abduction, perceived risk is somewhat higher than actual risk. I know parents who won't let their children out of their sights for fear of abduction. That can't be good for the child.

Of course one could say "you wouldn't think that if your own child was abducted" - and that's probably true. But we can hardly run our lives or our children's lives on that basis.

I really did try to keep a sense of proportion in what I wrote in reply to a post which seemed dismissive of the possibility of any risk.

[Lance Dopestrong]

It wasn't a joke, but I'm not offended if people think it's grin-worthy.

I had a lengthy career in the police, so my view of child abduction and worse is probably skewed quite badly. Nevertheless, I'd rather be paranoid than grieving, so I decide what is safe and appropriate for my 7 year old. I don't let strangers (real ones or the internet variety) decide on my behalf.

If people disagree, that's fine by me.

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/ ... -the-verse (not safe for work)

Ha ha - my very thought when I read Lancelot's paranoid weird concerning the STRANGER DANGER screaming. But I suspect Mr Dopestrong is not really into poetry or in any sense a fan of uncomfortable alternatives to his suspicious-eye mode. As he himself mentions, he is "probably skewed".

Some professions can induce unfortunate mental states into the professional. Those with a large scope of authority, inclusive of the ability to arrange various stringent penalties, often find themselves ordering everyone around like Wackford Squeers with a toothache!

Cugel, a connoisseur of old tinpots and other strutty blokes.

That's a bit harsh. It's little to do with authority, everything to do with having seen the bodies of dead children in the most horrific of circumstances. I freely admit my perspective in that regard will be utterly lopsided, then then who's wouldn't?

You're entitled to make your assertion 're the power thing, but it is disingenuous - I strive to be a paragon of politeness wherever possible, and don't order anyone around. The people that like to order others around are usually those with the least "power", be it moral or actual.

[meic]

That's a bit harsh. It's little to do with authority, everything to do with having seen the bodies of dead children in the most horrific of circumstances.

Do you think that the strategy would work?
I often rely on strangers to keep an eye out for my kids and I keep an eye out for theirs.

I reckon on balance there is a greater danger for a young child who doesnt turn to strangers for help than one who does.
I was having a joke with a fourteen year old lad (in the presence of his father for the paranoid among us) about being enticed off with sweets and puppies and he said that is so dated, its free wifi now.

[Cyril Haearn]

That's a bit harsh. It's little to do with authority, everything to do with having seen the bodies of dead children in the most horrific of circumstances.

Do you think that the strategy would work?
I often rely on strangers to keep an eye out for my kids and I keep an eye out for theirs.

I reckon on balance there is a greater danger for a young child who doesnt turn to strangers for help than one who does.
I was having a joke with a fourteen year old lad (in the presence of his father for the paranoid among us) about being enticed off with sweets and puppies and he said that is so dated, its free wifi now.

Saw a good cartoon about that, kids on holiday, no wifi
They eagerly scrambled up the nearest hewitt where there was a good signal

[Cugel]

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/ ... -the-verse (not safe for work)

Ha ha - my very thought when I read Lancelot's paranoid weird concerning the STRANGER DANGER screaming. But I suspect Mr Dopestrong is not really into poetry or in any sense a fan of uncomfortable alternatives to his suspicious-eye mode. As he himself mentions, he is "probably skewed".

Some professions can induce unfortunate mental states into the professional. Those with a large scope of authority, inclusive of the ability to arrange various stringent penalties, often find themselves ordering everyone around like Wackford Squeers with a toothache!

Cugel, a connoisseur of old tinpots and other strutty blokes.

That's a bit harsh. It's little to do with authority, everything to do with having seen the bodies of dead children in the most horrific of circumstances. I freely admit my perspective in that regard will be utterly lopsided, then then who's wouldn't?

Not as harsh as getting your child to scream STRANGER DANGER when someone merely says something to them. Don't you realise how utterly damning and damaging that can be to someone. not to mention the inculcation of fearful attitudes to other people in your child?

You seem to realise that your experience has made you "probably skewed" (your description of yourself) so why not unskew yourself? Stranger danger is tiny compared to, say, going out with your parents in a car; and several other everyday dangers. As another poster mentions, avoiding relationships with strangers is likely to put you in more danger than you were before, as a child on the street.

You're entitled to make your assertion 're the power thing, but it is disingenuous - I strive to be a paragon of politeness wherever possible, and don't order anyone around. The people that like to order others around are usually those with the least "power", be it moral or actual.

Well, who am I to judge you in particular, since I don't know you.

But it's nevertheless my experience that many (not all) authority-professions (policemen, doctors, judges, teachers, politicians, CEOs and several others) can get carried away with their habit of never being gainsayed, since they've spent much of their lives being in charge and giving orders to those afraid or otherwise unable to question their authority. Some take their responsibilities seriously, to deal equitably with others. Others become close-minded and arrogant martinets.

Cugel

[Lance Dopestrong]

Next time you're in a shop watching another customer throw their verbal weight around at some poor staff member I'll lay good money it's not a copper or a CEO doing it.

Fortunately, I don't care what anyone else thinks. People are entitled to their opinion as much as I'm entitled to dismiss it. Just so long as everyone is polite about it I'm not remotely fussed.

Similarly, if people dont approach my child in public and don't make unsolicited comments to them, then the situation does not arise to begin with. It is equally, if not more so, incumbent upon strangers not to place other people's children in that position in the first place.

[cyclemad]

I was taken to task for wearing the wrong socks a couple of years ago by a ''gent'' from a local cycle club

Did you find out what was wrong with your socks? Until now I've not given socks much thought, but perhaps I should.

It’s the too long/too short debate probably
The wrong colour also seems to come up too.

yes, they were considered too short..........