I'm in my sixties and reflect sometimes on how much freedom I had as a kid, and why things have changed so much in terms of risks parents are willing to accept.
One correlation with "safetyism" this article doesn't mention: the rise of the two income household (https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2014/04/08/after-d... for the US; the UK appears to be similar.) In reality when we kids were running wild about the town, someone was watching us out their windows. If we got into (or more likely caused :) ) a problem, adults, usually a housewife, would show up quickly from somewhere. Even when we were off in the woods there was a sense that we could find a house where a grown-up would help us if needed (like if some kid's little brother ruptured his spleen on a dare, which actually happened.)
Nobody would call Child Protective Services - you knew it was little Billy who threw that rock that hit Jimmy, so-and-so's kid. You would tell Billy's dad, who would make sure he didn't ever do _that_ again, and that would be the end of it. Now I imagine police and lawyers would be involved. It seems we don't have the informal social connections any more, which were largely driven by someone just being around.
The above link BTW shows that "only" 50% of mom's were stay-at-home in the 1970's. In my specific time and place, many of the moms who did work outside the home had jobs that revolved around the school schedule (i.e., working at the school, or some work schedule that allowed them to be home when the kids were not in school.) The ones with full time jobs like my single mother, supporting three kids through full-time work, were a rarity back then. Maybe my brothers and I had excessive freedom because there simply wasn't anyone to watch over us - fortunately we all turned out more or less OK :)
I'm in my early forties and both my parents worked (as did all my neighborhood friend's parents) and we still spent a lot of time wandering around. Honestly I think people are really overthinking this. We spent a lot of time wandering around outside because we were bored. Now kids have an endless well of entertainment to choose from so staying at home is a much more appealing option. It's always tempting to romanticize your childhood but if I'm being honest, most of that time wandering around outside I was bored out of my skull. I was just marginally less bored than I would have been sitting at home.
Late 40's now. Both of my parents worked in the 80's-90's and I wandered up to 10 mi (16 km) away when I was 13. I was cycling up and down fire roads in the mountains. They never gave two shits how far I went so long that I wasn't in the house all the time but was back before dinner or sunset.
> You would tell Billy's dad, who would make sure he didn't ever do _that_ again, and that would be the end of it.
By beating the child?
It's not necessary, but it might be necessary for the child to believe that's a possibility. It's like armies. The presence and the possibility do most of the work. My grandfather didn't beat his children, but e.g. spanks and being hit on the butt by a belt were permissible by society. He didn't do that AFAIK, but the children knew it was possible, and a single look from him sufficed to get them to stop misbehaving.
He's very loved by them, BTW. I didn't meet him, but they always talk with admiration of him.
I was hit with a belt as a child. The possibility nor the reality helped make me a better person. It actually has a negative effect on mental health
It might be like brakes. Some people abuse the brakes for their own self-satisfaction to e.g. brake-check others, others brake hard every time they need to come to a stop (e.g. intersections) because they don't know otherwise, and then others make it seem like the brakes don't even exist as the car glides without disturbance to the point that you might find it normal to have a drink from a open cup throughout. It's always necessary to have the brakes, and always permissible to slam on them in case an emergency is happening, but they're ideally used sparingly and softly. They should ideally be made to seem like they don't exist, even though everyone knows they do.
Aren’t you just describing an EV with regen braking and one foot pedal driving? The brake pedal is just for emergencies.
Dude, you're breaking the analogy. Imagine an ICE car from the 90s. It's not about what technologies you're using. It's about the skill and intent with which you use the brake pedal (considering it the only form of braking).
But the problem is fixed now with new tech. Now we just have to worry about heavy rapid acceleration in family sedans instead of bad brake discipline.
Actually no. I don't remember parents actually hitting their kids, even in the 1970's. And this was a very rust-belt working class environment.