Age-related
Questions 11-20
Feel free to browse the following questions, some of which may
still await answers. You can then post an answer or counter an answer
that has already been posted. Please read the
guidelines for answering questions
before making a posting.
Previous 10 this topic
area 
Next 10 this topic area
THE
QUESTION:
A20: Why is so much youth fashion so aggressively visually
unappealing, sexually unappealing or unflattering to the wearer, such
as grunge or baggy styles? What is the first impression the wearers
of such clothing wish to convey ?
POSTED JUNE 30, 1998
Greg C., 35, male
<gregc@NewZealand.Sun.COM>,
Wellington, New Zealand
(Similar question regarding the revival of '70s baggy, loose-fitting
clothes posted July 17, 1998, by Rocky S., 50s
<fred1c1dobbs@webtv.net>,
Las Vegas, NV)
ANSWER 1:
A lot of people wear clothes that don't suit them because
they want to pronounce their individuality and reject the
expectations placed on them by society, such as those that state what
they should wear. This is how both the grunge and homey fashions
began, just like in the '60s, when teenagers wore brightly colored,
flamboyant clothes to rebel against the conservative uniforms of the
'50s. What some teenagers don't realize is that if they wear these
clothes, they are conforming in another sense.
POSTED JULY 17, 1998
Frances S., 16
<
novacaine@rocketmail.com>,
Sydney, Australia
FURTHER NOTICE:
The reason for the grungy look, dirty feet under the baggy
pants (boys and girls) and the long, dirty hair is that they
immediately want you and me to be shocked. They hope we think they
are rebellious and that they are really different. They want to be
outcasts so they will at least be recognized for something. If they
don't turn to alcohol and drugs to be further recognized, they grow
out of all of this.
POSTED JULY 21, 1998
Cap'n Charlie
<charliep@versoft.com>,
Tallahassee, FL
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
We dress as our peers and heroes, just as you most likely
dress as your peers and heroes. In the '50s (at least according to
Nick At Nite) people wore tight cloths. It's the '90s and we wear
baggy cloths. In the '40s (according to my grandparents' photos) guys
wore suits with very baggy pants. Hang around a few years or decades
and the clothes you like will come back into fashion. As far as being
"sexy" or not, there were many Native American tribes who wore
nothing or next to nothing. We would consider that sexy or lewd
today, but they were just following their peers and heroes.
POSTED JULY 24, 1998
Black Male, 22, Oakland, CA
FURTHER NOTICE 3:
It's in the eye of the beholder. You mean to tell me that
previous generations of clothing styles - bellbottoms, psychodelia,
etc. - were visually appealing? If you were from a non-Western
culture and saw someone in a suit and tie, you'd probably consider
that ugly, too.
POSTED OCT. 28, 1998
M.W., 21
<ed375@freenet.cleveland.edu>,
Cleveland, OH
FURTHER NOTICE 4:
I wear unappealling clothes because I have low self-esteem
about my body and myself, along with many thousands and perhaps
millions of teens today. I do not desire to have people look at me
and say "Well, doesn't she look nice!" because I do not believe
anyone would truly think that. I would think that they were just
trying to be nice to me. I have also been sexually molested twice, so
I also do not want to attract people to me.
POSTED NOV. 2, 1998
M. Davis, 15, black/white/Hispanic, Houston, Texas
FURTHER NOTICE 5:
Much of the clothing teenagers wear seems perfectly normal
to them; it just seems different to you because it is not the same as
what you wore when you were young. To me there is nothing
unflattering or unappealing about the clothing teenagers wear today.
Through my eyes (checking out a guy), baggy pants are far more
appealing than horrible, uncomfortable tight pants of any kind. This
is simply the way we are used to seeing ourselves.
POSTED NOV. 19, 1998
Anne B., female
<Ambush99@hotmail.com>,
Brawley, CA
FURTHER NOTICE 6:
The baggy clothes started with the gangs. They use the
baggy clothes to hide their weapons, drugs and cash. Others just
followed what they saw as a fashion trend. When a young person
doesn't have a positive example to follow, they'll follow anyone. I
feel it's a sad statement that the parents don't take the time to
find this sort of thing out before they dish out the money to
purchase this type of clothing.
POSTED NOV. 21, 1998
Susan B., 24, female, MO
FURTHER NOTICE 7:
I think the whole point of grunge was to be freed from
having to be attractive and a sex object. It can make you feel free
of hassle about your appearance and you can concentrate on the things
that really matter in life. By becoming fashionable, a lot of that
side of it changed; you now have to wear perfect make up with your
army trousers! I don't actually find the grunge style of clothing
unattractive or unappealing. I find many of the older conventions of
dress much more ugly. I hate certain types of suits, frilly shirts,
puffed sleeves, and over-fussy clothes of any sort. I dislike them so
much because of the sort of people I associate with them - fussy,
narrow-minded people. Having said that, I don't think the style of
clothing has all that much to do with how attractive or unattractive
someone is. Certain people can just wear anything and look really
good.
POSTED DEC. 15, 1998
Beth, preferer of messy clothes, Edinburgh, UK
FURTHER NOTICE 8:
Since we are approximately the same age, I find your
question funny. What a lot of the fashion is now is retro '70s -
shirts with Adidas or Charlie's Angels on them, elephant bell
bottoms, shirts with stripes on the arms, etc. They are wearing what
people wore when we were kids, just more exaggerated, and the only
message we were worried about was that other kids our age would think
we were cool. Yep, their kids will laugh at them one day, too.
DEC. 18, 1998
Craig, 35
<cmorris@loft.org>,
Minneapolis, MN
FURTHER NOTICE 9:
I think it is unfair to judge others by the way they are
dressed. Everyone has their own style and that's it, period. The
"homie" style didn't even originate as a fashion statement. Kids
living in poverty often got hand-me-downs from their older siblings.
Very rarely did these clothes fit them and practically hung off of
their bodies. After a while this style caught on and all the kids
began dressing that way. At any rate it doesn't matter where it came
from, it matters that we all have the right to be individual. No one
else should have the right to judge what other people wear, or try
and give explanations for the reasons we choose to dress this
way.
POSTED MARCH 30, 1999
Female, 18, Latina
<arana14@hotmail.com>,
Stockton, CA
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
A19: Do people become more resistant to learning how to
operate things like VCRs and stereos as they get older? I'm looking
for a scientific answer, if possible.
POSTED JUNE 26, 1998
John, 42, Chicago, IL
ANSWER 1:
Older people continue with their disdain or attraction to
technology rather than transform at a set age. I feel like a pioneer
in a most exciting technological time. My husband is the same. Those
our age we know who eschew computers, VCRs, etc. had similar feelings
toward electric typewriters, tape recorders, CDs, etc. My generation
did not grow up with rampant technology, so only those naturally
curious about such things expend the effort to master them (many
times on their own). Don't be too hard on them. Imagine, if you will,
having all those objects that you tackled in stages as you
grew up thrust suddenly into your life instead.
POSTED NOV. 27, 1998
Beth, 60, white female, Orlando, FL
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
A18: Why is it that young people seem to think something is
wrong with you if you are a virgin? I'm 46 and proud that my wife is
the only woman I have ever slept with.
POSTED JUNE 13, 1998
Jay K., jayk01@msn.com, Charleston, S.C.
ANSWER 1:
I am not sure why it is that everyone my age is so
critical of virgins. I actually had a girlfriend break up with me
because I would not have intercourse with her (even though we did
have other sexual relations). My philosophy is that if I don't have
sex, I don't have to worry about unplanned pregnancy or AIDS. My
current girlfriend (who is not a virgin) understands my situation and
agrees. My friends at college make fun of me and one other student
who admitted we were virgins during a class debate. My guess is they
are jealous!
POSTED JUNE 26, 1998
Chris T., 21, white male
<thuemmel@globalbiz.net>,
Metro Detroit, MI
FURTHER NOTICE:
Sex sells and it's all over our media, movies, music and
magazines. More and more young people are becoming exposed to sex and
sexual material every day, and this material is becoming more and
more frequent. Because it's everywhere, it's becoming a part of what
many people think and do, including young people. I'm only 21, and
I've noticed the increase of explicit material in music, music
videos, movies, etc., just in my lifetime. To be a teenager/young
adult and to be a virgin these days is to be a minority. History
shows that minorities are often ridiculed and joked about. I'm a
virgin, too, and have broken relationships because of it, but that's
all right. It's a matter of choice, and I've chosen to abstain until
I'm married.
POSTED JULY 16, 1998
Jacqui, 21
<jmclaug@eos.ncsu.edu>,
Blacksburg , VA
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I think attitudes are changing. We have moved from a time
when premarital sex was frowned on and never discussed, to the sexual
revolution and free love, and now many (young and old) assume that
anyone not married and of high school age or older is having sex or
trying to have sex. I am a virgin but have watched my friends decide
to start having sex just because that's what you do. I think the
pendulum is shifting, though. With the prevalence of sexually
transmitted diseases and the declining teen pregnancy rates, I think
people are becoming more responsible. And I think as part of that
more people will make the decision to not have sex or to hold off on
having sex, and it will no longer be such a unique decision.
POSTED JULY 24, 1998
Tara, 24
<taraluken@hotmail.com>,
Washington, DC
FURTHER NOTICE 3:
Most people I know, especially girls, aren't ashamed of
being a virgin because it shows you aren't a slut and you have good
morals. I am a virgin because I have more self-control than people
who go around sleeping with everyone, and plus I am going to wait
until marriage.
POSTED AUG. 7, 1998
Kristina, 14, Houston, TX
FURTHER NOTICE 4:
I am only 15, but I am very proud to be a virgin. I intend
on saving my virginity until I'm married, which is something not a
lot of people can honestly say. Sex is everywhere you look. Even in
peer pressure. It's a sad thing.
POSTED SEPT. 28, 1998
Meg X., 15, female
<eyeamabat@aol.com>,
Modesto, Ca
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
A17: Why do teenagers wear those enormous pants? I see kids
with pants at least four sizes bigger than they would normally need,
and I just do not understand. How comfortable can it be for your
pants to be hanging half off you and have enough extra room for two
more people in them?
POSTED JUNE 13, 1998
C.J., 20, white female, Orion, MI
ANSWER 1:
My Orange County, CA, son tells me it is to hide weapons
or shoplifted merchandise - i.e. it is the gangster look they are
seeking
POSTED JUNE 25, 1998
M. Blake, 52, white male, Springfield, MO
FURTHER NOTICE:
Teens wear baggy pants because teens wear baggy pants. We
all tend to emulate our peers. But, what is the big deal? Why stress?
If you do not like baggy pants, don't wear them. I wear baggy pants
because I like the way I look in them. I don't make any "comfort"
excuses - I just like the style. And when the style changes, so might
I.
POSTED JUNE 28, 1998
S.G.D., 23, gay black male, Oakland, CA
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
As a mother, I love the big pants. My sons can get three
years' wear out of a pair of jeans now!
POSTED JUNE 28, 1998
Lisa, Leduc, Alberta, Canada
FURTHER NOTICE 3:
What if I were to ask you why you wore the clothes you
wore when you were a teen? We wear baggy pants because we think they
look good, which is probably why you wore whatever it is you used to
wear. And hey, don't knock it until you try it!
POSTED AUG. 9, 1998
Lynette, 14, white female, Battle Creek, MI
FURTHER NOTICE 4:
Who says they aren't comfortable that way? I think they
are more comfortable than when they are all stiff and it's hard to
crouch down without making creaking noises.
POSTED SEPT. 7, 1998
A concerned 17-year-old
<snail40@yahoo.com>,
Grand Rapids, MI
FURTHER NOTICE 5:
I wear the big pants for two reasons: One, it's
comfortable. I know a lot of people use it as an excuse, but it's
true. It's much more comfortable than tighter pants. And it's also
easier to dance/move around in them. And two, they look good. Not
ones that are five sizes too big, but ones that are just a little
larger.
POSTED JAN. 5, 1999
Meg, 14, female
<Eyeamabat@aol.com>,
Modesto, Ca
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
A16: I am 40 and still refer to my friends' parents as "Mr."
or "Mrs." Why do kids today refer to adults by their first name?
POSTED JUNE 13, 1998
Marc B., rstnevrslp@aol.com, Modesto, CA
ANSWER 1:
Many people no longer feel it is appropriate to put a
barrier between themselves and others, including younger people. It
is becoming rare in society at any level to be introduced with a
label that is related to anything other than your job, and many of
the titles of old used to separate groups and classes have become
unfashionable. This is an extension of the breaking down of
traditional roles within society.
POSTED JULY 1, 1998
Greg C., 35, male
<gregc@NewZealand.Sun.COM>,
Wellington, New Zealand
FURTHER NOTICE:
I'm 32 and by default will address anyone about the age of
my parents with the honorific. However, I have found that now that I
am an adult, many people this age are quite uncomfortable with being
called "Mr./Mrs./Miss X" once I am on terms of familiarity with them.
"You're making me feel ancient," a friend's dad complained to me.
Children of my friends are free to call me "Auntie," or to use my
first name. As Marilla of Anne of Green Gables replied to Anne
when the girl said that using just plain "Marilla" seemed
disrespectful, if you say my name with respect, that's good enough
for me.
POSTED JULY 28, 1998
Desiree S., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I am young and refer to anyone older than me by more than
just a few years as Mr. or Ms., but most young people today don't. It
is easier to get along with someone or be relaxed around them if you
feel you are equals. I feel equal to some people because I have grown
up, but my parents' friends and family are still referred to as Mr.
or Ms.. Still, for the most part I find people are uncomfortable with
young adults calling them Mr. or Ms.
POSTED AUG. 14, 1998
Molson, Windsor , Ontario, Canada
FURTHER NOTICE 3:
My parents brought me up to respect my elders. Every adult
is called Mr. or Mrs. So-and-So if I know them. If they are a
stranger, Ma'am or Sir. Some adults are now asking teens to call them
by their first names because they feel "older" when someone calls
them Mr. or Mrs. It's all a matter of individual circumstances, not
necessarily a matter of disrespect.
POSTED SEPT. 25, 1998
Kristen, 18, Southampton, NY
FURTHER NOTICE 4:
I call some of my friend's parents Mr. and Mrs., and
others by their first names. The difference is their preference. I
usually do the Mr. and Mrs. unless asked to do otherwise or if I am
introduced to them by their first names.
POSTED OCT. 5, 1998
Rachel, 20, white female
<Rachel_Kennedy@yahoo.com>,
Denver, CO
FURTHER NOTICE 5:
I was brought up in a Southern culture in which it was/is
impolite to make a person feel or seem old/er. Catty women of my
mother's and grandmother's day would stand up when a woman they
wanted to insult would enter the room because you always stand when
your "elders" enter the room. When I was growing up, I was usually
taught that I could call my family's closest friends by their first
names (I must always speak respectfully). Others were "Mr. Bruce" or
"Miz Maggie" or the usual "Mr. Smith, Mrs. Smith." Usually when one
"came of age" (went to college), adults gave us permission to call
them by their given names. Some of my elders seem to prefer being
called "Mr. Smith," and others exclaim, "Oh, dear! You make me feel
so old! Please call me Bill." I try to keep an ear open for what
others are doing that seems to please people I'm unsure about.
POSTED OCT. 15, 1998
Midori, 38, Southern female
<midorichan1@juno.com>,
Orlando, FL
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
A15: Why do older people tend to think of us younger people as
"young and immature"? I have a high maturity level and look older
than I am, but when people find out I am 15, they treat me like some
immature brat. Why? Should we younger people look at older people and
think they're stupid? I don't think so, so why do you do that to
us?
POSTED JUNE 9, 1998
Cyndi J., 15, sytrixacid@hotmail.com, Memphis, TN
ANSWER 1:
It is quite normal for teenagers to want to be seen and
treated as adults. This has been a teenage dilemma for ages but has
been more emphasized in these times, maybe because of the youths'
exposure to inappropriate information by the media. Just enjoy your
childhood, because you are, by all respects, still a child. You need
time to mature and gain experience that cannot be learned in books or
on TV or in movies. When you look back at your problem in five years
or so, you will see what I am talking about.
POSTED JUNE 24, 1998
Lenny C., 42
<casuy@prodigy.net>,
Antioch, CA
FURTHER NOTICE:
Pardon me for being a traitor to my generation, but a lot
of us are pretty dumb. I look around every day and see "regular"
teenagers talking like new-age hillbillies and adopting unrealistic
principles while becoming shallow and underdeveloped adults. I see
millions of my fellow students buying into empty fads and selling out
to corporate America while separating from the high moral standards
they falsely portray. Some teenagers are a lot more dependent on free
thought than others, but people are and will always be people. Old
people will still stereotype us, as we do them.
POSTED JUNE 28, 1998
Chickenman,16
<thekiwi5@aol.com>,
Honolulu, HI
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I've seen just as many immature 40-year-olds as I've seen
immature teenagers. I don't feel age gives anyone an advantage when
it comes to maturity. Maturity comes with perception. If a person (no
matter how old) perceives life in a serious way, they are more mature
than a person who perceives life as a joke. Society needs to quit
stereotyping and just take people as they are, no matter what
age.
POSTED AUG. 21, 1998
Susan B. 25, MO
FURTHER NOTICE 3:
I would like to respond to Lenny, who said teenagers
should enjoy their childhoods, for they are in all respects still
children. I know you didn't mean any harm, but I resent that
statement. How can you say a teenager is in all respects still a
child? Granted, many teenagers act like children, but so do many
adults. Many teenagers are mature individuals who are in all respects
(except for biological age and maybe money) adults. I am a
16-year-old college student who lives at home but works and pays for
all my expenses (except food and rent). I am not in any shape or form
a child. As for why adults treat us like children, it's because they
don't understand we're not children anymore. My advice to teenagers
is to act like an adult and prove the stereotype wrong.
POSTED SEPT. 25, 1998
Amy C., 16
<AmyMarilyn@AOL.com>,
Dayton, OH
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
A14: Why does a person's hair start to grow so much faster on
their ears when they get older, say starting at 40?
POSTED JUNE 8, 1998
jwb, 51, jwb@jps.com, Geyserville, CA
ANSWER 1:
I'm a 42-year-old Asian male and my wife is 41. We do not
have more or less hair on, in or under our ears now compared to when
we were in our 20s. Maybe your observation is true to only you and
your family.
POSTED JUNE 25, 1998
L. Cristobal, 42, Asian
<casuy@prodigy.net>,
Antioch, CA
FURTHER NOTICE:
Ear hair is one of the only known genes found on the Y
chromosome. The gene isn't activated until later in life. No one
knows why a particular gene becomes activated, but a lot of people
are trying to figure that out.
POSTED JULY 20, 1998
Shawn,
<brerio@hotmail.com>,
Chicago, IL
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I have to agree with your finding. I tend to notice that a
lot of Anglo men start getting more hair growing outta their ears and
sometimes on their noses when they start reaching 40. But not all get
this. Maybe it has something to do with hormones? But I also have
noticed that they start losing this hair when they start getting
quite older.
POSTED AUG. 28, 1998
Rebekah, 17, San Antonio, TX
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
A13: I have always wanted to know: When is it OK to correct an
older person on something, especially when they are incorrect about a
fact or about history? For example, I have tried to speak politely to
an elderly church member about a fact, but she told me to shut up and
sit down somewhere.
POSTED MAY 26, 1998
Cheryl B., 22 African-American female
<CherylB4U@aol.com>,
Memphis, TN
ANSWER 1:
Diplomacy. Don't force the issue. If you know you are
right, suggest they might be mistaken and correct them. If they are
open-minded, they will stand corrected. If not, don't push the issue.
If you know you are right, that is all that matters. There is no
point in arguing about it.
POSTED JUNE 8, 1998
Ken G., 36, not always right, noochie@pacbell.net, Dana Point, CA
FURTHER NOTICE:
Tact and timing are important. Just remember, if you're
right, you're right. Be sure you're right about facts and not
opinions. You know what they say about opinions. Old people are wise
in experience, but can be inaccurate or make mistakes. Like buying
$64,000 worth of aluminum siding on a $32,000 house.
POSTED JUNE 9, 1998
Bob, 31, San Diego, CA
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
Older people enjoy feeling valued for their experience and
wisdom. I would correct a much older person only if strictly
necessary, such as, "Actually, ma'am, I believe the store you're
looking for has gone out of business." If I wanted to discuss
something more open to interpretation, I would say something like,
"It's very interesting that you say that, sir, because I had always
understood such-and-such to be the case." An indirect approach is
less likely to be perceived as disrespectful, and could open an
interesting dialogue for both of you.
POSTED JUNE 13, 1998
A. Morgan, 33, white, Houston, TX
FURTHER NOTICE 3:
It is very difficult for some people "beyond a certain
age" to admit they could be wrong about anything, especially when the
dispute is with a much younger person. In a nutshell, the reasoning
must be something like "I have been around long enough to know what I
am talking about!", coupled with a certain insecurity that a new
perspective might have some merit and would require them to give up
long-cherished beliefs.
This seems to have been more common in prior generations, when not
as many people were well-educated. An episode of "All In The Family"
comes to mind. (An excellent show, by the way!). Archie and Mike were
locked up in the basement together. Mike said that his father was
often wrong about things. Archie asked "how can your father ever be
wrong"? Truth was often established by power and authority, not by
facts and reason. Some older people have a hard time turning loose of
this.
In all fairness, it is equally fatuous for a young person to
assert that nothing of real value can be had from listening to the
elderly and taking heed of tradition, the "tried and true" ways.
POSTED JUNE 13, 1998
S., white, S.C.
FURTHER NOTICE 4:
I had a positive experience seeking an older person's help
in authenticating an incorrect fact he was teaching. I once heard my
father relate information in Sunday School that I knew was incorrect.
That evening, I called him from campus and told him I had been
searching for that piece of information, but I could not find it.
"Would you please find it and tell me where it is, for future
reference?" He readily agreed, because I was appealing to him as a
Bible scholar, not someone in need of correction. A day or two later
he called me back and said he had searched high and low and had not
found it, either. I don't think he ever relayed that piece of
information again.
POSTED SEPT. 23, 1998
W. Lotus, 29
<wlotus@dreamscape.com>
Syracuse , NY
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
A12: Does anyone know why kids are killing kids and teachers
in our schools nowadays? What is happening and why? Is anyone out
there afraid for their school-age kids?
POSTED MAY 23, 1998
Cheryl G., 44, black
<blackcherrie@yahoo.com>,
Jacksonville, FL
ANSWER 1:
I heard an answer the other day that made sense to me:
Teens today are products of our video culture, which portrays
violence as cool and attention-getting. Violence is also depicted as
a direct solution to correcting a perceived wrong or a sure way to
getting your minute of fame. Teens and others, especially those who
think they have to pay back others for real or imagined wrongs, find
all kinds of encouragement to take matters into their own hands. The
media will give them all the attention they think they deserve, so
they convince themselves they must act violently against their peers,
in many cases their worst tormentors.
These teens are acting out in their school environments the acts
of Tim McVeigh and Ted Kasczinski and the America First-ers. The
media doesn't describe these acts as cowardly and demeaning to the
perpetrators; instead, it finds all kinds of "human interest" aspects
of these cowards and their anti-human acts. The media plays to our
prurient interests, and we read this stuff and give our teens the
impression there is something of value there. The teens are acting
out our least generous and most anti-social ways of thinking and
talking. All the stuff vented on talk shows like Jerry Springer,
et. al., gives teens the impression that life is like that - a
mess. So why shouldn' t they act to "clean it up"?
POSTED MAY 26, 1998
Robert, 62, white male
<robertgagnon@hotmail.com>,
Ottawa, Canada
FURTHER NOTICE:
Many young people do not have the stability to know what
is right and wrong to meet the challenges of today. They have the TV
image of life: Overpower or kill to make things right. Lack of
parental guidance has left them with nothing to determine whether
their actions are right or wrong. We must remember that guns and
weapons that kill come from a source, and many belong to parents. It
is a parent's responsibility to teach these things, but unfortunately
many parents are ignorant as to the way to do right themselves, being
victims of their childhood teachings. I don't think kids want to be
bad, they are just not thinking right or have the right direction.
Let's also remember that these kids are in the minority, as I believe
the majority of kids show a very high level of behavior and
intelligence when it comes to making the right decision.
POSTED MAY 27, 1998
Charlie D. <CTD28@aol>, Ocala,
FL
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I would like to add that the ability to discipline our
children is greatly hampered in this day and age. Look at the track
records of some of these kids: They seemed to have a very loose
leash. I read in a newspaper that the boy in Oregon was angry his
parents took his guns away from him as a form of restriction for his
pulling stunts like throwing rocks at cars from overpasses and
toilet-papering houses. Then he was caught trying to buy a stolen gun
in school, after which he sought retribution. Most "problem kids"
know that if they are disciplined too harshly, they can call someone
and it will be stopped. What else could happen with things working
this way?
POSTED JUNE 3, 1998
David B., 21, DHBrantner@worldnet.att.net, St. Petersburg, FL
FURTHER NOTICE 3:
I have a five-year-old and am very worried about the world
he is facing. We worry more about the rights of an individual than
the rights of society, including raising our children. Parenting is
not secondary to your professional success or increasing your income.
Instilling values and self-discipline in a child requires time and
interest in their growth. It is not easy when television, movies,
toys, etc. seem to show them that all behavior is acceptable. Parents
are using television and day cares to raise their children. I have
been to see Jurassic Park, The Lost World and
Godzilla. All had scenes of violence and pretty tense moments.
The theaters were full of small children, some as young as three. I
was angry with the parents. What are they thinking? My wife and I
can't watch television with our son because of the constant
references and displays of sex and violence, and we don't have cable!
When we talk with other parents, I feel we are in the minority. I
wish we had more time to spend with our son. The parents I talk to
wish they had less time with their kids. I'm not trying to be
superior to anyone, but I've got to believe that not enough parents
get involved with the growth of their children.
POSTED JUNE 17, 1998
Snorget, 34, white middle-class parent
<rcoate@robinent.com>,
Columbus, OH
FURTHER NOTICE 4:
Single parent homes, little or no parental supervision,
lack of rules or restrictions and misunderstanding of personal
responsibility are all factors in what causes children to kill and
break the law. Yet these young people are making a conscious choice
to do something illegal. Our society tends to blame anything and
everything for the way people behave. It's time we take notice that
we are responsible for our own actions and choices. It is our job as
parents to teach our children right and wrong. I feel that many
parents leave discipline and child-rearing to schools, day care
providers or other means.
POSTED JUNE 17, 1998
Charlynn, 39, Middletown, CA
FURTHER NOTICE 5:
I would like to point out that this rash of murdering
teens cannot be entirely blamed on the influences of television. I go
to school in a public, suburban high school, and I can tell you that
the way a parent handles a child can warp or redeem him or her for
the rest of their life. In my own small circle of five close friends,
three have been physically abused by their fathers; another's mother
emotionally breaks her down; my own father committed suicide and my
mother is intent on making sure I never feel I am worth anything ever
again. And these are not isolated cases: This is through the whole
school, if not the whole country. No offense, but why don't
baby-boomers know how to be good, loving parents? Divorce, death,
suicide, homicide, adultery and an array of abuses take their toll on
children who are as impressionable as a dollop of warm wax. So don't
blame TV or gun culture or violent movies. Blame the parents whose
treatment of their child has caused him or her to snap. I think it
was Dostoevsky who said that whenever a child murders his parents,
his parents are partly to blame.
POSTED JUNE 22, 1998
Kendra N., 17
<englishgoddess@hotmail.com>,
Carrollton, TX
FURTHER NOTICE 6:
Kids are killing teachers because they weren't raised
strict enough, and they may want the attention they may have never
gotten from their parents. Kids have minds of their own and aren't
influenced by television as much as older people believe. I
occasionally watch Jerry Springer, but that doesn't make me
want to become a teen prostitute or go shoot my family and teachers.
It's just a stupid show that brings out the bad in America, and most
kids don't take it seriously. If a child is raised in a loving
environment and taught right from wrong, they should never feel the
need to do something so outrageous to get their parents'
attention.
POSTED AUG. 7, 1998
Kristina and Cherie, 14 and 15, Houston, TX
FURTHER NOTICE 7:
I'm not wanting to play down any of the terrible acts of
violence that have occurred recently, but the fact is schools are
among the safest places for kids. The kinds of violent acts that
occurred recently in schools represent a miniscule fraction of teen
violence in our society. Emotionally disturbed people are everywhere,
and once in a while they go berserk in post offices, banks, grocery
stores, their own homes and schools. Unfortunately, lightning can
strike anywhere these days.
POSTED AUG. 17, 1998
Bruce G., 46
<brucegrnk@aol.com>,
Reseda, CA
FURTHER NOTICE 8:
I think the answer lies in our culture of revenge. There
are so many lawsuits now that some people cannot even afford to be in
business or they live in a constant state of fear that they'll be
found liable for someone else's decision or action. When I saw family
members of the victims of the Oklahoma City bombing running out of
the courthouse, laughing with glee and celebrating when Timothy
McVeigh was found guilty, chills ran over me. I've seen this reaction
over and over from family members in similar situations. The solution
seems to me for each of us to take responsibility for our own
actions, teaching our children the same, and learning the freedom of
forgiveness. Vengeance will not bring back a life or make a wrong
right. It will only add bitterness to the already great pain of
loss.
POSTED SEPT. 1, 1998
Rhonda H.
<rhonda.m.hazen@juno.com>,
Birmingham, AL
FURTHER NOTICE 9:
There is no rash of school violence. Kids are 100 times
more likely to be killed by their parents than to be killed at
school.
POSTED OCT. 28, 1998
M.W., 21
<ed375@cleveland.freenet.edu>,
Cleveland, OH
FURTHER NOTICE 10:
Just one thought, and certainly not the answer, but have
you ever noticed that on TV when people get killed, they show up an
hour later on some other show? I think there are kids out there who
honestly don't understand what killing someone means.
POSTED NOV. 9, 1998
L. Lashley, 36, Burlington, , NC
FURTHER NOTICE 11:
I'm 19 and throughout my life, I've seen a great variety
of television shows and movies depicting violence, sexual situtations
and so on. I first saw A Nightmare on Elm Street when I was five. Am
I out slashing people to bits and pieces because of that? No. Does
that mean I have horrible, irresponsible parents because of that? No.
On the topic of sex in television and movies, I've seen enough of
that in my time, too. Do I have 15 children running around from 15
different mothers and diseases from all of those women? No. Sorry,
but I'm responsible and know how to use a condom and birth control.
Basically, what I think, is that if a teenager is going to commit
murder, television and movies aren't to blame. The weak intellect of
the individual and lack of attention from parents is the reason
today's kids are killing kids, pure and simple.
POSTED APRIL 1, 1999
K.W.
<edicius@hotmail.com>,
Clinton Township, MI
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
A11: When I listen to the radio these days, all I find is
"oldies" stations or stations that seem to play the same 10 new songs
over and over. What are most teenagers really listening to these
days? Are they actually into '70s music? Or what?
POSTED MAY 15, 1998
Colette, 33
<inkwolf@earthlink.net>,
Seymour, WI
ANSWER 1:
I don't listen to oldies. I think most radio stations
nowadays are aiming toward the "older" crowd. Every now and then, the
oldies radio station in my town will play a song I actually like.
POSTED MAY 17, 1998
Monique, St. Marys, GA
FURTHER NOTICE:
A lot of people my age listen to music from private
collections. The most popular bands aren't the ones we hear on the
radio. However, my younger siblings love what is on the radio - they
are more into the "pop" music that is played over and over. When I
listen to the radio, I hit scan until I hear something that sounds
good. I would prefer to listen to my own music, but lack a cassette
or CD player in my car, which is the only place I listen to the
radio.
POSTED JUNE 17, 1998
Hilary, 20, white female, Lawrence , KS
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I do like some oldies. However, I do not think radio
stations play them for a young target audience. There is a radio
station where I live, however, that has a balance between the
two.
POSTED JUNE 18, 1998
Trueseeker, 15, Augusta, GA
FURTHER NOTICE 3:
The vast majority of today's teenagers (14-18) listen to
pop/rock. The pop/rock bands of the past couple months would be
Fastball, Smashmouth, Semisonic, Everclear, The Wallflowers, etc. The
preteens (9-13) like Hanson, The Spice Girls, Backstreet Boys, *N
Sync, etc. Since I was about 12, I have always preferred oldies music
(late '50s to early '70s) over the new music of the day. It's
smoother and makes me feel upbeat and happy. In today's world, that's
what you really need. If you think you are hearing the same top 10
songs over and over again, it's because you really are. The top 10
does not change very drastically from week to week, as you have
noticed. Just stay away from it and never go back again!
POSTED JUNE 30, 1998
Katie J., 15-year old
<kmj2001@yahoo.com>,
Grand Rapids, MI
FURTHER NOTICE 4:
I agree with the person who said most of the stuff kids
listen to now isn't even on the radio. Some of the best bands I know
rarely get airtime anymore. Also, I think songs are getting played
over and over because they're in a new style - the old alterna-rock
style is plummeting to its death, so there are new styles coming out,
but only with a few songs. Those are the only ones anyone (not me)
likes now, so the radio only has a few options to snag the kids
on.
POSTED AUG. 14, 1998
The concerned 17-year-old again
<snail40@yahoo.com>,
Grand Rapids, MI
FURTHER NOTICE 5:
A lot of kids I know, including me, like the music from
1960s, especially The Beatles and The Monkees. I feel this music has
more meaning than the songs of today. As far as hearing the same 10
songs over and over, I have to agree with you on that. Seems like
they make one song and have five re-mixes of it. But I also tend to
feel that way about oldies stations. After all, there are no new
oldies.
POSTED AUG. 28, 1998
Rebekah, 17, white female, San Antonio, TX
FURTHER NOTICE 6:
I love listening to the oldies. I think the reason for
there being so many oldies stations is that the baby boomers are
getting older and the radio stations want to please their tastes.
They want to bring the past into the future.
POSTED SEPT. 25, 1998
Becky P., 18
<becky_peck@hotmail.com>,
Indiana, PA
FURTHER NOTICE 7:
I too have listened to "oldies" for several years even
though I'm only 21. I find today's music is completely unmelodic. But
at the same time, I don't really like most oldies stations I hear.
They seem to base their playlist on nostalgia and play a lot of crud
like Lesley Gore or Herman's Hermits. The alternative is "classic
rock," which I don't like sometimes because they play a lot of late
70s/80s stuff that doesn't sound to me like real rock n' roll. If I
ran a radio station, it would play "rock" music, from Little Richard
to the British Invasion to the psychodelic era to the latter-day,
"old-fashioned" sounds of Bob Seger and John Mellencamp, with some
60s soul thrown in.
POSTED OCT. 28, 1998
M.W., 21
<ed375@cleveland.freenet.edu>,
Cleveland, OH
FURTHER NOTICE 8:
It seems to me, being 15 and classified as a teen, that
music on the radio is not a valid interpretation of the music I
listen to. A lot of people I know do listen to the radio, especially
the ironically dubbed "alternative" music, but it is apparent that
they are not as enthusiastic about it as MTV would like the public to
think. Practically all the music I listen to is not played on the
radio, and I only listen occasionally. As for oldies, no one I know
regularly listens to the oldies stations, although the music is much
more sophisticated and timeless.
POSTED NOV. 16, 1998
Hannah, 15
<Pixiegrl32@aol.com>,
Va
FURTHER NOTICE 9:
By the time someone gets to be 16 or 17, they realize pop
music stations will play the same thing over and over again, just as
a four-year-old would wear out a Disney videotape until they can
memorize the script (or in this case, lyrics) verbatim. It is the
realization that good music knows no time, place or person that many
of my generation are into the current revival of music from the 1920s
to the 1940s (such as swing, jazz and big band), as well as "classic
rock or soul" of the 1950s-1970s. It's just good music, plain and
simple. I also hold that record marketing from major record companies
during the 1980s and 1990s has become more oriented toward producing
music that looks good for MTV rather than being quality tunes.
POSTED JAN. 14, 1999
Jeremy, 17, male
<jeremy_craig@hotmail.com>,
Macon , GA
To
respond
BACK TO TOP