There’s no cure alll solution. I consider homeschooled children taught to live their lives by regressive religious texts to be just as broken as the cult of Tate.
If any intervention will still yield roughly equivalent mixed results, I always err on the side of more access to information. A child can gravitate to Andrew Tate’s toxicity, or they can look up facts about the confederacy their parents told them fought for “states rights and freedumb!”
In a perfect world, loving parents should be available to provide opinions and context, but I’d rather that child have the opportunity to find a benevolent path. The parents most interested in dominating all information their child receives tend to be the same ones that ger mad at the schools for teaching children that their genitals exist and their country wasn’t always perfect.
you seem to be assuming that children have the same logical reasoning faculties that adults do. this is not the case.
i agree that parents should not have a monopoly over the information that their children get, but i think that well-educated school teachers are a better solution to this than the internet. (although this would require the US to put some kind of emphasis on improving its education system, so it’s probably unlikely)
you seem to be assuming that children have the same logical reasoning faculties that adults do. this is not the case.
Critical thinking and reasoning must be taught, and in the US largely isn’t until the college level unfortunately. Many adults, many parents have no logical reasoning faculties and never will. Some are very proud of this, declaring the whims and opinions that pop into their heads “common sense.” I refer you to my fellow Americans who see salvation in a slumlord game show host nepo baby.
Again, some like myself may seek out such information if they are starved of it at home, if they have access. If anything, getting multiple conflicting opinions tends to make a new mind seek out ways to parse the true from the false, and that chance is better than no chance at all.
There’s no cure alll solution. I consider homeschooled children taught to live their lives by regressive religious texts to be just as broken as the cult of Tate.
If any intervention will still yield roughly equivalent mixed results, I always err on the side of more access to information. A child can gravitate to Andrew Tate’s toxicity, or they can look up facts about the confederacy their parents told them fought for “states rights and freedumb!”
In a perfect world, loving parents should be available to provide opinions and context, but I’d rather that child have the opportunity to find a benevolent path. The parents most interested in dominating all information their child receives tend to be the same ones that ger mad at the schools for teaching children that their genitals exist and their country wasn’t always perfect.
you seem to be assuming that children have the same logical reasoning faculties that adults do. this is not the case.
i agree that parents should not have a monopoly over the information that their children get, but i think that well-educated school teachers are a better solution to this than the internet. (although this would require the US to put some kind of emphasis on improving its education system, so it’s probably unlikely)
Critical thinking and reasoning must be taught, and in the US largely isn’t until the college level unfortunately. Many adults, many parents have no logical reasoning faculties and never will. Some are very proud of this, declaring the whims and opinions that pop into their heads “common sense.” I refer you to my fellow Americans who see salvation in a slumlord game show host nepo baby.
Again, some like myself may seek out such information if they are starved of it at home, if they have access. If anything, getting multiple conflicting opinions tends to make a new mind seek out ways to parse the true from the false, and that chance is better than no chance at all.