Some people are more interested in challenging someone else to prove they are right than offering their own opinions. Especially teenagers these days.... . (that last line was a joke, to any cast-iron sensory-devoid humanotrons that might like to argue it isn't actually the case)
No one said a research paper was called for, but then why complain about the evidence backed answers I did give? The Duchess posted a positive thread, she wanted to attest to the good in kids she sees and immediately her post was nay-sayed @sunsplash discounted the decrease in teen pregnancy, chalking it up to birth control access as if teens making better choices couldn't possibly be the reason. He/she's still arguing about it without any evidence. @thirdwind discounted drug use being down and questioned the 80% part time employment without checking either fact. http://www.asse.org/newsroom/safetytips/teensafetytips2.php It may be lower if that data doesn't reflect current unemployment but it may not. At least @Andrae Smith had the decency to ask for her sources, and rightfully so: @Thomas Kitchen probably didn't mean it but it sounded like he was suggesting kids only had more education because they had to. And you didn't follow your own advice: Though I see now you said in Oz, not the US for your condemnation of today's teens. I looked up the wrong data but it turns out you were still wrong: http://www.mindframe-media.info/for-media/reporting-suicide/facts-and-stats The suicide rate in Oz in 15-19 yr olds is currently half what it was in 1997. But this is the ironic icing on the cake: Did you or did you not challenge much of what the Duchess posted? All I did was check her data because other people challenged it. Otherwise I have no dog in the race. *** It's true, I challenge unsupported opinions claims. Maybe if more people considered looking up the facts before making factual claims there would be fewer unsupportable opinions out there. But why complain or be offended. Did you expect the Duchess to be offended by your comments? Yet mine bother you? My approach is to see being wrong as a win, because I learn something new. I also learn new things when I question them facts and it makes me look them up. ***Edited to add: I take that back. My dog wins when people get better at critical thinking, when they consider looking stuff up before repeating what they just assume is correct. Most won't change, but some folks like Andrae and maybe eventually the Duchess will make fact checking a habit (if it isn't already). I try to set an example.
If one adds a variable, access to birth control, that is going to at some point reach its peak effect. If the rate of teen pregnancy continues to decline after access to birth control has reached its peak effect, then other variables are acting. Your comment said you weren't surprised the rate of teen pregnancy was down as you were comparing it to the rate that occurred half a century ago. As someone who has had access to birth control my entire teenage and adult life, I fail to see why the rate of teen pregnancy wouldn't have come down and leveled off at some point. Yet it continues to decline, every year. Had the thread not been trending to nay-saying I may not have bothered to comment about your post. But given how many people challenged the Duchess' positive statement about teens these days, your's was in the bunch.
To be fair, I didn't "challenge" what Duchess wrote. I was simply mentioning how some of the numbers seem off to me. That's all. However, it would have been nice to have some sources. The 80% figure still seems off to me, and there's no indication of how the American Society of Safety Engineers came up with that number. Did they survey teens? If so, how many did they survey? I'd like to know more details.
To quote John Marston from Rockstar's Red Dead Redemption, "Ah, the arrogance of youth. They get a little fur on their lips and they think they know what's best all of a sudden."
You're a good egg, Ginger, and you know I like ya. At least you can handle critical thinking from others and smart-asses like me. However, I didn't take the OP comment as 'positive'. In fact, I found it inflammatory and defensive, especially the last line. She could have just said, I think teens today get a bad wrap, instead of saying, look how much better we are statistically than others, without actually thinking about it. The thread tended to nay-saying simply because her point was nay-sayable.
I didn't challenge ANY of her statistics. I gave MY opinion on WHY the statistics may not lead to a conclusion of a master race of teens. And yes, I'm exaggerating. And yes, it's down from the nineties by 30% after trebling from the 60s, but over the past year it's going up again. I didn't say it was more than ever, I said it was skyrocketing. Which sadly over the last few years it is. ie: it went down, but now it's going up. You like sources so: http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/western-australia/suicide-is-the-leading-cause-of-death-among-wa-teenagers/story-fnhocxo3-1226795018700
Teenagers these days don't know how to romanticize their own generation. I bet in twenty years, they won't even know how to tell you how much better things were in their day. I blame Youtube.
Actually, that is partly what I meant. I may stand alone in this opinion, but if jobs are in fact becoming sparser for the younger with little to no experience, the only way to compete with others (if they want to pursue careers which require qualifications) is to in turn pursue a higher education, a higher level of understanding. It won't be long before Master's degrees become the norm, although it's already a more common thing for people to have one. Just my (albeit a little cynical) view of things. Edited to add: this of course does not apply to all teenagers. Some will want to pursue higher education because they want to, but I feel (from others of my age I have talked to) that a lot of teens and young people apply and go to university because they simply do not know what else to do.
You're searching for negativity where is doesn't exist in using my post as an example. My reply wasn't challenging her positive statistics. She presented the idea that people are hard on teens today, give them a bad rap and suggested the data shows otherwise, and I suggested a reason why her post held merit and another reason why adults could have the misconception that the her current age group is worse than previous generations. I call that supportive. The only idea I disagreed with was that we're jealous of them today. Those who say "teenagers these days" in a negative way is not new or specific to only to right now. It was to show her to not take it personally, we've all heard it about ourselves from our elders at that age and, at some point in her adulthood, I'm betting she'll say it, too.
Really? Did I say it was the only thing? Is in necessary to go through an entire list of contributing factors when she herself presented no evidence of where her data came from? I replied with an OPINION in a non-debate area and you chose to take it in a negative way for no reason other than to try and argue and make a point against something I never implied in the first place. Never once did I argue or debate here, I thought it was a pleasant discussion of opinions between two people and was trying to help you understand, but I see you'd like to spin it differently. I don't play those games so this will be my last reply on this. Feel free to have the last word if that is what is so important. @Duchess-Yukine-Suoh - if you feel I "pooped on your party" with my initial reply, that was not my intent. Good for your generation and I hope it continues to get better for the sake of my own kids and beyond.
The thing is, the data applies to people who have those degrees, meaning ages ~22 and older. The US was turning out more advanced degreed persons long before current economic times. And current conditions might be more of a wash. While some are going to school because there are no jobs, others are not going to school because they can't afford the costs or the debt.
The education thing is great, except..... It's driving us (teenagers, I'm 16 and pursuing higher education after gradation) into insanity. A friend of mine took the SAT and got 1730 on it. Her dad yelled at her (for the low score) and she called me crying. That was a mess. She came in the next day to school and I could tell she was a tearing hair out. It was bad. It means nothing. Oh great, you have a degree (and in most cases loads of debt with it too). Well, now you need to find a job. There are so many stories of degree holders who don't have jobs in their fields, but working in convenience stores or restaurants. So yeah, we're all pursuing higher education and it means nothing.
I work with teenagers most days, I'm a trainee teacher. Teenagers today are ok, and anyone who thinks they are all horny party animals with no morals are fuckwits.
@sunsplash, I didn't naysay everything the Duchess posted, I looked her facts up. My apologies if I read negativity into your post that wasn't there. You only needed to say so. On the other hand, digging your heels in defending your claim is another issue. At what point do you think the effect of accessible birth control will level out so that it is no longer the operating variable in the continuing decrease in teen pregnancy? Or do you think it possibly already did level out? Well it turns out there is some research that helps us sort the acting variables out. I was surprised to find abstinence was actually up, since abstinence-only education has proven to not only be ineffective, but in some cases it has shown to be counter productive as teens who tried but failed to abstain had less knowledge about contraception. Another variable that should make you happy is that some of the continuing decrease in teen pregnancy was due to more effective birth control. Teens not having to remember to take their pills turns out to have been one variable. It's not access, but it is birth control related. The following data is based on teen birth rates not pregnancy rates, and it is a 15 yr old study, but the variables looked at apply to pregnancy rates and are more likely to still be operating than variables from 65+ years ago. My goal is not to win pissing contests here despite the fact I'm sure people think that. My goal is to post evidence supported information and if someone posts a claim I'm not sure of, I look into it. It struck me as odd claiming the introduction of birth control 65+ years ago was much of a factor in the decreased pregnancy rate over the last 10 years.
I remember seeing a book in my high school library (eons ago now) about teens, and it was title We are Not Monsters. It really struck a chord with me. Teens are just people stuck in this limbo between childhood and adulthood, yet they are almost always lumped together as, like you said, horny, immature party animals with no morals. Some teenagers act more mature and adult than some actual adults! Shocking!
I have a student when I teach A-level who is much more clued into what goes on in the world than the 50 year old adults I've been teaching at my Adult Literacy placement.
That goes without saying. There are many teenagers who are more intelligent, aware, and mature than people twice or triple their age. But here's the crazy part, there always has been.
Regarding the education issue, I wonder what the stats are for more advanced degrees like MA, PhD, etc. I recently read about how people with PhDs in the humanities are having a very hard time finding a stable job. Apparently it's really hard to get tenure-track positions in the humanities. I wonder if more young students will opt to stay with BA/BS degrees and/or if they'll pursue advanced degrees in other fields.
Employment is still an issue. It took my son with a new master's degree in applied math (the computer kind not the teacher kind) more than a few months to finally get a job and it's not the high paying job one would expect for the qualifications. If anyone here is young and deciding on a profession, I highly recommend nursing. I've never had trouble getting a job and now the pay is decent.
