Hi Readers!Â I usually don’t like to comment on the comments — “Everyone’s entitled to his own opinion,” etc. etc. –but this time I must. ThisÂ commentÂ arrived in response to the story I posted last night (below this one) about a teacher who wanted an author to speak to her fourth grade class. Since theÂ school and the author areÂ 1000 miles apart, the author suggested using theÂ video-chat service Skype. The teacher said no — not unless he could come up with a way the kidsÂ could see HIM, but not vice versa.
Then, to add insult to injury, here is what someone commented right here, on Free-Range Kids:
“The teacher is likely (legitimately) concerned that the kids’ faces could end up plastered all over the internet.”
Excuse me? Legitimately concerned that —
1 – A children’s author she has invited will turn around and take photos of her class and post them without permission?Â That that’s what men do all the time? Can’t trust ‘em for a second?
2 – That boring photos of a 4th grade class are so exciting that they will take the Internet by storm? (Because, of course, there are so few photos of school children available.)
3 – That someone will see this particular photo, obsessively focus on the kid in the third row and move heaven and earth to come find this child and stalk, rape or kill him/her? And thatÂ we must keep Third Row Kid safe at all costs?
These are insane fantasies! Perfect, text-book examples of the way so many of us now jump to the absolutely WORST CASE SCENARIO and then work backward from it,Â preventing something harmless or even wonderful from ever taking place just in case. Using this method of risk calculation, a teacher could politely request that from now on, no one serve her studentsÂ lunch at school. Because what if one of the lunch ladies is secretly a psychopath and she is intent on murdering the kids one by one? It COULD happen, right? Let’s be prepared for the ABSOLUTE WORST! After all, we’re only thinking about the good of the children!
I am so sick of this “We must protect the children” attitude when we are NOT PROTECTING THEM FROM ANYTHING! We are simply seeing everyone in every capacity as a potential nut job and then we actÂ accordingly. Who’s the nut job there?Â
In this case, take your pick:Â TheÂ paranoid teacher preventing an author from Skyping her class. The paranoid commenter saying, “She has a legitimate safety concern.” Or the paranoid country that thinks every time a child has ANY interaction with ANY adult, even from 1000 miles away, those children are in GRAVE DANGER.
When people think that way — and congratulate themselves for being soÂ “caring” (not to mention clever! And proactive!) — THAT is when I despair.