12 ms·

Trashing Teens (2007)

• voldacar 7y ago
  Really interesting article! This quote was particularly insightful and thought-provoking: "Teens in America are in touch with their peers on average 65 hours a week, compared to about four hours a week in preindustrial cultures. In this country, teens learn virtually everything they know from other teens, who are in turn highly influenced by certain aggressive industries. This makes no sense. Teens should be learning from the people they are about to become."
  • Nition 7y ago
    A lot of interesting bits. This bit made me think as well: > The factory system doesn't work in the modern world, because two years after graduation, whatever you learned is out of date. We need education spread over a lifetime, not jammed into the early years—except for such basics as reading, writing, and perhaps citizenship. Past puberty, education needs to be combined in interesting and creative ways with work. The factory school system no longer makes sense.
    • p1esk 7y ago
      two years after graduation, whatever you learned is out of date This also does not make sense to me. I can't think about anything I learned in college (mechanical engineering) in mid 90s that is obsolete today. For example, we used to do engineering drawings by hand. It's an amazing skill - kind of like learning how to program in assembly. It's an enlightening experience - once you mastered it, learning tools like SolidWorks (or Python for programming) is a breeze. Similarly, nothing you learned in college as a CS major 30 years ago would be obsolete today. Most algorithms and data structures already existed and haven't changed much. Programming in C is still (arguably) the best way to learn how program a computer if you want to understand what's going on under the hood. If you learn about OSes, databases, networking, compilers, computer architecture etc by studying specific examples from 1989 you would learn 90% of what you need to succeed as a software engineer today.
      • tremon 7y ago
        So you learned tools, not facts. AIUI, the major criticism of the US "factory schooling" (I'm from the EU btw, so it's only hearsay) is that you're considered "done" once you leave school, and never have to acquire new facts again. Both your education and mine (electrical engineering) focused on the means of acquiring and communicating knowledge (reading comprehension, critical thinking, technical writing), not on rote memorization. That basis sets you up for a lifetime of adaptability through discovery and learning. If you're never learned how to assimilate new knowledge, you're going to have a hard time staying relevant in a rapidly-changing society.
        • C1sc0cat 7y ago
          So leaning about Ohms law hasn't changed in the last century has it
    • Nasrudith 7y ago
      The work switching is nontrivial in costs and arrangement. There is some inherent in a "research what you need for your occupation" but it is specialized and divergent over time. So while plumbers may learn to work with sonar robodrones once they come out and become the norm or doctors with nanoprobes if things advance the foundation often atrophies to not in fact being smarter than a 5th Grader. I am not sure how well it can be combined with work given that it is extrinsic to its many varied purposes that are already an incentives and strategic mess. The "best" way to enforce learning when it is fundamentally misalligned would involve a bueracratic gatekeeping hell sure to spark rebellion both overt and covert. Good luck in China let alone a liberal democracy. A less foregone dystopian way would be to subsidize general learning but even that would have opportunity and systemic costs that would limit uptake without obvious payback.
  • p1esk 7y ago
    four hours a week in preindustrial cultures This makes no sense to me. Are they saying 15th century kids only interacted with other kids 4 hours a week?
    • Mirioron 7y ago
      Why is that weird? If you lived on a farm back then the only other kids your kids will meet are their siblings and maybe some close neighbors (that will be like family). Nowadays they basically have a mandatory 30 hours of meeting other kids that are not as close as family.
      • watwut 7y ago
        But they were definitely in touch with them more then 4 hours a week.
        • ajuc 7y ago
          How? When there's light you work, when it's dark you sleep. Only sunday's free.
          • baud147258 7y ago
            In preindustrial cultures, you'd get a lot more free than just the sundays, since most religious celebration were holidays.
        • simonh 7y ago
          If peers are kids your own age, then that makes sense. Your siblings aren't the same age, they're not your peers - you don't see them as equals and they don't influence you on the same terms. I'm guessing though, it's not very clear.
  • onion2k 7y ago
    Teens should be learning from the people they are about to become. That's only true if the objective of learning is to maintain the status quo. Given the older generations prepensity for ignoring serious problems (climate, housing, etc) and their rampant materialism, I'm not sure teens should be learning from them. Also, figuring things out from first principles without all the received wisdom of experience has value. You might make a bunch of mistakes and get things very wrong sometimes, but that's OK. You can find things people missed the first time around. That can be useful.
    • Mirioron 7y ago
      >and their rampant materialism Is this really that bad? How well do you think teens understand the issue from both sides? It's easy to be against materialism when you yourself don't have to worry about bills and food. It's a lot harder when you have to make choices in what you can and can't get because of your lack of resources. Perhaps if teens understood money better there wouldn't be such a huge problem with student loans. But there is, which indicates that they're not very good at managing money. Edit: this applies to teenagers of today. Perhaps if they are handed more responsibility as they grew up they would be better at managing money?
      • ben_w 7y ago
        I cannot reconcile your words with my understanding of the world. “Materialism” (as a social issue rather than a philosophical worldview) is bad because it focuses on endless consumption of unnecessary things. Not food and shelter, but designer sunglasses and pre-ripped jeans. As for the student debt problem in the US and the UK, that’s because education now costs as much as the deposit on a very nice house — never mind a starter home! — whereas in the UK a generation ago it was free and two generations ago the government paid you to attend. This education has been sold as “getting you a good job” but then it turned out to be necessary for even for jobs that, a generation ago, didn't need a degree. So we have young people starting the same jobs three years later and in massive debt despite having followed the advice of their elders which everyone concerned was expecting to give them a career boost. I got lucky. I picked software engineering because it seemed fun, but it turned out to be the quickest route to one of the highest income professions. If I’d been on a “normal” salary while burdened with the £36k of tuition fees my niece can expect to pay, there’s a very real chance I would reach retirement age without clearing that loan, and no amount of playing games with myself about spending £0.50 a day on food or looking for the lowest rent room and putting up with rats eating my bedsheets (real examples from university life) would fix that.
  • goodmachine 7y ago
    Citation needed, I guess: only 4 hours a week of peer-peer contact in preindustrial cultures?
• noobermin 7y ago
  I remember reading sentiments like in the late 00's and early 10's and feeling justified in feeling that I at that age was being infantilized by society and that teenagers and people in their early twenties are more capable if they were given just, as the article puts it, not just more freedom but more responsibility. Today though, more than 10 years later, it seems the pendulum has continued to drift even further, with some people suggesting, as the article hints, that adults aren't really adults until perhaps 30.
  • eitland 7y ago
    > teenagers and people in their early twenties are more capable if they were given just, as the article puts it, not just more freedom but more responsibility. Agree. Although it probably should come gradually, a 15 y.o. probably shouldn't be judged as hard as 25 y.o. or a 55 y.o. I've read before that a theory is that choosing 18 years (or 21 or whatever it is where you live) as the age of adulthood was done in a time when people were actually held responsible for their actions after they were 15. I also think I read that certain parts of the brain didn't develop until a person start being held accountable for their actions. I cannot find it at the moment so for what I and you know this is pure speculation (unless anyone remember it or care to find it) but to me it doesn't sound to unreasonable
    • Mirioron 7y ago
      >in a time when people were actually held responsible for their actions after they were 15. Interestingly enough, people are legally held criminally responsible at ages of 14-16 in quite a few countries. But even in those countries they're often treated as just kids with no say.
      • Nasrudith 7y ago
        Really the age of responsibility is transparently bullshit based upon whatever is more convenient to the rulemakers and enforcers than any unified principles - and occasionally lapses into Kafkaesque insanity.
    • 7y ago
• Animats 7y ago
  What do the younger readers think of this? What got me is "30 is the new 20". That may be mostly economic, driven by student loans keeping twentysomethings broke and the decline of middle class job openings.
  • clarry 7y ago
    Loans did not keep me broke, but unemplyment did. I feel like I got a very "late start" in life and I still haven't been able to shake off the feeling of uncertainty regarding future, employment, money, etc. At least I got a middle class wage now, but no property to speak of. It's long road from here on to something like home ownership. I'm more concerned for my little sister who's accumulating student loans.
• dcolkitt 7y ago
  I think one major reason that modern adolescents can be so moody, impulsive, and irresponsible is widespread chronic sleep deprivation. Adolescents naturally have very late-shifted chronotypes. I.e. compared to older adults they tend to wake late in the day and stay up late at night. Yet American high schools have ridiculously early start times. For example it's not unusual for schools to start at dawn. Which means students taking the bus may have to leave before dawn. We have decades of research demonstrating the impact of sleep deprivation on cognitive functioning, decision making judgement and emotional stability. It's little wonder that a segment of society that we're forcing into chronic sleep deprivation acts "immature". We just don't recognize the problem because it's too easy for us old folks to write off the symptoms as the "foibles of youth". Yet it's us old folks pushing these torturous schedules onto teens, despite mountains of scientific evidence saying otherwise.
  • TeMPOraL 7y ago
    > We just don't recognize the problem because it's too easy for us old folks to write off the symptoms as the "foibles of youth". We also don't recognize it because our salary literally depends on not recognizing it - when both parents work, school times have to match the typical workday, with an extra offset for commute.
    • pbhjpbhj 7y ago
      Adult partners both working has really screwed things up in a lot of ways. But, AIUI you have the cause and effect the wrong way here - when many more people entered full-time work then wages have adjusted downwards. Society "chose" this situation; mind you I'm pretty sure we didn't accommodate teen brain in the past when that would have been possible (in middle class families, where a caregiver was home).
    • flukus 7y ago
      Teens are more than old enough to get themselves up and at school without parents being there.
  • watwut 7y ago
    I pretty much guarantee you that neither rural farm teens nor city factory working teens in past centuries were allowed to sleep till 10. They had to wake up when everyone woke up to work.
• friendlybus 7y ago
  Definition of adult depends on your values and culture. Some people staying with parents taking care of family would be adult in east Asia, but not having your own house and mortgage lacks maturity in the west. What it means to be an adult in the west is up in the air at the moment. We don't have easy institutional or cultural markers for what the American dream is or what adulthood should be. The old institutional rites of passage through college and graduation milestones is looking less attractive as the internet grows. Marriage can be seen as uncertain. The only thing I can suggest is the idea of picking up your own cross and bearing it. Kid/job/mortgage has a lot of uncertainty built into it at the moment.
• hamolton 7y ago
  Youth rights is something I wish liberals would get behind publicly. I know nobody wants to make controversial statements supporting people that can't vote, but at least teens control a decent portion of the online political activity. Instead, we're watching a mass crackdown on teen vaping and college drinking in fraternities. At least Bernie is willing to fight off people trying to let employers pay teens less than minimum wage as they do in Australia.
• watwut 7y ago
  The article makes many strong but dubious claims. Like, I am inclined to believe that many teens and kids could handle more responsibility, but a lot written in article just does not sound trustworthy. (The part where I disagree is the part where author promotes early marriage, I dont think it is good idea to marry as teen.) Like: > American teens are subjected to more than 10 times as many restrictions as mainstream adults, twice as many restrictions as active-duty U.S. Marines, and even twice as many as incarcerated felons. > It's hard to keep a marriage together when there is constant conflict with teens. Are conflicts with teens really cause of that many divorces? > The factory system doesn't work in the modern world, because two years after graduation, whatever you learned is out of date. That is highly exaggerated statement. I am pretty sure 2 years after you are just find. > Unfortunately, most people learn in those classrooms to hate education for the rest of their lives. Is this actually true that over 50% of people hate school in America? > young people are integrated into adult society as soon as they are capable, and there is no sign of teen turmoil Is this result of actual study of teens in those societies? Or just reflection of assumptions? Because from what I read about history, in European societies where young people worked in the past, young people were still quick to join revolutionary movements or just get drunk and fight it out in streets. Plus, they often lived and work with families for economic reasons. > Teens in America are in touch with their peers on average 65 hours a week, compared to about four hours a week in preindustrial cultures. Were they really "in touch" with siblings and cousins only for 4 hours a week? ------------- Plus, the reason teens are not considered adults is not that their IQ would be low. The reason is impulsivity and similar considerations.
  • normalnorm 7y ago
    > Plus, the reason teens are not considered adults is not that their IQ would be low. The reason is impulsivity and similar considerations. Maybe what we call "impulsivity" is just an healthy reaction against absurd constraints and monotony? We forget very easily that we are animals, and the way we have been living for the last few centuries is radically different from the way we were evolved to live. Perhaps factory-like schooling is inherently painful, and what we call "adulthood" is just learned helplessness...
    • 7y ago
• blablablerg 7y ago
  I think the artificial extension of childhood is caused by the rapid increase in complexity of modern society, while our biological makeup is pretty much the same as 10.000 years ago. To hold an avarage job and participate in society as an informed citizen you seem to need at least ~20 years of education in western economies. We can't just go around by our instincts like animals any more without getting in trouble, I think that is what caused the extension of childhood.
  • aklemm 7y ago
    That's intriguing enough that it might stick with me. Thanks!
• rsp1984 7y ago
  Paul Graham actually wrote about this in 2003: http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html Adults can't avoid seeing that teenage kids are tormented. So why don't they do something about it? Because they blame it on puberty. The reason kids are so unhappy, adults tell themselves, is that monstrous new chemicals, hormones, are now coursing through their bloodstream and messing up everything. There's nothing wrong with the system; it's just inevitable that kids will be miserable at that age. I could not agree more. Adolescent education is completely and utterly broken in most developed societies and is causing pain and misery on a vast scale, but fixing it is a complete non-priority for those who could. Greta, when you're done with climate change, can you fix schools please?
  • pbhjpbhj 7y ago
    Are you/pg defying the mood-altering effects of high hormone levels (or perhaps it's a high rate of change of hormones?)? Observing my own children there has been a clear point where social/interpersonal interactions have become more fraught; and these "moody" periods are relatively arbitrary, not depending on tiredness AFAICT. Now, that's not too say tiredness is not also a factor in mood, but denying the hormonal effect seems at odds with my personal observations, at least.
    • Nasrudith 7y ago
      It is denying the inevitability of it. I mean considering women to be inevitably miserable and moody because of their menstrual cycle would be rightfully called ignorant and misogynistic. The fact some women may suffer crippling menstrual issues because hormones are a very real thing. Why would the invalid hormoned as destiny expectations be assumed valid for youth as well? View as a possible obstacle to overcome rather than destiny.
    • closeparen 7y ago
      I’d say the total frustration is an interaction between changes in your own state and the way others react to those changes.
• esotericn 7y ago
  I vividly remember being frustrated as a teenager that I essentially lived my life as a vassal until age 18 or so. The school system felt utterly farcical. Like being trapped in a cage with a bunch of idiots. In adult life you can quit a job, leave a town, change yourself. As a teenager your most expressive period is robbed from you.
  • theandrewbailey 7y ago
    Yet, many people want to paint the time before 18 as filled with unicorns and rainbows. Most of the time, it sucked for me. For the longest time, I didn't have a way to get money (a job), no way to get around without someone else, and what little money I had, I couldn't spend it the way I wanted.
  • arandr0x 7y ago
    I also agree that people running their mouths of on how bad teens are without considering that they are essentially chattel and being told every day of their life they are not to make any decision that matters to their physical and mental well-being -- straight up until they're 18 and then they better get every decision right -- is insane. Judgment is not something you can learn in school.
  • ThrowawayR2 7y ago
    > In adult life you can quit a job, leave a town, change yourself. Only if you've got the wealth. Most adults are wage slaves chained to grinding, unfulfilling jobs just to pay the bills and feed their families. Childhood might not seem so bad to them.
    • esotericn 7y ago
      A 14 year old would have a hell of a time trying to 'set up' in a different town at all. That an adult might find it difficult, or potentially end up in a worse situation, is besides the point. And obviously I'm not talking about running away from a family.
• pojntfx 7y ago
  Ok boomer.
• Smithalicious 7y ago
  >In recent surveys I've found that American teens are subjected to more than 10 times as many restrictions as mainstream adults, twice as many restrictions as active-duty U.S. Marines, and even twice as many as incarcerated felons. What does this even mean? I don't feel as though "restrictions" are countable, fungible things.
• baud147258 7y ago
  > two years after graduation, whatever you learned is out of date I don't get this point? Does algebra get outdated in two years? History? Grammar? Big O notation? Design Patterns? Concrete pouring techniques? Basic chemistry?
  • mythrwy 7y ago
    If they spent more time teaching this it would be great. I got to hear how communists are bad mkay and weed is very dangerous. Today I expect they spend a bunch of time hearing how cross dressing is perfectly natural and anyone thinking differently is bad mkay. (just to be clear, not passing judgement on the truth of any of the above just noting a large portion of public "education" is ill informed opinion and attempted indoctrination).
  • themaninthedark 7y ago
    There are people who memorize only what is required to pass a test and once they do so, they think they have learnt the subject matter. So you end up with someone who "knows" Big O because they memorized the current algorithm and and what works best in each situation but if you present them with a new algorithm, they will not be able to tell you if it is better or not because they can't do the analysis. There are alot of people who just want what is required to do their job now, are not interested in how the tools they use work and resent it if you change the tool or make it work differently.
    • baud147258 7y ago
      But that's not a failure of education
• nomorerul 7y ago
  One of the issues I see is that teens usually don't think about the future, and that is bad if you think that they are the future... does this make sense?
  • wavefunction 7y ago
    Is short-term thinking a problem limited to teenagers? It seems even more problematic in adults who wield the power and from what I've seen short-term thinking is very prevalent at any age group in humans.
    • Nasrudith 7y ago
      Lets put it this way - we should probably be using the term long term thinker instead of short term thinker from a compression standpoint The ones getting shat on for taking student loans are long term thinkers relatively speaking - and also illustrate that it doesn't always work out.
• misja 7y ago
  I'm sure that a lot is wrong with our current eduction system for teens and that giving some amount of responsibility to teens would be good. But the claim that adolescents are as good or even better than adults when it comes to decision making or responsibility is just plain wrong and there is plenty of physical evidence that disproves it. When teens reach their adolescence, the functioning of the frontal lobe in the brain is tuned down. The frontal lobe is what gives people self control; tune it down and you become more impulsive, emotional and risk seeking. The frontal lobe only returns to its normal mode when people reach their early twenties. Source: e.g https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?ContentTypeID=1&ContentID=3051 https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?Con...
  • olau 7y ago
    The source you cite does not seem credible to me. It starts out with this statement which is obviously false: "Good judgment isn’t something they can excel in, at least not yet."
    • chuckgreenman 7y ago
      Would you care to provide any evidence that a publication from the University of Rochester medical center, reviewed by an MD and two RNs is not credible?
• basicplus2 7y ago
  emerging science about brain development suggests that most people don't reach full maturity until the age 25 https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=141164708 https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=141164...
• rjkennedy98 7y ago
  I have to think that the cause of our overschooling is the fact that for the most part there is nothing for teens (and now even young adults) to do. We don't have jobs for the vast majority of young people. We don't even have enough jobs for people over the age of 26 (even though we saw the unemployment level is at record lows). If we put all these people in the work force it would cause a huge economic and political crisis.
  • aklemm 7y ago
    Nearly 100% agree that teens having nothing meaningful to do is the problem, but you're conclusion is scary. How about reforming school so that older kids spend about 25% of their time teaching and caring for younger kids? I'd probably start there.
    • Nasrudith 7y ago
      That still wouldn't work - to be frank that sounds like neglect on a massive scale and wasting everyone's time in a paternalistic way. How would you like it if the government decided to handle homelessness and the foster care by assigning you an orphan and/or homeless stranger? Or being assigned after you lost your job? Yeah I would think that would generate plenty of work - police work. There are twofold issues with it - one is the level of career education for the demands and the lack of true entry level ladders - most jobs skilled up and automated and two that existing areas which need labor aren't funded as much as they should nor alternatives chosen.
      • aklemm 7y ago
        Schools already do it in small ways with older kids mentoring younger kids. The concept of mixing ages is well-known and well-regraded, for the reasons I’m suggesting. Your objection is out of place considering there’s been no discussion of details; certainly those need to be hammered out. Unfortunately, your comment is baselessly dismissive and unhelpful.
• aklemm 7y ago
  My pet theory on teens, and one I'm brainstorming for my own kids, is that they don't have enough meaningful responsibility within their families or communities. Somehow I want to find them work that is critical for the family and let them be in charge of it. Whether they are more competent than we assume is an interesting angle, but I look back at my teens and feel like I was both competent enough for most work but also utterly useless compared to what I am now. Edit: I'd reform school to add in lots of responsibility for older kids to teach and care for younger kids. Also perhaps get them helping with food production in gardens, farms, grocers, restaurants. What other meaningful work could we find for teens?
  • pbhjpbhj 7y ago
    Learning is critical work too, perhaps recognising that as a responsibility (to the family and wider society) might be a good idea. I guess it depends on the kids whether more directly aiding through work is a greater benefit than preparing for later work.
    • aklemm 7y ago
      That is an important point, and true that a teen’s main work is learning. I guess that’s lost on them too often.
  • Nasrudith 7y ago
    That is something I have seen as well by "well meaning" wanting to promote volunteering and well outright authoritarians. They fail to think of what it is like being in the other's shoes. Responsibility forced upon without the perks is just another burden. They miss the important aspect of it long term - agency and power in decision making. I know many forever turned off from volunteering as they view community service a punishment they were unjustly assigned. The correct answer is to support them in something they are interested in.
    • aklemm 7y ago
      The “perk” is fulfilling a purpose in your social group. No ones talking about a volunteer death march.
• stereolambda 7y ago
  One of the factors may be the desire for indoctrination, from many sides. As long as you're legally a child, your time and attention is effectively someone elses's property. The school system can have you schooled for n*10 hours a week on whatever it considers objective truth. There is lots of political tampering with this everywhere. Parents can (legally) control what media you consume, what information you get and who you can interact with. It's partly about the power to make young people what someone else wants them to be. (Not that it usually works as expected.) I'm not saying adolescents should not be educated (in fact, I think there is lots of unrealized opportunity for society in public education), just that this is a tasty quasi-political power that's hard to give up and tempting to expand.
  • dangerface 7y ago
    True too much focus on what you should learn with no interest in teaching how to learn. I think it's very telling the intention behind the institution when you see this.
• otakucode 7y ago
  Prejudice based upon age is the last remaining socially acceptable form of prejudice. Most articles about adolescents read exactly like opinions about various races, women, etc in the past. The arguments are the same, and the conclusions are the same. The lack of scientific evidence is, also, the same. Repeatedly they observe some limitation and conclude, without any evidence at all, that the limitation is not due to lack of education or socially-inflicted lack of experience but endemic and unavoidable. One of the most popular misunderstandings of neuroscience going around recently is the "brain isn't fully developed until age 25" idea. This is often parroted and repeated, often by otherwise quite knowledgeable people, without any understanding of what brain development is, or how it occurs. The idea is used to support notions of restriction and sheltering, which is totally at odds with every understanding of how brain development actually occurs. The brain develops in response to novel experience, and solely in response to novel experience. Lack of novel experiences leads to lack of brain development. When an infants visual cortex is immature and incapable of stereoscopic vision, the exactly wrong course of action would be to cover one eye. Doing so would prevent the brain from developing the ability to integrate vision from both eyes into a coherent single image. The issue is even more problematic when you look at what criteria is used to judge the brains "immaturity" in the material supporting the "immature until 25" claim. What they examine is neuroplasticity. They observe that neuroplasticity reduces substantially after age 25. They interpret that as a sign that the brain is 'done' with it's primary development, but that's a bit of an arguable point. It is just as likely, in my opinion, that neuroplasticity in a high state is the desirable condition and that its reduction is a consequence of the end of introduction of large quantities of new experiences due to most people entering the working world and settling into a 'routine' life. On a lighter note, just imagine if this perspective were to change, socially. If in 10 or 20 years time prejudice against teens were viewed with as much disgust as racism and sexism are now. Old tweets griping about teens being surfaced and people being 'cancelled' over them, etc. It would be quite different. But, there would probably be markedly less school shootings.
  • dragonwriter 7y ago
    > The issue is even more problematic when you look at what criteria is used to judge the brains "immaturity" in the material supporting the "immature until 25" claim. What they examine is neuroplasticity No, it isn't neuroplasticity, it's capacity for executive function, which reaches a basic level in early adolescence, but continues to develop through adolescence and early adulthood, is at its peak from about the mid-20s to early-30s, and regresses slightly thereafter back to a level similar to the late teens by about the 70s. Neuroplasticity is usually what people point to when claiming the young have an advantage in learning or adapting to new environments, but not when talking about teens not being ready to be trusted with the full responsibilities of adults.
• paulryanrogers 7y ago
  Didn't see a lot of citations in that a article. Still I'd agree that parents may have too much authority over teens. Growing up in a very religious household did some damage to me. But thankfully the schools taught us to break out of group think, the scientific method, and exposed us to a lot more viewpoints. Though I doubt letting younger teens enter into long term contacts. Teens can be impulsive and lack the experience to comprehend the consequences.
• mmcgaha 7y ago
  My grand mother was born in 1894 and was tenth of eleven children. She spent here early years on a farm helping with her younger brother. She attended school until the 4th grade. At 11-years-old, she was working full time in a cotton mill. At 14 she had her first child. My grandmother and grandfather maintained a farm while both worked in the mill. Mornings started at 4:30am six days a week. Grandma had a picture with all of the young girls at the mill, and would always point out a couple of the unmarried girls who were 16 in the picture and say that they were old maids. It is possible, maybe likely, that we have extended childhood too far, and I am sure that given the right upbringing, my 11-year-old daughter could function just as well as my grandmother, but I have not prepared my daughter for that type of life. My daughter has never been required to start the day with chores; she has never been responsible for others. If we are going to change how we treat teens, we need to start a lot younger and change how we raise children.
  • simonsarris 7y ago
    I plan to do this: Give my kids lots of responsibility from a very very early age, starting with collecting small sticks to start the fire every morning (we heat with a wood stove). By teenage years they should be able to make things to sell or gift to others. My wife currently nannies children and her "field notes" are just incredible. Children want to have responsibility. They want to have jobs. Not that I'm suggesting they go into factory work, but there's no reason a 12 year old can't learn to start perfecting something like a croissant. Instead if young kids clamor for something to do, some parents do stuff like help them setup a lemonade stand. This is hardly DOING something, its mostly sitting there waiting for cars(???) to stop so they can sell sugar water. It is already below their skill level and a waste when they could be learning something more meaningful. We have definitely extended childhood too far. We basically park child bodies into little feedlots called schools, which seems generally to only be because of a total lack of imagination on the part of adults. Children should be DOING things. https://twitter.com/simonsarris/status/1192477007986221057 https://twitter.com/simonsarris/status/1192477007986221057
    • WalterGR 7y ago
      > Children want to have responsibility. This article made the rounds last year: Families In A Maya Village In Mexico May Have The Secret To Getting Kids To Do Chores - NPR https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2018/06/09/616928895/how-to-get-your-kids-to-do-chores-without-resenting-it https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2018/06/09/6169288... Discussion here on HN, with 382 points and 202 comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17280710 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17280710 (Disclaimer: Having read neither, I cannot vouch for their contents.)
• Balanceinfinity 7y ago
  We can't go back (and who would want to) - the challenge for a modern parent is to give the kids as much rope as humanly possible. It's tough and can be terrifying - when are they old enough to cross the big street two blocks from the house or walk to school alone. I did those things at 7 (with my 9 year old brother), but my daughter was around 11 when we got up the nerve to let her. But the role of the parent should be constantly pushing the little birds closer to the edge of the nest, even when the thought is unsettling.
• scottlocklin 7y ago
  One of the things which blew me away as a yoot; reading about Alfred Krupp, who built a small family business into the Krupp empire ... starting at age 14. For whatever reasons, no real english language Wiki entry (this is all there is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krupp#Alfred_Krupp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krupp#Alfred_Krupp), but there are multiple books on his incredibly productive life. Makes any modern entrepreneur look like a wantrepreneur. He did it as a teenager. I don't think the PT article is exactly right, but history teaches us it is obviously true that teenagers are capable of much more than we ask of them now. Alexander won his first battles at 16. Augustus was active in politics as a teenager. Keeping kids cooped up playing video games and skateboarding is just keeping competition caged in, rather than unleashing human fire on the world.