Children should be allowed to get bored (2013)
bbc.com
bbc.com
-Playing in storm drains. Inside the narrow tunnels I might add.
-Abandoned construction sites.
-Railway tracks. Putting things o the rails waiting for the train to see what happened. Everything from rocks to toys to coins.
-Dumpster diving in large dumpsters. There was a soap factory near us and wed dive for schampoo or hairgel.
-Jumping in the biohazard pond looking for frogs eggs.
-Throwing things off bridges.
-Climbing various constructions, houses and dubios trees.
-Competing in who could jump from the highest roof.
Kids not only could get hurt. We did. Legs were broken. No one died fortunately.
Bored kids outside is not really as romantic as many would have it. Not arguing against boredom, constant stimuli is not healthy.
That being said, unsupervised bored kids can lead to some very dangerous outcomes.
Sorry, but we had been living like that for ages before helicopter parents became the norm. Kids didn't die in the streets by the truckload, or jump off of roofs to their doom any any number to statistically matter, as this alarmist comment implies.
Compare that to the sheltered, all-wishes-granted and no minute spent w/o distractions like social media, kids. Started with Gen Z who get all angsty, with panic attacks, when they have to start performing, i.e., during final exams and the like. And never learned to deal with emotions and free-floating thoughts, handling themself, keeping calm.
(all observed from multiple coworkers being parents, some had to bring their offspring to psychiatric therapy - of course, driven, as taking public transport on their own would be too much!)
Due to our normal childhood, we could handle situations later in life where today's offspring inevitably fails.
Youth criminality, alcoholism rates, teenage pregnancies are down and that is a good thing.
- The parent who grew up in the <more rugged years> self-identify as a tough rugrat who had fun and was fearless; not a wuzz like those modern kids (“kids” here excludes their own)
- But the parent would rather that their kids be safe than to have to pain themselves worrying about them constantly
This seems a difficult ask, but it's possible and probably very healthy for all involved.
How do you know what risks are stupid and unnecessary?
Kids spent a lot of time outside getting hurt for almost all of human history, and "ruin" wasn't something anyone worried about.
The gooses thing was memory of my grandmother. It is not some kind of distant medieval history, it was the norm around WWII.
I brought up "human history" as the logical extreme of the counter argument, not to argue that's the goal.
The problem with that logical extreme is that kids died a lot by our standards. They also had no protection against abuse. You had more of them due to non existent anticonception, which made their "value" go down.
Reminds me of the Mark Twain quote:
> When I was a boy of 14, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be 21, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years.
I wonder what the equivalent is for knowing how to be the perfect parent until becoming one yourself.
It seems obvious there is a direct link between environment and behavior, but what he started doing was like "programming the environment" in order to trigger behavior changes.
Why would we litter if the trashcan is nearby ? Why would we go out of our way with cables if power-socket is on every table ?
The same way I wonder if we cannot "program" the environment for kids, in a way that allows us to let them get bored out, but in such a situation that is not dangerous but also productively interesting for the kids.
It is not the same to get bored out outside nearby a train track or in the industrial area, than in a somewhat controlled area ?
What do we want to expose them to ? We already know it might want to try crazy stuff ; but I guess we can reduce the danger factors and increase area for more interesting activities ? Also, this is all linked to age and I'm not sure we can make generic rules.
Growing up in a farm is much different than growing up in the streets, and ultimately, my parents and I think a lot of parents, decide to live where kids are safe to grow with somewhat nice activities and people around them.
(Note that I also met a couple that completely cut themselves from the world and they really had to come back to society when the kid came to age, just because a kid requires social interactions with people it's age)
I don’t worry at all about my 8yo boy however, as he’s very cautious and risk averse. My 6yo girl though already scares me to death with the stuff she does when she slips out of sight. I can’t wait for the teenage years! <sarcasm>
During all of this ordeal, I thought the issue was that I went in the forest and got dirty. The "disappeared for a long time" and the "holding and using a rusty machete" did not register as issues.
Goold luck with your daughter, it did not become better for my parents until I was...Until they stopped knowing what I did. And just as you they were unprepared because my older brother is mostly into being alive and safe.
But harder to list the benefits learnt, because they are often subconcious.
What happened / happens? I've always wondered.
I guess the rock gets crushed?
What about trams, where the rails are instead submerged in a "crack" in the ground?
We did dumpster diving too and playing with fire :-)
Yes, you find out your kid was throwing stuff off bridges or being a vile bully, you come down like a pile of bricks.
But that doesn’t mean a full safety-rail environment. That means kids will jump off high places and break into others and we slap them on the wrist and carry on. That means lots of broken bones and the very occasional tragedy. Because a whole generation prone to mental illness and incapable of autonomy is infinitely worse. I think we’ve learned that by now.
Technically, the jury is still out on this. I don't think anyone's done any kind of study of how childhood YouTube brainrot affects their long term outlook during adulthood, simply because YouTube brainrot is too new. For what it's worth, if I had to bet money, I'd agree with you that "socialized, bonded, explored, etc." is better than YouTube, but I don't think this has been proven yet. It's just a gut feeling.
There are definitely many benefits to socialization outside, but let’s not forget the tradeoffs. Mental health can be repaired (I.e. ozempic for the mind?), permanent injuries - much less so.
(I picked an extreme example to prove a point, I’m not suggesting the risks of playing outside today are equivalent. But the risks are real nonetheless)
In Ukraine they are / will be for many years.
Easier said than done if it is your kids taking risks, but kids and parents need room to learn and grow.
Even into my 30s I used to wake up in a panic remembering all the situations where I’ve almost died because I was just a little bored.
It sounds like the nostalgia in the comments here are akin to “I was poor, so you’re going to know what it’s like being poor too”.
You forgot school shooters exist.
Large portions of globe functions with fights at school that don't escalate to death or injury with a weapon.
We had fights, they could be brutal, the social mechanics allowed a needle to be threaded which myself and a number of others largely managed to do; stand your ground, don't engage physically, don't run .. if someone calls you out and starts smack talking, don't rise, just reply and confound. If they take a swing dodge it and don't respond, if it lands, suck it up and don't respond - in the rung climbing of high school and elsewhere this makes the other look a fool.
There were lessons learned from that and I can still my grandchildren benefitting from phyical encounters (not just fights, engagement with big waves, steep hills, solid animals, bicycles and motorbikes) that can hurt but largely don't kill them.
IMHO, a lot of these analyses suffer from survivorship bias; the ones who died don't get to tell you it was a bad idea.
In the past we had moments we were bored. Now, we always have a phone or other screen were we can indulge on dopamine.
Second guess is Mongolia, where the steppes go on and on forever...
Jokes aside, computers (all kinds, handheld incuded) cause as many problems as they solve. They are a trouble relocation device. I feel demotivated working on and for computers.
It is about the same now but I genuenly have much more to do, miss the times of doing nothing. Whenever I have to travel that is the time of reflection. Instead of pushing my nose into the mobile I stare outside or try to observe others without being creepy. It is easier nowadays, 90% of travellers use mobile. They don't know what happens around them. Luckily this mobile and tablet revolution passed me by, likely because of my occupation. I have all day at the computer I can use 30-60 min away, it is not enough actually.
The more appropriate common vernacular is “instant gratification” IMO. (And interestingly dopamine is associated with expectations of things like pleasure. But if you pull out your phone immediately when nothing is happening then there is a very small window for expectation to happen.)
That being said, I generally agree with the sentiment.
best get used to it
not much else to do in-between here and Alpha Centauri :)
Sitting quiety will make you self-reflect. Self reflection will reduce stress and fear. Reduction of stress and less fear is a reduction in problems caused by human error, and negativity towards eachother (due to fear).
People will say things like this, and then miss how many people immediately become uncomfortable with sitting quietly lest they face the risk of self-reflection, and how many social tools for avoiding it we have.
I did go to therapy after a while for a few sessions, that's definitely something i'd recommend when depression hits. it's totally worth it, to get some confirmation or guidance on psychology.
One of the things for example for me that was an issue: I became super indoorsy after a bad injury. That also caused me to excersize less. This both led to a loss of anti-cortisol production, which is a hormone that reduces stress. That ultimately meant, that no matter how long i'd sit in silence, i'd still be stressed because my physiology lost the ability to produce that by itself. Now i go for lots of walks outdoors, and do some minor excersize. It helps a lot to reduce stress again, but I do still need to meditate / sit in silence to reduce fear.
for the record. i am really bad at it still. learning every day :)
Yes, there are a number of problems that can be solved by sitting quietly, but there are many more problems that cannot.
- A fire
- An angry girlfriend
- Racism
- A border dispute
- Monopolies
- Corruption
- War
And even for fires good amount of fires is caused by that...
It then gets dressed up as some kind of mystical wisdom when it was never intended to be that big. It's become an easy way to believe oneself wise without having to actually think.
--not DXP
If you open the window some flies will get in
--DXP
I prefer my faiths justified, but if you lack that constraint, the wheel in the sky keeps on turning, and so the Age of Aquarius ought to be rolling around within your ~250 year timeframe?
If enough flies get in, the housecats will be more interested in them than in the pigeons outside?
Not much, but Kurt had a thing for amoebas, roughly like beetles in your model??
Then maybe approximate flies as amoebas?
Can we get a (2024) study on this?
Unsurprisingly, the security guards and other neighbours now say hi to me regularly.
It is not just a question of perspective. It is quite literally a question of what word means.
Agreed - it's not forcing. Not all things that are bad are forcing.
There may be more obvious stimuli like established hobbies, or peer pressure, but ultimately a lot of the desire for a new belonging is likely driven by marketing from the companies selling it.
And kids who have seen marketing to find nintendo or tv fun. If they seen it in their friends house, they found it fun.
And yet, much money is spent marketing things to children. What a waste this must be!
> Likewise, kids always wanted what they seen adults to have (phones).
While a mobile phone may be a simple and useful (even vital) tool, huge amounts of money is spent on marketing to drive desires for particular brands, or new models/features. This influences adults, and also probably children in turn.
> If they seen it in their friends house, they found it fun.
So where did those kids discover or get the desire for the item? And/or where did their parents get the idea to buy it for them? Why (e.g.) Playstation rather than Nintendo, or vice versa? At some point, it likely tracks back to marketing, creating the desire.
"The desire for a new belonging" is present in kids who dont see ads nor have access to screens. They see what other kids have, they see what adults have. Kids wanting the same thing as other kids is nothing new or revolutionary.
Trying to pretend that kids wanting things is somehow a change against any time before is absurd.
> Playstation rather than Nintendo, or vice versa? At some point, it likely tracks back to marketing, creating the desire.
Small kids do not know playstation vs nintendo. They still want games. They want same games as their friends have.
In reality, things are never so black and white. When I tell my kids “no youtube, no gaming, but you’re allowed to use Scratch” there’s a risk they’re just browse scratch’s endless catalog of games made by others, plenty of which are impressively fun. So then I gotta say no to that too. But then my youngest wants to use Scratch with a youtube tutorial. That’s fine right? Well yes it is but it also means there’s the addictive recommendation cycle right there on the screen too. He’s not allowed to click on them but that’s hard to resist etc etc. It’s all solvable but it’s all very nuanced and makers of apps and platforms (including MIT) actively work against you at every step.
My theory is that every person in this thread who thinks this is simple doesn’t have children. It’s simple in the abstract and super messy in reality.
As always. "Why don't you just..."
Minecraft has been great for my 6 year old, learning fluent English etc, but I have to be very active in enforcing rules, especially around Minecraft YouTubers (only British, they tend to build advanced machinery and explain well).
But anything can turn into an addiction. Recently he wanted to do Duolingo to learn intermediate English, but now I get the sense he does it to get "allowed" screen time and doesn't actually learn much.
It's very nuanced. I want to provide screen time because we're nerds and you need to spend time with technology to learn about it, but there are way more distractions than when I was a kid, and our home computer didn't even have internet.
Now, the kind of device I would provide is another story. Unfettered access to the Internet at large, including social media, is probably not well advised - access to Wikipedia probably is. Questions of degree.
There are adults that can’t handle slot machines. Many more seem to be unable to handle social media. I’m very seriously recommending friends and family to limit it. With children it’s more hands-on, so as a parent it wouldn’t just be recommendations.
If you lived in a farm 200 miles from any kid in rural Nebraska maybe. And even there there would be tons of adventures to have on one's own.
In my life I find that what works the best for my kid and for myself are physical activities such as climbing, swimming and walks in forest.
I'm trying to find ways to replace dopamine with serotonin (replacing pleasure with happiness) and it seems that usually involves some form of physical activity where mind needs to focus on the movement and surroundings, so that there is simply not much room for thinking and desires.
if he gets less tv or whatever, for a period, he gets deeply invested in lego or drawing or similar
I firmly believe that humans need seasons, i.e. periods of time that are different from each other, either summer, winter etc, or periods where a TV show is simply not accessible.
What almost always works to get away from TV, though, is if _I_ start a project, and within minutes my daughter will have picked up her own project, and we'll be companionably working on something.
I find that setting (and enforcing!) a limit works great though. Play X episodes a day, the turn the TV off.
"okay, just one more episode" definitely doesn't work!
But I also think that current ability to see the series at once and then be done with that is strictly superior over past "episode once a week" schedule. First, it leads to way more interesting shows, but also it affects my life much less.
The tv schedule used to rule peoples days, they would try to be at home for the show, they would stop socializing and what not just to see the show.
This is actually a very weird part about living in Los Angeles. It doesn’t feel like time passes when the weather is always the same.
—Bertrand Russell
Last week I showed a few teens how to chop some wood; it took .5 seconds for moms to get up and start freaking out saying it was too dangerous...
An hour later we had a stack of wood and everybody had fun, learned and felt great about a good job done.
People need to relax and let their kids have fun, learn and know what, sometimes get hurt. It's part of a process that is now much too rare...
What’s wrong with humanity?
Overall, it is absurd, someone getting outraged over a kid not having a trip to preschool or whatever turned into as educational enriching character building exercise as possible.
I can’t imagine anything good coming from that bored=grab-screen-attitude that people have. Moreover those screens are also used to silence kids. Like pacifiers, but with worse side effects and with habits formed for the rest of their lives.
Also, why use the screen on the bike? I bet that is not the only screen time. Kids have been behaving on the backs of bikes for 100 years with 0 issues. The value of the screen is negative.
It is opposite of what you say. It claims it wont be boring, but that it will teach them to navigate themselves which they wont learn otherwise.
Naturally not everyone can afford this kind of pace so this is not a problem which involves everyone. But the insidous problem is that these parents are convinced that they are doing everything right for their kids. They are the most likely who can change course and incorporate such research.
Me: no
Dad, my iPad is dead. Can I use your phone?
Me: no
And so forth. Not hard.
The best trained dogs are those trained only by positive reinforcement so…
Me: no
Me: yes.
And there they are, watching movies with Johny in Johny house.
__The Chair That Changed My Life__
There is the chair.
Sit on it. Tell yourself: this is my life now.
"But, but, I want to watch a YouTube video! I want to be on Instagram."
No you little media fueled thrill-seeker. You sit on the chair.
"But I AM FUCKING BORED! For the love of God please let me out!"
If it helps mister thrill-seeker, you can do anything on the chair that you want.
"Anything?"
Anything. As long as you don't get off the chair.
"I'm gonna sing!"
Go right ahead.
"I'm gonna dance on the chair."
It's yours to do so.
"I'm gonna... I'm gonna... Wait a second, I should file my taxes!"
Oh, taxes? Hmm, that sounds important. Alright then, feel free to get off the chair or whatever it is that you need to do to fill your taxes - such as using a computer.
"Thanks!"
But remember, when you're done, get back on the chair. And no, no secret laptop smuggling with internet! This is an electronic free zone.
---
This exercise has given me some success in allowing myself to be media free at the times where I need it. I invented the exercise by at one point being so frustrated by my digital media addiction that I just told myself "you'd rather live your life on a chair? Fine! Feel free to do so. See what it does!" Then I got bored and I realized there was a key to explore there, and here we are.
> stealing the time to think about things which could improve your life
I don't think those two are the same.
The problem is not that eventually kids/people will find a way to not be bored. The problem is how easy and effortless it is to find entertainment these days.
The situation is similar to food. It's not that eating and enjoying food is bad, but the way modern society makes food available (and the quality of it) enables some quote suboptimal behaviours (to put it mildly)
I limit their time with electronic devices (yt kids, games, etc) because it seems that the devices/services are similar to drugs including withdrawal symptoms.
So getting bored just means having to find something to play with. Lego is a good creative way to spend time. Going outside is also preferable to Minecraft ..
The friends house where they will get TV or video games.
Once he is in the creative zone, he takes charge of his time. He will ask us to help with something and then tell us to go away and then have us come see what he built while he tells us elaborate stories.
There is a kids book called the boring book that captures this process pretty well.
https://www.thriftbooks.com/w/the-boring-book_shinsuke-yoshi...
Children should be allowed to get bored - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5431188 - March 2013 (52 comments)
Screens are a so simple solution. And it's so hard to block them.
https://www.3-6-9-12.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/flyer-ap...
No no no, that's dangerous!!! Don't ever let your kids talk to strangers, duh. /s
Same thing applies to adults imo. Embracing boredom was one of the best things I did in the past years. Boredom is fun!
/s
PS: the phone tried to autocorrect "boredom" to "Boston". Any truth to that? :)