system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: Learning how to box, hunt or wrestle is good for a kid and not a 'legacy of violence', kids these days are overprotected and therefore, weak.

I had a very traditional upbringing where my dad encouraged us to enjoy things that are not considered PC anymore. 

I had boxing lessons, a BB gun, a penknife. I was encouraged to defend myself and not be scared of getting bruised. It taught me how to protect myself, and that I was strong and able to control that force.

I recently watched a 'documentary' calling my culture a legacy of violence (gypsy/traveller). I don't really agree with that and would like to hear your opinions about why that is not just passing on traditions.

Imo, kids who don't learn to deal with getting hurt occasionally is making people weak.

Tldr, I think kids should be encouraged to be tougher.
gpt
I believe the most important thing in playing "rough" in childhood is what is called the wind down. Children learn a lot while playing, but there is a different between violent behaviour and safe behaviour. You said it yourself, you had boxing lessons - the key part is "lessons". You did not go to the playground and started hitting other kids, you encountered violence in a safe and controlled space. The most important part of rougher play is not the roughness, but the wind down. To quote Alastair Spate with regards to fathers playing rough with their sons:

>The crucial thing is the winding down. Here a father teaches his child, through play, the mastery of his energy and angers, sets the limits of aggression and how to stay in charge of one's emotions and not be flooded by them. (Quoted after Steve Biddulph)

The goal is not to teach violence or to be tougher. The violence is only a secondary part in teaching kids to be not tough but to control their emotions.