Backyard fight between teenagers-mixed feelings

[Headhunter]

I think there's a difference between understanding and endorsing behavior. I think the difference between a rational parent and a helicopter parent is the difference between being pissed when you catch your kid doing something stupid and never giving them the room to do something stupid. Saying it will never happen is helicopter parenting. Saying its dumb is not.

Headhunter was way over into the "rar. I will never let my kids do blah blah rar." That's helicopter parenting.

You really don't get it do you.....sure kids will do dumb things but any half decent parents needs to make sure there kids are safe and if they catch them doing something dumb let them know why it's dangerous...personally I'd rather my kick not be paralysed or have brain damage and I doubt kids would be very happy with me if they got crippled and I let them do what they did. That's called bad parenting letting kids do whatever they want. Like I've said they want to fight go to a gym and do it properly that's absolutely fine. Go train get tough there but these kids have little to no training and don't understand what they're doing

 

[Steve]

That has nothing to do with sparring safely. These kids didn't have the skill set or the control to spar at the intensity that they were sparring.

Afraid of risk or failure attitude comes from the "Everyone's a winner mentality" The OP's video was not that. I teach sparing at my school and there's no way I would have let someone with the lack of control that they had spar with that level of intensity.

Who's talking about sparring safely? I'm not. Clearly there are safer things those boys could be doing. I feel like you guys aren't paying very close attention to what I'm saying. You think I'm endorsing the behavior, even though I've said several times that I don't. You think I'm saying it's safe and/or smart, though I've said otherwise several times.

I simply don't think it's MORE dangerous than many other things no one has any trouble with, and I also don't think it's "too" dangerous.

I believe most of the reaction to the video is emotional.

 

[Steve]

You really don't get it do you.....sure kids will do dumb things but any half decent parents needs to make sure there kids are safe and if they catch them doing something dumb let them know why it's dangerous...personally I'd rather my kick not be paralysed or have brain damage and I doubt kids would be very happy with me if they got crippled and I let them do what they did. That's called bad parenting letting kids do whatever they want. Like I've said they want to fight go to a gym and do it properly that's absolutely fine. Go train get tough there but these kids have little to no training and don't understand what they're doing

I disagree, and think you're the one who doesn't get it. I think you're hand wringing and fretting over pretty much nothing. And if you would let your kid play football with his friends in the park or skate board, you're also being hypocritical.

And, for what it's worth, I think your particular brand of hand wringing is bad parenting, soooo... maybe we just have a fundamental difference of opinion about quality parenting.

 

[Steve]

That has nothing to do with sparring safely. These kids didn't have the skill set or the control to spar at the intensity that they were sparring.

Afraid of risk or failure attitude comes from the "Everyone's a winner mentality" The OP's video was not that. I teach sparing at my school and there's no way I would have let someone with the lack of control that they had spar with that level of intensity.

Just to address the "everyone's a winner" attitude, it's a different side of the same coin. When you over protect your kids physically from any danger, you're doing the same thing as when you over protect them emotionally. Same end result.

 

[Headhunter]

I disagree, and think you're the one who doesn't get it. I think you're hand wringing and fretting over pretty much nothing. And if you would let your kid play football with his friends in the park or skate board, you're also being hypocritical.

And, for what it's worth, I think your particular brand of hand wringing is bad parenting, soooo... maybe we just have a fundamental difference of opinion about quality parenting.

Well my kids haven't got any brain damage or concussions from being idiots in the back garden and are healthy and are responsible and have good lives with very successful careers so if that's bad parenting then so be it. But okay if you believe you letting your kids beat the **** out of each other makes you a good parent then so be it

 

[Steve]

Well my kids haven't got any brain damage or concussions from being idiots in the back garden and are healthy and are responsible and have good lives with very successful careers so if that's bad parenting then so be it. But okay if you believe you letting your kids beat the **** out of each other makes you a good parent then so be it

Ditto. Lol, as I said, parenting is kind of a pass fail thing. If you had just agreed with me at the beginning we could have saved some time. Cause, you know I'm right.

 

[Jenna]

@Headhunter, @Steve, @JowGaWolf and other folks posting,

I am not sure if I am interpreting the points people are making correctly or not.. would it be fair to say we are all agreed that children, ours and others who they interact with or that we are responsible for, are protected from harm, yes?

That being the case, maybe it is what define overprotection that is the knub of the matter? by that I mean zealously keeping a child from any kind of hurt whatsoever, be that physical or emotional. Overprotection is not a good thing for a child, true?? Because this hamper their ability so self-soothe, to cope with difficulty, to develop naturally etc.

Maybe the differences in thinking here arise because people naturally have different outlook, views and experiences about where the delineation lie between protection and overprotection? Could that be?

I do not know if this is a fair assessment or not. What do you think? In this case, what count as a balanced level of protection for these kids while still "letting kids be kids"? And what would be a counterproductive overprotection or unnecessarily wrapping them in blankets? Whereabouts do all of your experiences suggest the lines ought to be put?

 

[JowGaWolf]

@Headhunter, @Steve, @JowGaWolf and other folks posting,

I am not sure if I am interpreting the points people are making correctly or not.. would it be fair to say we are all agreed that children, ours and others who they interact with or that we are responsible for, are protected from harm, yes?

That being the case, maybe it is what define overprotection that is the knub of the matter? by that I mean zealously keeping a child from any kind of hurt whatsoever, be that physical or emotional. Overprotection is not a good thing for a child, true?? Because this hamper their ability so self-soothe, to cope with difficulty, to develop naturally etc.

Maybe the differences in thinking here arise because people naturally have different outlook, views and experiences about where the delineation lie between protection and overprotection? Could that be?

I do not know if this is a fair assessment or not. What do you think? In this case, what count as a balanced level of protection for these kids while still "letting kids be kids"? And what would be a counterproductive overprotection or unnecessarily wrapping them in blankets? Whereabouts do all of your experiences suggest the lines ought to be put?

For me it's not even about being a child. I don't let adults with similar skill sets spar like those kids did. I believe in the video there were 2 people who were also concern about what they say but were discourage from managing the sparring by the person who was filming, who stated "let them kill each other." He didn't care about their safety he wanted to see a knockout, he wanted to see someone get hurt. To him, those guys were his entertainment.

To compare fighting to those other sports is not a realistic comparison because in fighting or sparring you are trying to strike a person in the head, body, or limbs. If you are a grappler then you are trying to choke, or put them in a position where their joints are compromised. All of these are intentionally done. If I'm on a skateboard I'm not intentionally trying to break my arm. If I'm doing an arm bar then I'm intentionally trying to put that arm in a position where the joint will be compromised and if I'm not careful that same movement may cause serious injury to my partner.

An over-protective parent wouldn't have allowed the sparring in the first place. I yet to see anyone say that the kids shouldn't have been sparring in the first place. What I have seen is concern about how they were going about it and how it increased their risk for serious injury and not reduce it. Does wearing protective gear reduce all of the risk? Of course not, but it helps to reduce some of injuries. Does sparring with control reduce all of the risks? Of course not but it decreases the chance that someone will get seriously hurt because they could not control the power. They were giving.

Steve is making this a case about being over-protective. I've seen over protective people and parents, and what people are saying aren't overprotective parent comments.

 

[Steve]

@Headhunter, @Steve, @JowGaWolf and other folks posting,

I am not sure if I am interpreting the points people are making correctly or not.. would it be fair to say we are all agreed that children, ours and others who they interact with or that we are responsible for, are protected from harm, yes?

That being the case, maybe it is what define overprotection that is the knub of the matter? by that I mean zealously keeping a child from any kind of hurt whatsoever, be that physical or emotional. Overprotection is not a good thing for a child, true?? Because this hamper their ability so self-soothe, to cope with difficulty, to develop naturally etc.

Maybe the differences in thinking here arise because people naturally have different outlook, views and experiences about where the delineation lie between protection and overprotection? Could that be?

I do not know if this is a fair assessment or not. What do you think? In this case, what count as a balanced level of protection for these kids while still "letting kids be kids"? And what would be a counterproductive overprotection or unnecessarily wrapping them in blankets? Whereabouts do all of your experiences suggest the lines ought to be put?

Completely agree. I've said from the beginning that this isn't all that safe, and I think we all agree that training in a school is the "right" way to do this. I just don't happen to think this is any more dangerous than many other things. And so far, some of the responses to my posts have not been anything more than emotional and hyperbolic.

The "intent" argument is irrelevant, in my opinion. I understand the rationale, and disagree. I think it's a way to rationalize an emotional reaction. In these fights, the intent isn't to cause permanent damage any more than it is in football, rugby or any other activity. Accidents happen in life, and it's sad when it does, and tragic when it results in loss of life. While that is true, it is also true that you can't protect kids from all harm. I don't believe intent has anything to do with this. It's more about ACTUAL risk, which is higher than if they were playing video games, sure. But this isn't any riskier than swimming in a lake or playing tackle football in a park.

So, to sum up, there are some points of agreement and points of disagreement.

I agree that the sparring wasn't all that safe. I also agree that there are safer ways for the kids to do this kind of stuff. I agree that this kind of thing shouldn't be endorsed.

I disagree that it's "too" dangerous. I disagree that a parent can truly keep kids from doing stupid things like this. More importantly, I don't agree that kids should be kept from doing anything stupid. I happen to believe that this is normal and healthy.

Another rambling comment I'll say comes from the comment about raising "successful" kids. Every generation is a little different, and it's amazing how when one is born affects attitudes, personalities and core traits. Of course, this isn't the only thing that defines a person, but it's one thing. And with each generation, there are strengths and weaknesses, and different definitions of "success." A real concern is that millennials, as a group, want to be lead. They can be excellent employees who work hard and do excellent work. But very few (as a group) aspire to management. Work for them is a means to an end and nothing more. They are less loyal to a company, and content to earn less money if it means limited responsibility and a convenient work day. To tie this back to the comment about being successful, I believe that when their parents (mostly Baby Boomers) were overprotective (physically or emotionally), we ended up with kids who are risk averse, and this has translated in a very real way into business now in the form of a leadership vacuum. While this works very well for those few Millennials who are ambitious and capable, as there is a lot of opportunity and little competition, it's not all that good for the country. We have a bunch of followers out there. As Gen Xers retire in the next 10 years or so, I predict that the next generation to move America forward will be our kids who were born after 1995 or 1996. The children of the Gen Xers, in other words. In 15 years, these young people will effectively leap frog the Millennials.

Last thing, I have no problem with people disagreeing with me, and I can see where you guys are coming from. While I have my opinions about this activity, I do truly believe that parenting is pass/fail. If your kids end up happy, healthy and successful (however they define it) good on ya. Congratulations. You pass.

 

[Skullpunch]

Are some of you watching a different video than I just did? Because in the one I saw, those kids very obviously knew what they were doing and very obviously have some training. No, it wasn't Jon Jones vs. Aleksandr Gustaffson but if you can't tell the difference between these 2 guys and a couple of kids who are too stupid to not die every time they close their fists then you need a lot more training and a lot less virtue signaling in your life.

 

[drop bear]

Well my kids haven't got any brain damage or concussions from being idiots in the back garden and are healthy and are responsible and have good lives with very successful careers so if that's bad parenting then so be it. But okay if you believe you letting your kids beat the **** out of each other makes you a good parent then so be it

Well. Yeah. You get your kids into golf not martial arts. Because there is a heap more money in it.

 

[drop bear]

Are some of you watching a different video than I just did? Because in the one I saw, those kids very obviously knew what they were doing and very obviously have some training. No, it wasn't Jon Jones vs. Aleksandr Gustaffson but if you can't tell the difference between these 2 guys and a couple of kids who are too stupid to not die every time they close their fists then you need a lot more training and a lot less virtue signaling in your life.

That. Barry licra had some skill.

Full contact will always look scrappier than what some people are used to I think.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Are some of you watching a different video than I just did? Because in the one I saw, those kids very obviously knew what they were doing and very obviously have some training. No, it wasn't Jon Jones vs. Aleksandr Gustaffson but if you can't tell the difference between these 2 guys and a couple of kids who are too stupid to not die every time they close their fists then you need a lot more training and a lot less virtue signaling in your life.

I agree. They've clearly had some training, and I have no issue with them going full contact. Just would like someone with more training watching them, especially with the grappling