• Secure your account

    A friendly reminder to our users, please make sure your account is safe. Make sure you update your password and have an active email address to recover or change your password.

  • Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) There shouldn't be any downtime, as it's just a maintenance release. More info here

The funny thing about youth...(a message to teens everywhere)

Hee hee. No, I am not, sir. When I was 15...
The "Bad" tour was in full swing.
THere was no such thing as an MP3 or a DVD.
Reagan was in office.
Keaton had not yet signed on to play Batman.
A cell phone wighed a good 2 pounds.
And many of the people on this thread who can't seem to see where I'm coming from did not exist.

There is a difference between not seeing where someone is coming from and disagreeing with them. Although I have come to agree with you on several points that were poorly communicated.

Also, Bad is a really good song. Although Thriller is my favorite of his later years (of his early stuff, nothing can top "I Want You Back")
 
Many of the points on which you & I initially disagreed was actually due to a lack of understanding. Perhaps on both parts.
 
Many of the points on which you & I initially disagreed was actually due to a lack of understanding. Perhaps on both parts.

Oh, most definitely. We both communicated our points fairly weakly and vaguely. This whole this has been very educational for me in terms of communication and argument.
 
You seemingly came into it playing Devil's Advocate. I wanted you to see that there's usually a method to the madness.
 
You seemingly came into it playing Devil's Advocate. I wanted you to see that there's usually a method to the madness.

I think it was more that I tried to make my point to strongly without very much detail, and tried to tailor it to what you guys were saying instead of explaining it clearly. Like, I really do think that kids don't have a very good deal in our culture, but I got really caught up in the argument about specifics of parenting, which is only a really small aspect of my whole point. Honestly, my beef is more with how society as a whole, specifically schools and the government, deal with kids, which ends up effecting how many parents parent. Some parents have the wrong approach, but it has little to do with how many or few rules they have and everything to do with the attitude they have when enforcing those rules or not. It doesn't matter if you've got your own mini lawbook or if you let your kids do whatever they want. if you look at them as somehow inferior or otherwise distance yourself from them emotionally, even a little bit, you're going to have problems.

Also, that day I was still a little pissed about someone I knew who was being kind of obnoxious when spouting his opinions about young people today, and so I came on a little strong. Again, I apologize for that.
 
Hee hee. No, I am not, sir. When I was 15...
The "Bad" tour was in full swing.
THere was no such thing as an MP3 or a DVD.
Reagan was in office.
Keaton had not yet signed on to play Batman.
A cell phone wighed a good 2 pounds.
And many of the people on this thread who can't seem to see where I'm coming from did not exist.
When I was 15....

Michael Jackson had just made the song BEN
Nixon was in office
Keaton had just got out of high school
A cell phone was called a two way radio
And most of the people at this site didn't exist....:oldrazz:
 
I think it was more that I tried to make my point to strongly without very much detail, and tried to tailor it to what you guys were saying instead of explaining it clearly. Like, I really do think that kids don't have a very good deal in our culture, but I got really caught up in the argument about specifics of parenting, which is only a really small aspect of my whole point. Honestly, my beef is more with how society as a whole, specifically schools and the government, deal with kids, which ends up effecting how many parents parent. Some parents have the wrong approach, but it has little to do with how many or few rules they have and everything to do with the attitude they have when enforcing those rules or not. It doesn't matter if you've got your own mini lawbook or if you let your kids do whatever they want. if you look at them as somehow inferior or otherwise distance yourself from them emotionally, even a little bit, you're going to have problems.

Also, that day I was still a little pissed about someone I knew who was being kind of obnoxious when spouting his opinions about young people today, and so I came on a little strong. Again, I apologize for that.

Well, when I wrote the opening post, I was pissed about an obnoxious, rebellious teenager. I guess we're even.
 
Well, when I wrote the opening post, I was pissed about an obnoxious, rebellious teenager. I guess we're even.

I suppose.

I think one complication with that is the fact that there is a lot of unnecessary crap in a teenager's life that's worth rebelling against. Problem is that many of them fail to see the distinction between the things and people in their lives that are actually unfair and the things and people who are on their side, a distinction made blurrier by the fact that many of those unfair things are cultural institutions that go unquestioned, so many parents and other adults who otherwise have wonderful attitudes towards kids support and perpetuate them without even thinking about it.
 
I suppose.

I think one complication with that is the fact that there is a lot of unnecessary crap in a teenager's life that's worth rebelling against. Problem is that many of them fail to see the distinction between the things and people in their lives that are actually unfair and the things and people who are on their side, a distinction made blurrier by the fact that many of those unfair things are cultural institutions that go unquestioned, so many parents and other adults who otherwise have wonderful attitudes towards kids support and perpetuate them without even thinking about it.

That's what I was advocating when I made that thread about today's kids being under more pressure. I think people misinterpreted it as me *****ing about Lebron, but that wasn't the case. I think with all the things that distract young kids from doing things also distract adults from listening to them. One cycle that gets passed down through generations is the fact that youth never get listened to, and the tech we have now makes it a bigger problem that isn't acknowledged.

It's like Matt Stone from South Park said about Columbine. Michael Moore asked him what he'd say to the Columbine kids if he had a chance to talk to them. He said that he wouldn't have told them anything. He said that he would have just listened to them. Looking at how people reacted after the Columbine tragedy, it's still evident that young people aren't being listened to.
 
Failing to see the distinction between what's fair & just and what's totally unnecessary IS a part of the problem. But it's a distinction that can many times be learned only through time & experience.
 
Failing to see the distinction between what's fair & just and what's totally unnecessary IS a part of the problem. But it's a distinction that can many times be learned only through time & experience.

What makes that harder is that many of the things that are totally unnecessary, in my opinion, are cherished cultural institutions. I think the way most schools are run is a complete joke, and it's only purpose is to keep kids in line and turn them into a future labor force, not help them grow as individuals and get educated in a meaningful way.
 
There is a difference between not seeing where someone is coming from and disagreeing with them. Although I have come to agree with you on several points that were poorly communicated.

Also, Bad is a really good song. Although Thriller is my favorite of his later years (of his early stuff, nothing can top "I Want You Back")

Now that I think about it, the "Bad" album was released about 2 months after I turned 15. I saw him perform about 2 months before turning 16.
 
Individualism is too often suppressed. That's why idiots walk around with their pants hanging. They think it's cool because other dumb asses do it. I respect people's choice of style, so they should sag their pants if they want. Still, everyone that I've asked that does it says that they do it because everyone else does.
 
When I was 15

Miley Cyrus was this crazy, sometimes ****ty teenager :huh:
Conan O'Brien got screwed by NBC. Now look! :awesome:
GR87 was a possibly crazy stalker-ish person
Bamfer was a Mod.....Twice!


Memories! :awesome:
 
What makes that harder is that many of the things that are totally unnecessary, in my opinion, are cherished cultural institutions. I think the way most schools are run is a complete joke, and it's only purpose is to keep kids in line and turn them into a future labor force, not help them grow as individuals and get educated in a meaningful way.

There is truth in that. But it's up to the parents to make sure they judge all matters where their kids are concerned fairly & objectively-which is MUCH easier said than done.
 
Now that I think about it, the "Bad" album was released about 2 months after I turned 15. I saw him perform about 2 months before turning 16.

You lucky bastard... the closest I can ever get to seeing that much lanky awesomeness live on stage is Conan O'Brian's upcoming comedy tour, but that doesn't even match up.

Individualism is too often suppressed. That's why idiots walk around with their pants hanging. They think it's cool because other dumb asses do it. I respect people's choice of style, so they should sag their pants if they want. Still, everyone that I've asked that does it says that they do it because everyone else does.

It goes beyond schools, too, although schools are the biggest offender, what with the "the best way to make everyone an effective adult is to have them all know the exact same stuff and think the same way" mentality. A lot of children's TV Shows and movies, especially in the 80s, were and are designed to promote group think over individuality. Add to that all the organizations, both inside of school and out, that promote group solidarity and enforcing pride in a constructed culture, and, well, it's appalling how far it goes when you look at it.
 
There is truth in that. But it's up to the parents to make sure they judge all matters where their kids are concerned fairly & objectively-which is MUCH easier said than done.

Oh, absolutely. Both because of the personal investment they have in their kids, and because of the personal investment they have in the things their kids are going through that they also had to go through. Going back to the school example, for a moment, so many parents go along with traditional education and get fed up with their kids complaining about it because, and I quote "I went through it and I turned out fine."
 
When I was 15

Miley Cyrus was this crazy, sometimes ****ty teenager :huh:
Conan O'Brien got screwed by NBC. Now look! :awesome:
GR87 was a possibly crazy stalker-ish person
Bamfer was a Mod.....Twice!


Memories! :awesome:

That, especially because you mentioned Conan, reminded me of his "Great Tonight Show Moments" segment.
 
Honestly? School. I think school is a huge example of this. And the way schools are organized today is something we can live without. Other than that, I think that kids, naturally depending on the age level, are more capable of taking care of themselves than we give them credit for. I know of people who have been taking the subway into Boston by themselves since they were fourteen, largely to hang out with other people of the same age, and they all turned out fine.

That's the only way I've ever known school to be. But I was ignorant to the alternatives you mentioned before. Again, I'd have to understand more about it and the results it produced before I can give much of an opinion on it. That being said, obviously there are alternatives. Homeschooling is another one. The parent has every right to seek a different way to educate their child. I think the situation with the subway is less about trusting the child and more about paranoia of society. It's argued that crime hasn't gotten worse over the years, it's just more covered by the media, so it looks worse than it is. Regardless, parents are far more restricting than they used to be, just because they are afraid their kids will get snatched up or something. Justified or not, it's not about trusting the kid.....it's being scared of how the world is. Hell, when I was growing up I used to walk to elementary school nearly 3 miles away. Sometimes by myself. For Halloween we'd travel waaaaay far from our neighborhood and be out past 10. Now parents drive their kids around and they are done by 8.

I'm finding the "living in a utopia" thing to be a little insulting... but whatever. What you say here... does and doesn't make sense to me. In that I think it's largely dependent on a child's age. A four year old isn't going to be able to have much beyond the simplest of conversations about anything, let alone how the household is run. As for older kids... again, if the kid's just asking why to stall for time, then I think that any conversation you're going to have should probably be about something else, like why it is they feel so strongly about not doing what you asked them, not why they should do what you asked them.

I understand, but I wasn't really sure how else to word it. Trust me, those conversations have taken place. More than once. I used the utopia reference because you seem to have this belief that if you just sit and talk things out that everything will come together and total understanding will occur between adult and child. And that's simply not realistic. Granted, it may work with some kids, but I promise you it will not work with all kids and all situations. Just like the whole "because I said so," kids often have the equally frustrating "Because I don't want to."

I've only met one person who came out of a school like that and couldn't read very well. Then he tried to take college courses, and taught himself how so he could keep up. At this point he's actually not allowed to read because he's been known in the past to be two hours late for work because he was too busy reading a book and forgot about the time (luckily he runs his own business).

Good deal. I'm sure there are plenty of instances of something like this happening. On the flipside, it's said that 14% of adults are currently illiterate, the number on children that can't read is higher. Most of those people's stories aren't as rosey as you're friend.

What do you mean by violent acts? Because I'm talking about teenagers shooting and stabbing each other over money and drugs.

Yup, so am I. I'm also talking about what they've coined around here as the "Millard Gang." It sounds funny for me to even say it. The Millard area here is a completely suburb, upper middle class area....completely. And yet they have a group of kids that go around doing gang level stuff. Not quite as bad as what goes on in LA and such, but bad enough.

I'm not sure kids really learn like that, but then it depends on the age you're talking about. I don't entirely disagree here, although I think it's best to deal with any social interaction with a certain level of gentleness. Not that you shouldn't stand your ground, just that you shouldn't be rigid and harsh and actually try to understand what's going on in the other person's head and dal with it/confront them about it. I'm not accusing you of anything, by the by, because I've never seen you in a social situation with anyone. I'm just stating my opinion on the subject in general.

Again, and I'm sorry if this sounds like an insult, but we're back to this ideal world you have. Not all kids are going to react the way you hope they will. There are times when you have to bring down the hammer and be rigid. You can only talk so long with a kid who simply doesn't care about the logical reasons behind anything, they just want to do what they want to do, and that's it. It's no big mystery. There's no big underlying cause to figure out....that's all there is to it. As one of the other posters said, there is no silver bullet solution.

I've never advocated for kids getting away with things when they do wrong. I just think that if a kid wants to do something that doesn't infringe on the rights of others and isn't inherently self destructive, then they should be allowed to do it. However, I think our definition of "not self destructive" is too narrow, because we're scared of kids running amok when I know from experience that they probably wouldn't.

What experience teaches you that kids wouldn't? And the addition of the word probably lends the the assumption that you're not 100% sure.

I understand all of this. I'm not unfamiliar with employment. Also, that last comment I thought was slightly condescending.

In any event, my point was that a job is a completely different dynamic than school or home. I don't see how making kids do things they don't want to do for the sake of making them do it prepares them for the work force, because the fact that getting a job means you'll be performing various duties in exchange for money is very clear up front when you apply for a job, and if you're not cool with that you can look for a different job.

I have a sarcastic wit that, unfortunately, works it's way into my daily conversations. People that know me understand it's not personal. I wouldn't expect you to know about that first hand....so don't take it personally. I disagree somewhat that getting a job means that your duties are clearly stated up front. That's not always the case. Your "major" functions are clearly stated up front, but not only does your job almost always contain "other duties as assigned" it also has the potential to change as time goes on. For example, I was hired on at my job as a LAN Administrator. Basically a desktop repair gopher. It morphed into also being a Network Admin, a Server Admin, Remote Office Installs (travel), to just being a Server admin for Exchange Email Software, then to IIS, then Lotus Notes got thrown in, etc. Not all jobs are that dynamic. But kids had better be prepared for it, or they need to keep looking for a job that's more static.

I actually don't see how that's not being a kid's friend. If my friend asked me to do something that would be an inconvenience to me and eventually to them, and not an immediate inconvenience but a major, long term inconvenience, of course I would say no. However, I do agree, there are aspects to the role of parent that have to take precedent at times, but they and the role of friend are still not mutually exclusive

I think for the most part we agree here.
 
That's the only way I've ever known school to be. But I was ignorant to the alternatives you mentioned before. Again, I'd have to understand more about it and the results it produced before I can give much of an opinion on it. That being said, obviously there are alternatives. Homeschooling is another one. The parent has every right to seek a different way to educate their child. I think the situation with the subway is less about trusting the child and more about paranoia of society. It's argued that crime hasn't gotten worse over the years, it's just more covered by the media, so it looks worse than it is. Regardless, parents are far more restricting than they used to be, just because they are afraid their kids will get snatched up or something. Justified or not, it's not about trusting the kid.....it's being scared of how the world is. Hell, when I was growing up I used to walk to elementary school nearly 3 miles away. Sometimes by myself. For Halloween we'd travel waaaaay far from our neighborhood and be out past 10. Now parents drive their kids around and they are done by 8.

It's not a lack of trust, but it's a lack of believing a kid can take care of themselves to a certain degree.

And I so think that paranoia is largely unfounded. Statistically speaking, in most cases of child abuse and/or abduction, the guilty party is someone the child already knew. And, really, it makes sense. If you're of the inclination to kidnap or harm a child for whatever reason, why go to the trouble of going on the hunt if you've got a potential victim in your own backyard. Not so say that strangers doing things to kids doesn't happen, but it's rarer than people think. Harming children runs so counter to our cultural values that it takes a severely broken person to do it, and luckily it takes a lot for someone to be that broken.

Good deal. I'm sure there are plenty of instances of something like this happening. On the flipside, it's said that 14% of adults are currently illiterate, the number on children that can't read is higher. Most of those people's stories aren't as rosey as you're friend.

I'd want to look into those statistics and find out how many of those people ever had an opportunity to learn to read or currently live lives where reading is important. I would also think that, the fact that there is such a social stigma about an adult being unable to read, many of those cases may be partially a result of the person convincing themselves that they're too stupid to learn to read because they haven't already. Of course, that's just speculation.

Yup, so am I. I'm also talking about what they've coined around here as the "Millard Gang." It sounds funny for me to even say it. The Millard area here is a completely suburb, upper middle class area....completely. And yet they have a group of kids that go around doing gang level stuff. Not quite as bad as what goes on in LA and such, but bad enough.

Where do you live?

Again, and I'm sorry if this sounds like an insult, but we're back to this ideal world you have. Not all kids are going to react the way you hope they will. There are times when you have to bring down the hammer and be rigid. You can only talk so long with a kid who simply doesn't care about the logical reasons behind anything, they just want to do what they want to do, and that's it. It's no big mystery. There's no big underlying cause to figure out....that's all there is to it. As one of the other posters said, there is no silver bullet solution.

I don't have an ideal world. Please stop saying that.

In any event... again, I suppose this does partially depend on the age. But I disagree that there is ever a need in domestic situations to be rigid. That's not to say that you shouldn't stand your ground, but you should also be flexible, non-judgmental, willing to listen, and gentle in your approach. Gentle, the way I use the term, does not mean timid. What it means is an understanding, or an attempt to understand, the other person's point of view and react to them in the way that is most helpful to them and to the situation, instead of simply trying to enforce your authority. I suppose gentle isn't the perfect word. Skillful works better.

Now, obviously some people don't want to listen. But they're ore likely to be willing to listen if a more skillful approach is taken. Skillful doesn't always mean accommodating or telling them what they want to hear, but it does mean that you don't try and put barriers between yourself and the other person. Because, you're right, there's no magic bullet. You need to be flexible in your approach.

My issue isn't really with anyone being hard on kids, it's people creating a divide between themselves and kids where they talk down to and talk at the kids. That doesn't accomplish anything.

What experience teaches you that kids wouldn't? And the addition of the word probably lends the the assumption that you're not 100% sure.

The schools I mentioned, for one. Kids there have complete control over how they spend their time and even have a say in things like budget and discipline. None of the schools exploded.

I have a sarcastic wit that, unfortunately, works it's way into my daily conversations. People that know me understand it's not personal. I wouldn't expect you to know about that first hand....so don't take it personally. I disagree somewhat that getting a job means that your duties are clearly stated up front. That's not always the case. Your "major" functions are clearly stated up front, but not only does your job almost always contain "other duties as assigned" it also has the potential to change as time goes on. For example, I was hired on at my job as a LAN Administrator. Basically a desktop repair gopher. It morphed into also being a Network Admin, a Server Admin, Remote Office Installs (travel), to just being a Server admin for Exchange Email Software, then to IIS, then Lotus Notes got thrown in, etc. Not all jobs are that dynamic. But kids had better be prepared for it, or they need to keep looking for a job that's more static.

I've just never found that conditioning a kid to blindly follow orders prepares them for the work force.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"