I’ve always viewed the concept of stranger danger to be somewhat of an unfinished idea. The philosophy states that strangers are potentially dangerous and, consequently, should be avoided. Given that a stranger is only a stranger if they are unknown, I begin to discover an incomplete painting of one of society’s most abundant philosophy. Should we feel encouraged to learn about, and engage with more people, or should we feel limited and fearful of the unknowns around us? In essence, I think the question boils down to whether we prioritize eliminating strangers, or eliminating potential dangers.
I find that how we, as individuals, view strangers, have a great deal to do with our privileges, or lack thereof. A common illustration of privilege, especially regarding strangers, I think, is the idea of neighborhoods. Too often, particularly in my time in suburban United States, I heard the terms “safe” and “dangerous” being used as descriptors of local areas. Perhaps if I were to grow up in a “safe” neighborhood, I would be less fearful of strangers, and vice versa, if I were to grow up in a “dangerous” area. I suppose my only question would be whether or not these differing degrees of fears towards strangers would carry over to environments outside of the neighborhoods.
Between various societies, there are vast differences in how strangers are treated between and by its people. Beyond the stereotypes and individual anecdotal experiences of specific countries, I think that it’s fair to claim that these differences exist, and are often clearly visible. I am led to believe that these variances in friendliness towards strangers are caused almost solely by social and cultural factors. With this in mind, I begin to wonder if some societies intentionally implemented social and cultural factors that would drive their communities in a direction that would be better suited for prosperity. What I’m trying to get at is whether or not some societies attempted to instill their social norms before the establishment of their society. A chicken and an egg question, if you will. Perhaps outside intervention could be made to alter the egg to hatch a more fit chicken.
In the end, I continue to be puzzled by the intentions of “stranger danger”, and will likely remain unsure, simply due to the nature of the philosophy. To me, it almost feels as though the phrase introduces a problem, and forgets to, or intentionally omits, the answer. Interesting how a question that seeks a lifelong ethical answer is introduced at such a young age.
