12 Comments
User's avatar
E2's avatar

When I was seven (through ten), I was independent for a couple hours after school. There were several shops I could visit on the way home, including a pizzeria with slices (and a jukebox, where I first heard Prince and Eurythmics).

Expand full comment
Ryan M Allen's avatar

Sounds like a great time.

Expand full comment
Interested Party's avatar

“de moine” lol

Expand full comment
Ryan M Allen's avatar

Ha don’t know how that one slipped through the editor!

Expand full comment
bnjd's avatar

"I view it as sad because a kid ordering fast food while his mom is in the parking lot is so rare that it's newsworthy. Our built environment in the US constricts kids from doing very normal things. We must rethink our spaces to give back their independence. I will have a post on this next week."

Yes, to a degree, but this is also socially constructed. The fundamental reason that kids can't do normal things is that parents and the general public do not value kids doing normal things. The physical environment just reinforces this social construction. What you are failing to consider is that Boomers grew up in the suburbs, and they did some of these normal things.

Expand full comment
Ryan M Allen's avatar

Death rates for kids did definitely drop over time. So that is partially just a recognition that things were dangerous. We do not have to accept that.

Expand full comment
bnjd's avatar

Which death rates for kids are you talking about? And what caused those rates to drop?

Expand full comment
Ryan M Allen's avatar

Child pedestrian deaths. Kids don’t walk anymore.

https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/children

Expand full comment
E2's avatar

Where does the social construction come from? I find that many people just accept the implications of their local built environment.

Expand full comment
Ryan M Allen's avatar

Mostly small incremental erosion over time. Basically the boiling frog metaphor. By the time we noticed, it was too late. Was all around us.

Expand full comment
bnjd's avatar

What do you mean by "built environment?" Architecture and infrastructure have formal qualities, but they are also socially and legally constructed. I play a game with nineteeenth-century maps maps in Houston, in which I know where the boardinghouses are. It's impossible to identify a Houston boardinghouse by its formal quality. At least two scholars preceded me in this observation about southern BHs: Glenn Perkins's study of boardinghouses in Wilmington, NC and Elizabeth Englehardt in Boardinghouse Women. Narratives using before and after photos of Amsterdam are misleading, for example. They are supposed to illustrated how much the BUILT ENVIRONMENT changed, but they often show streets with NO FORMAL CHANGES. What changed were the social and legal constructions. Amsterdam decided to use the same street in a different way.

Expand full comment
Ryan M Allen's avatar

I actually don't always like the comparisons between Amsterdam and the US, or really any other country. It's better to look at our own past. As you rightly mention, some places have not changed. Those are often our favorite places, such as old street car neighborhoods. Old principles of land use that don't demand long setbacks or wide forgiving streets. The fact is there has been fundamental redesign of our places through standards, zoning, and other regulations. Time to go back to traditional American style. https://www.ft.com/content/27169841-7ee3-481e-919d-41b247e401f6

Expand full comment