Nerf balls still allowed

If you coddle kids too much, you risk them growing up to be Tea Party types, demanding government shut down one day and then coming up with a new complaint about something being shut down almost every damned day.
 
The point about elementary school recess is for kids to run around, scream, work up a sweat, heck, even fight, before they have to sit still for another 45 minutes (which comes a lot less naturally to elementary school children than the former).
With this "containing" of "destructive power" you are eliminating the utility of recess.

That you do it from a mindset and ideology that essentially treats children the same way as prison inmates doesn't bode well for either you or the children, even though it may not have immediate consequences here.

Damned straight. Childhood is not a failing. Play, even exuberant play, is not a fault that needs corrected. If a school cannot maintain an acceptable semblance of safety when balls are on the premises, I'd label that school a failure in the entirety of its basic premise. Shut it the hell down for gross incompetence. It's a self-labeled public nuisance to the safety of children.
 
The point about elementary school recess is for kids to run around, scream, work up a sweat, heck, even fight, before they have to sit still for another 45 minutes (which comes a lot less naturally to elementary school children than the former).
With this "containing" of "destructive power" you are eliminating the utility of recess.

That you do it from a mindset and ideology that essentially treats children the same way as prison inmates doesn't bode well for either you or the children, even though it may not have immediate consequences here.

I worked at a paedagogic institution once and I like Rousseau more than, say, Hobbes. I have no disagreement with you on these things. This is most probably some ******ed parents having too much control over the institution (I admit I did not read the article), which forced trained paedagogues to give up paedagogics in face of parental fearmongering. Happens a lot in DK after all. But: the OP's stance reads nothing like paedagogical reasons beyond "it makes our kids wussy" and his rhethoric lends more to the essential same panicky 1984-fearmongering similar to the practice of what I assume is ******ed parenting. He left nothing to the concerns of paedagogues and instead went all big gubment blaming. I find that extremely irritating.

The op was reasonable enough. This post is beyond abysmal.
 
Remember, though, this is a temporary measure while construction has taken away a big chunk of their playground. I don't think it is unreasonable to decide that a particular space is too small to accommodate particular activities. My children are not allowed to play soccer in the hallway, but they are allowed to play it in the backyard. During the spring rains, when half of the backyard is flooded to a depth of a foot or so (thanks to the neighbors, who have blocked it), they can't play soccer in the backyard, either, as there isn't sufficient space.
 
I imagine this decision has much more to do with school liability than an actual concern with child safety or "[ladyparts]ification" or whatever you want to classify this as.
 
But: the OP's stance reads nothing like paedagogical reasons beyond "it makes our kids wussy" and his rhethoric lends more to the essential same panicky 1984-fearmongering similar to the practice of what I assume is ******ed parenting. He left nothing to the concerns of paedagogues and instead went all big gubment blaming. I find that extremely irritating.

Well, i can in principle agree with that. But when the very same mindset that is being criticised is the driving force behind the enormous overdignosing of a medical condition and the "medication" of millions of children with strong psycho-pharmaca that cause severe long term damages (like, say, death - among others) i am ready to forgive some hyperbole.
Spoiler :


"[ladyparts]ification"
The vast majority of said children - who essentially get poisoned as a result of a whim of medical and cultural fashion - are boys.

But this usage of terms is (of course!) the first offense of sexism that has to be pointed out here.

:rolleyes:
 
The vast majority of said children - who essentially get poisoned as a result of a whim of medical and cultural fashion - are boys.

But this usage of terms is (of course!) the first offense of sexism that has to be pointed out here.

:rolleyes:

I've read this at least 9 or 10 times now, and I still can't for the life of me deduce what you're trying to say here.
 
I've read this at least 9 or 10 times now, and I still can't for the life of me deduce what you're trying to say here.

You've somehow missed the massive drugging of elementary age boys for "ADHD?" It's terrifying and horrible and gets almost no traction. It's almost like we've decided the Y chromosome is simply 5-10% totally socially unacceptable during youth and needs to be drugged to make palatable.
 
Top Bottom