28 Dec 09
2 edits
I was Listening to the radio the other day and someone was discussing the differences of the youth of today and the youth of the pre-modern era. They discussed how the youth of yester-year worked for the most part and education was often an after thought, unless one was "well to do". Of course, then came the industrial revolution and children working as slaves in factories, which we have all seen pictures of. Then came laws restricting youth from being able to work in such a capacity. Also, the youth of yester-year often married early, not long after puberty. However, today, our youth are told to wait until they are at least 18 and then are incouraged to wait at least another 4 years to get some form of higher education.
So what are some of the pro's and cons of the two worlds? Of course, the obvious pro's are that children cannot legally be treated as slaves earning a meager wage, at least until they are 18. LOL. As for waiting longer to marry, yong men and women have a longer time to decide what they wish to be when they grow up, as well as who they wish to live with for the rest of their lives.
Conversly, what are some of the con's? The radio host referred to youth of today as often listless and often spending the majority of their time avoiding responsibility and the four letter word "WORK". In addition, they are less likely to learn a vocation like the youth of old. The youth of old often worked along side their parents to learn how to survive growing up and/or had some form of apprenticeship. The result was that the youth of old were not only preparing for adulthood in terms of mastering a vocation or working the land, they maintained a certain healthy level of responsibilty in their lives, as much as they were capable of handling. As far as marraige was concerened, the youth of old had children younger in life, when they were more energetic and more likely to survive until their children had matured sufficiently to survive on their own once they passed on. In addition, the youth of old were less likely to experiment sexually as they often picked on partner early in life instead of an endless dating life leading to a myriad of STD exposure. In fact, I saw an article the other day that said the one in four teenage girls have an STD!!
So what say you? Which world is or was better? Of course, it is human nature to think that their way is better, but that does not mean it is or that it should be reconsidered.
28 Dec 09
Originally posted by whodeyAre you talking about modern day youth in Africa, modern day youth in Asia, modern day youth in Europe, modern day youth in South Americans?
I was Listening to the radio the other day and someone was discussing the differences of the youth of today and the youth of the pre-modern era. They discussed how the youth of yester-year worked for the most part and education was often an after thought, unless one was "well to do". Of course, then came the industrial revolution and children working as sla ...[text shortened]... that their way is better, but that does not mean it is or that it should be reconsidered.
Or are you talking about something a jaundiced, chuntering, push-peoples-buttons talk radio DJ coughed up about lazy misanthropic stereotypes of youth in some sterile, quivering, gloomy, 1-wage-packet-away-from-financial-disaster nook or cranny in the U.S. in between cheesy retail ads for things that make you obese/diebetic or yet more near redundant-but-'aspirational' consumer goods that you can sling on to your credit card and then pay off at the end of the month with another credit card?
I just want to be clear.
28 Dec 09
2 edits
Originally posted by whodeyJust considering life in "developed" countries.
I was Listening to the radio the other day and someone was discussing the differences of the youth of today and the youth of the pre-modern era. They discussed how the youth of yester-year worked for the most part and education was often an after thought, unless one was "well to do". Of course, then came the industrial revolution and children working as sla that their way is better, but that does not mean it is or that it should be reconsidered.
In those days of old, life was usually nasty, brutish, and short.
The great majority of people were peasants who essentially were slaves to some sort of lord or master.
You didn't have modern police forces, so the world was a much more violent place than it is today. Either your master protected you or you were toast.
You didn't have modern medicine, so there were many more diseases you could die from. Even the act of giving birth was a major risk.
As for marriage. Most people's marriages were arranged by their parents. You didn't have the choice of "waiting", and you definitely didn't get to "pick" your spouse. Marriage occurred early because death occurred early. If you were to pass on your genes, you needed to get on with it.
As for mastering a trade. Most youths had no choice but to learn whatever trade their parents chose for them. In most cases, that trade was plowing your lord's fields in return for protection from bandits and thugs.
28 Dec 09
Originally posted by FMFThat phrase made me think of the irony that roughly half of the ads I see and read relating to food intake are hawking food products that are enormously high in fat, sugar and calories and the other half are hawking product that decrease your appetite or otherwise allow one to lose weight, lower cholesterol, manage diabetes, etc.
cheesy retail ads for things that make you obese/diebetic
Think of all the ad revenue generated by this strange dichotomy we live in... enjoy today and tomorrow, let's think of a quick fix to mitigate the problems caused by today's party. And, it's not just food. I saw an ad the other day for hangover prevention pills; And, of course, the morning after pill ads get squeezed in between the Viagra ads.
It's actually quite amusing when you think about it.
28 Dec 09
Originally posted by sh76The same irony can be seen in many of the magazines at the grocery checkout line. Almost without fail, there will be at least one with a big headline about some sort of weight-loss plan on the cover - a cover that also features a cake or pie or something equally likely to thwart said weight-loss plan.
That phrase made me think of the irony that roughly half of the ads I see and read relating to food intake are hawking food products that are enormously high in fat, sugar and calories and the other half are hawking product that decrease your appetite or otherwise allow one to lose weight, lower cholesterol, manage diabetes, etc.
Think of all the ad revenu ...[text shortened]... squeezed in between the Viagra ads.
It's actually quite amusing when you think about it.
28 Dec 09
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFI am talking about youth in general. We have a wide range, as you point out, of cultures through the melenia as examples. In the culture I live in, I get the impression that kids are sheltered in large part, from responsibility and are often listless and in limbo. I can speak for myself in that, this is exactly how I felt. For example, high school was nothing more than a place to party in large measure. So its no wonder that college campasses across the US are known for institutes for higher partying rather than higher learning. Really not much is expected of you, even though, at times, you wish more was expected of you. I can remember on several occasions in my youth thinking, "But I can do that, I want to do that", but never able to "test the waters" simply because I was deemed to be too young.
Are you talking about modern day youth in Africa, modern day youth in Asia, modern day youth in Europe, modern day youth in South Americans?
Or are you talking about something a jaundiced, chuntering, push-peoples-buttons talk radio DJ coughed up about lazy misanthropic stereotypes of youth in some sterile, quivering, gloomy, 1-wage-packet-away-from-f and then pay off at the end of the month with another credit card?
I just want to be clear.
I also remember feeling in limbo and without direction not knowing what I wanted to do in life, I think in large measure, because I had not been exposed to much of anything. The result is a college full of kids who have no idea what they want to do in life, or think they do, but quickly find out their decision was ill advised. Then when they realize they have made a mistake thousands upon thousands of dollars later, they still don't know what to do with thier lives.
28 Dec 09
Originally posted by sh76😀
That phrase made me think of the irony that roughly half of the ads I see and read relating to food intake are hawking food products that are enormously high in fat, sugar and calories and the other half are hawking product that decrease your appetite or otherwise allow one to lose weight, lower cholesterol, manage diabetes, etc.
Think of all the ad revenu ...[text shortened]... squeezed in between the Viagra ads.
It's actually quite amusing when you think about it.
This reminds me of that song, "I need a new drug, one that does what it should. Not one that make me feels to bad or one that makes me feel too good."
28 Dec 09
Originally posted by whodey
😀
This reminds me of that song, "I need a new drug, one that does what it should. Not one that make me feels to bad or one that makes me feel too good."
FMF, I know you don't like to go to youtube based on links that people post; but this one is funny, man. Trust me.
28 Dec 09
Originally posted by whodeySo, in other words, what you're saying is, you've always been a miserable git?
I also remember feeling in limbo and without direction not knowing what I wanted to do in life, I think in large measure, because I had not been exposed to much of anything.
28 Dec 09
2 edits
Originally posted by whodeyYou do hit on one of the big "problems" of modern life. There are so many options -- no matter what you end up choosing, you end up feeling like you're missing out on something even better. In the past, you had no choice but to accept your lousy lot in life and be happy with your measly corner of existence.
I am talking about youth in general. We have a wide range, as you point out, of cultures through the melenia as examples. In the culture I live in, I get the impression that kids are sheltered in large part, from responsibility and are often listless and in limbo. I can speak for myself in that, this is exactly how I felt. For example, high school was not ousands upon thousands of dollars later, they still don't know what to do with thier lives.
Your today, you have so many CHOICES!! -- your career, your spouse, your house -- even something as simple as what TV you buy -- there's always that nagging feeling that the proverbial grass is greener everywhere else.
The result is that many people become very slow to make a commitment to anything - it all gets put off for as long as possible. And once a commitment gets made, it becomes tempting to make a change at the first sign of adversity -- so you have lots of people changing jobs, changing careers, changing homes, changing wives -- and still feeling like they're losing out. So even though we're so much richer than people were a couple centuries ago, many of us are actually more miserable.
29 Dec 09
Originally posted by MelanerpesI don't think it is a matter of too many choices as it is a state of limbo. You could argue that these choices create a state of limbo, and I suppose there is some credibility in this ascertion, but it need not be the case.
You do hit on one of the big "problems" of modern life. There are so many options -- no matter what you end up choosing, you end up feeling like you're missing out on something even better. In the past, you had no choice but to accept your lousy lot in life and be happy with your measly corner of existence.
Your today, you have so many CHOICES!! -- you ...[text shortened]... ch richer than people were a couple centuries ago, many of us are actually more miserable.
Really what I am saying is that kids are only exposed to what goes on at school and learn about ivory tower academics instead of learning about the "real world". Case in point are the numerous stories I have heard about multimillionares who dropped out of high school in order to pursue their fortune. For them, high school was a big time waster in terms of pursuing their fortunes.
29 Dec 09
Originally posted by whodeyI taught in inner city schools in the U.K. for six years. All my colleagues were real people who knew plenty about real life. Not a single one of them was an "ivory tower academic". In fact the suggestion you make is an unusually hackneyed cliche, at least in the U.K. Ordinary teachers have often had all manner of jobs, they pay a mortgage, they raise kids, they have family members who die, their cars break down, they might be active politically, they encounter all types of children at work, take on responsibility, all types of family, tackle a whole range of problems, and so on. What's not 'real life' about it? I've heard this lazy cliche of yours a thousand times.
Really what I am saying is that kids are only exposed to what goes on at school and learn about ivory tower academics instead of learning about the "real world". Case in point are the numerous stories I have heard about multimillionares who dropped out of high school in order to pursue their fortune. For them, high school was a big time waster in terms of pursuing their fortunes.