?

Log in

++Everyone's out of town... - So much to tell you, but so many more important things to do. [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
>>>space dementia

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

++Everyone's out of town... [Nov. 23rd, 2006|02:22 am]
>>>space dementia
[mood |zzzzzish]
[music |I Will Light You on Fire - Golden Shoulders]


I suppose the crux of the issue is deciding whether or not all twelve-year-olds know how to handle themselves just because I did (snark etc). And common sense, accompanied by the usual anecdotal evidence of sexual harassment and exploitation (not to mention the numerous examples of general idiocy on behalf of stupid kids that I'm sure everyone has seen), dictates that no way in hell should kids be allowed on Myspace, Youtube, AIM, computers period, whatever. But I maintain that that should be an individual decision – not something governmentally regulated. Yes, the company can certainly enact various policies deterring participation by minors, but none of them will ever work and no one should truly expect them to. Legal policies, when governmentally instituted, can - if only due to replacing "mom says so" with "it's illegal" or something, which I guess is a Big Deal when you're ten. I think they also breed a form of resentment in that direction that should never, ever be formed, because the kids grow up resenting the policies and thus the system (and of course this sort of thing isn't solely applicable to preadolescents – this is sixteen, seventeen year olds, this is me, being told that something as simple as online congregation is illegal because I'm not responsible enough – but tha's something a little different so we'll ignore it for now). Parents are generally assumed to have a stronger opportunity to analyze and determine whether or not their children are mature enough to handle themselves – not to mention that blanket policies concerning trivial personal liberties (such as this) are just ridiculous period. So then the responsibility falls on the parents, which is essentially – and I know, of course there are exceptions, but still – something never handled properly. You either get the people who shrug all responsibility and then blame the system when they find out that, oh gee, things aren't going the way they like, or parents who are entirely incapable of analyzing when their children are rational human beings and objectify them as a matter of discourse for the sake of maintaining control (that's the other easy way to go). And yes, the latter sometimes does succeed in limiting growth and liberty (and, okay, also stupid decisions) on behalf of the child, but it also indicates a lack of intelligence on behalf of the controlling party that's simple enough to circumnavigate, especially in a situation such as this when the younger generally has such an advantage technologically. We end up with the same problem of a lack of regulation.

So I don't know. I can refute myself over and over, but never come up with anything solid - hence the lengthy, repetitive paragraphs. Anyway, thoughts are welcome.


Re: break - Sleep, half-check. Homework, check. Kafka anthology, check (and a v. good read).

Off to hickland for a DAY AND A HALF UGH UGH UGH I HATE RELATIVES AND MANDATORY FAKE NICENESS AND STUPID TRADITIONS...packing would be smart probably, let's see if I can tune things down to only mildly excruciating.
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: xxxnevermorexxx
2006-11-23 06:54 pm (UTC)
hmm, interesting speculations. personally, age limits and other such idiotic rules governing what's "good for us" piss me the fuck off-- i really don't think it's anyone's business besides the person doing the activity. i agree that kids can be stupid, but i think it's ridiculous to make rules and laws based on that; i hate how a few idiots ruin it for everyone. i think if some dumbass kids get themselves in trouble then it's their own fault. no one should blame the government, no one should get sued; the parents may have partial responsibility for such a crisis depending on the circumstances, so the families can work it out accordingly (although there are a lot of stupid parents who REALLY shouldn't have had kids to begin with and don't know how to deal with them constructively, but what can you do). i get this sick lurch in my stomach every time someone says "oh, we have to make a law about this because minors are silly and can't handle it." society is already restrictive and suffocating enough without such bullshit being introduced, and if someone tells me that teenagers are in the same category as 8-year-olds, all i can do is laugh in their face. i repeat: it is none of anyone's business what "children" do, besides to a partial extent their parents'. kids need to learn responsibility for their actions anyway instead of simply being sheltered, because sheltered kids remain stupid and perpetuate this vicious cycle of idiocy.

[pant pant twitch] x.@;;

i could seriously write a book on this, but i'll spare you the rest. i guess for me the issue is personal in that i've encountered so many bullshit policies that limit my freedom (and those of my friends) because "durhur you'se a minor." -.-;;;;;;;;; you might have seen some of my rants about this already.

gahh, anyway, good luck with thanksgiving. hope it doesn't suck too bad.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: vale_of_plenty
2006-11-26 05:13 pm (UTC)
I know, I feel the exact same way - you've got so many people who mature at such different rates that it's impossible to actually establish a solid limit that works efficiently or effectively (like in voting, for example). Sheltering kids is a problem that I don't think anyone can genuinely do anything about, and it's one in the same vein as stupid, irresponsible parents - you get people growing up who in many cases actually [i]don't[/i] know how to handle themselves at all, despite the fact that the norm (ie most teenagers) is entirely capapble, and then soon enough they're the ones doing the blatantly irresponsible things that make people feel the need to institute the restricitive policies in the first place. And there's no way to really fix that problem without infringing on parental rights, not to mention the rights of the kid, by making things against the law and ruining it for everyone - so it's like there's no workable solution. I don't know, social conundrum or something. Maybe killing stupid people would work too.

I survived thanksgiving, hope yours went well :)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)