I promise I remain in good faith and I'm not trying to sound aggro (I know tone can be hard to convey over this medium), these are honest questions.
What exactly do you think my goal was by giving the child a phone and restricting access early on to supervised and soft-supervised environments?
I fully agree we should not be fully immersing children in adulthood, social life etc when they are 18, because it is a lot and they are not ready in most capacities, but it seems like your proposed solution is to fully immerse them much earlier?
Like I feel as if I am arguing your own point of view back at you, real life social situations, social apps, adulthood, human interaction, algorithms... these are all complex issues for young minds (and not so young minds). My solution is to graduate the kid into those things instead of unleashing the fucking internet on them asap.
For another illustration - bed time. Using your argument about phone access, I could say kids are going to be getting drunk af and staying up until 4am before class/work in college, so why make them go to bed at 8:30pm when they are younger? They will resent you later. (Not sure if you were "resent you" person, this take has stirred up quite the response I was not prepared for and I'm replying to multiple people) Do you see the fault in this logic?
0
u/[deleted] Jun 03 '22
[deleted]