Hacker News Reader

Comment by nkrisc | Hacker News Reader

Pretty frightening, really. These kinds of experience have absolutely though subtly changed how I interact with people. Particularly, as a man, with women and children.

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.

View on HN

The correct response is to stand your ground and say "No, I'm trying to connect a hurt child with their parents. Are you their parent? If not, we'll cut this favor short and just call child services".

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.)

I agree with this statement. While it's not 'your job' to save the child, if you've already started along the path, you might as well see it through to the end.

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.

This response may be practical but it's sad and indicative of the problem at hand. Society is so distrusting and litigative that the sensible way to help a child is to call the cops?? those ACAB guys that kill dogs?

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?

I find it ironic that you talk about distrust but then use ACAB, which I assume means "all cops are bad" (cursory googling).

Cops experience professional deformation. Most of the other humans they see at work have been bad or have been involved in something bad. This eventually has an effect on anyone. It's not a good effect. They start to expect it in other people, they start to assume the only folks they can trust are the ones they usually see doing the "right" thing (other cops). This turns them into bad people.

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.

Exactly. I've worked for cops (taking care of police orphans/half orphans) for three summers when I was younger.

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.

Involving the police in that situation would be an insane and risky escalation. The girl has a cold, anti-social caregiver/parent. That's sad, not illegal. There were zero reasons to involve the police. What happens when we call the police and the woman lies and says one of us was groping the child and her friends corroborate her lie? I'm not taking that risk.

Don't try to out-crazy a crazy person. That's not a game I'm going to play.

>Involving the police in that situation would be an insane and risky escalation. The girl has a cold, anti-social caregiver/parent. That's sad, not illegal.

That's factually incorrect.

There is nothing illegal about ignoring your kid while they cry on the playground.

Sic the cops on the crazy person and let nature happen.

> What happens when we call the police and the woman lies

The recording device in my pocket comes into play, and afterwards my attorney seeks damages and fees.

I hate that we live in a world where this feels like a remotely sane question but do you use an analog or digital device?

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?

> I hate that we live in a world where this feels like a remotely sane question but do you use an analog or digital device?

> 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.

> Are you their parent? If not, we'll cut this favor short and just call child services".

> 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.

If your daughter is crying, injured, and you are not close enough to get to her before OP, you deserve to have a social worker speak to her 1:1, full stop.

No.

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.

The GP comment is about a three year old. Not old enough to be playing a block away with friends.

It was when I was a kid.

I trusted my then-3 year old to be 250' away at the opposite end of a neighborhood park that abuts my house. Usually within eye sight but not always.

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.

What if the girl above is crying and appears hurt because she has been mollycoddled, and this is a strategy to get attention?

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.

Then the proper response to OP would have been "Yeah, don't worry, she's okay."

Kids need to be not kept in a tiny parental bubble and do some things with (manageable levels) of risk. They need to grow into independent people, and to understand their limits.

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.

lol what the fuck?

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.

What kind of helicopter parenting bullshit is this?

This will surprise you, but I can guess the # of children you have.

> That is the same thing, though! ... very quickly escalating a probable mundane situation to very serious accusations!

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.

I don't know. I might do that depending on $country. Person A's idiotic comment shouldn't punish the actual parent. So I would only call police if it is helpful. I have called police when I found a kid before. while I was in the phone I found the parents so said all good. I think the cop was relieved! But this is not in the US.

This came out really petty and evil, suggesting revenge as taking away other people's kids just because you don't like them, and lying to the authorities.

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.

It´s already a long time ago, I was on my way home when I saw a young boy crying. Turns out he got disconnected from his parents on public transport and totally lost where he was in some other part of town. When I tried to calm him down, I was making sure to stand several meters apart. We called his mother on my phone and I actually brought him to the station where she would pick him up. The whole time, I was keeping several meters distance and making sure to speak extra loud and formally, to make clear what I was doing with a crying child from a different ethnicity obv not mine. This was in a semi-civilized country in europe, not the "US". And still I was worried it would "look wrong". Weird times.

Wow, sounds like that person's brain has fried itself if it jumps to conclusions like that. Which region or general area do you live? What has happened to common sense in the community?

It’s just anti-social people being anti-social, but now they have the internet to use against you.

Suburban East Coast US.

It's not just you. Men in general are realizing the risks and are changing their behavior and environment in order to protect themselves from accusations. Everything from ensuring witnesses are always present to simply not interacting at all.

To be fair, victim-blaming has always been a risk women have had to contend with, the novelty is mostly that perhaps men are now exposed to it as well.

That is a real shame. I have had almost exclusively positive interactions with the other parents and kids at the playground. Maybe a different culture where you are.

Honestly it’s rare, it’s not normal. But it’s also so scary I just won’t risk it, however small the risk. You can’t tell which strangers are crazy.

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.

I'm honestly not sure I understand what you are afraid of. What accusation could she possibly make in the context of a playground setting that has such dire consequences, especially if you're with your own children? Who would act on it?

I don't know if you've noticed, but there's a huge "pedophile panic" going around these days--much worse than the "satanic panic" back in the 80s and the "video game panics" in the 90s. I don't think anyone wants to be the next viral video star with a caption like "Found a pedo at the park--put him on blast!"

Nope, I hadn't, maybe it's not made it to my neck of the woods (world; I'm not in the US) yet. Is this extremely recently and mediated by the whole Trump-Epstein of it all?

I think it's been almost a decade since it started ramping up. Hard to say when its peak was exactly, but I think it's been finally started dropping off a bit in the past year. It's going to take a long time before the fear goes away though.

Just look at the article linked in this submission. Even just a false, unsubstantiated accusation can be devastating.

I don't think these are comparable. The accusations in this case are about systematically sleazy behavior and hint at not-so-consensual sex, which isn't exactly the same as "this guy bothered my kid somehow for a minute".

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.

> I have had almost exclusively positive interactions with the other parents and kids at the playground.

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.

What if people who have children approach them differently from those without, and it's noticeable?

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.

This. I watched my friends become Dads and change a bit, but I couldn't quite put it to words. I would feel scared to hold any baby. Then son is born, I'm trying everything to help him burp, and I'm learning the tonal language of his cries. Every taxi driver is a possible Dad I can relate to, and every kid is a glimpse into the future.

I don't think we can chalk these up to "it's just Reddit, amiright?" I have a daughter, and I've personally had a non-zero number of negative interactions with justice-moms on the playground / at kid events. Are those interactions extremely rare? Yes. Did it freak me out a little? Yes. Are these kinds of anecdotes amplified on Reddit? Yes. A dad needs to keep in mind that he's likely to encounter it at least once in a while, while also not avoiding all life on the off chance the it happens.

> I don't think we can chalk these up to "it's just Reddit, amiright?"

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.

Whether something is rare vs. common can only be verified with statistics, and you'll notice a trend that someone pushing a narrative will refuse to cite any published statistics, or hand-waves them away for specious reasons, because they're trying to manipulate you using an emotional gut-response of something that "feels true" and also hits a fragile part of your ego. Indulging in that fantasy soothes your wounded ego better than pure rationality and holding beliefs lightly would, so you have nothing to gain by questioning their narrative even in your own mind. It's the same process of emotional manipulation used by fascist provocateurs.

I have not encountered anything like that (but I am not in the US).

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.

Wasn't it the Internet Research Agency trying to stir up gender tension in the West? I hate this timeline but I truly believe this is happening.

The problem is that if anyone at any time feels like they're just annoyed with you or don't want you around anymore they can make an accusation, completely unfounded, that will destroy your life.

The problem is is that a lot of guys walking around that haven't had it happen to them assume it hasn't happened to them because they've been doing everything right when really you've just been lucky so far.

Look, I hope the original author doesn't see this, I don't want to kick people when they're down. But the vast, vast majority of these controversies involve admitted sexual activity which a stereotypical stodgy dad would identify as inappropriate, and I would encourage any men who worry about being cancelled to consider whether he might have a point. While there's no guarantees in life, it's extremely unlikely that a story like this could happen to me, because I don't sleep with people when the propriety of doing so is even remotely in question.

The problem here is the asymmetric nature of outcomes. The vast majority of these types of interactions will be positive, but it only takes 1 to ruin someone's life or reputation, that forces over-correction in behavior

I experienced a similar situation and decided from then on to get a second adult involved before assisting a stranger's kid.

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.

I grew up in a small village. Such towns place social cohesion above all. As a child I thought that as long as I am right, I'd be able to reason my way out of everything. But I learned that in a crowd shit can go from 0 to 11 very fast, which is why I have a deep fear of people, and especially crowds. When you're there with one person you might have a slim chance of reasoning with them, but crowds behave unpredictably, emotionally, and violently. They almost always follow the most charismatic leader, not the most logical one. The older I get, the more I hate people and the more disgusted I am with them. I understand why so many old people are bitter cunts. I want to make it until retirement and then move far away from everyone else, just me and my internet connection. I want to gain financial independence so that I don't need to rely on people's petty games to make a living.

I still try to find those few people around me who aren't garbage, but it's a tough job.

If you think everyone around you is garbage, you might want to reflect on yourself.

I did. I genuinely did. After a few years of thinking I'm at fault, I realized that's not the case.

While my fear of crowds may not be as strong as yours, I see your point of view. In most situations, it doesn't take a lot for a crowd to become a mob.

> 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.

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.

She has vastly more power than he has. With one sentence she could have him arrested or at least temporarily detained for nothing.

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

Let's be specific about the supposed power in this situation.

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 roughly tracks with my own thinking on the scenario. I don't understand the perceived danger.

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.

The danger was perceived precisely because it's rare and uncommon and the whole thing unusual. It's the only time I've every personally encountered something like this, so it made me believe that this woman knew exactly what she was doing and we interpreted her words as an insinuated threat. Why else would she say something like that about a man who everyone could clearly see was just trying to help? No, there was no confusion. Whatever she was up to was malicious.

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.

I understand disengaging in the situation, sure.

Would any of those things have happened? Maybe? Maybe not? No idea. Wasn't going to find out.

The OP article goes into great lengths giving a first-hand account of what kind of catastrophic damage a mere bad-faith nefarious accusation can cause, no matter how "obvious" its falsehood may be or how little credence it would hold in court.

Did you just jump into comments without reading the article in the post?

> She has vastly more power than he has.

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

She knew he was just trying to help. I think she didn't appreciate having the crying child brought to her attention which would have interrupted her conversation she was having with her friends.

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.

To steel man the mom, I raise my own children with a “rub some dirt on it” mentality for non serious injuries, minor scrapes and such.

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.

I don't know if it would've mattered. The reality is that if the situation escalates then you're in a "he-said she-said" kind of scenario.

Well, who would you believe? Who would the average person believe?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com