Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Discussion & Questions' started by fushingfeef, May 2, 2014.
Nail on the head completely! I totally AGREE!
The Parents take their role from society's rule! You're both RIGHT!
It's not just a few immoral idiots, though, and it's not always down to parental failings. Sometimes kids do things that the parents would either never tolerate, or have been fairly clear and strict about. But, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions, and it's true that if you don't know your kid, a nudge that might have worked well on you can have a catastrophic effect on them.
However, kids aren't with their parents all the time, and one of the first things modern society teaches kids is that are a secondary consideration compared to Making Money. These days, both parents HAVE to work because the days of one income being enough are long gone for some (if not most). But what message does that send to the very young? That their parents are responsible people, doing their best for the family? Nah. That kind of understanding comes later (and is resented, because the childlike response is "But why does it have to be that way?"
All a little kid knows is that mom and dad (or mom or dad, depending) aren't there. Some kids are OK with that and cope well. Others don't. Of those that don't, there are those who still won't go off the rails - they'll just be distant later on and will probably have social issues, or may just tell their folks to do one once they hit their teens - and there are those who can't cope with the sense of rejection and play up...because to a child there's no such thing as the wrong type of attention.
The parents aren't to blame for that, nor is the child. It's the expectations and values of society that have created the situation. If society was different, so would the situation be...and the trouble would probably be less.
But the main point I was trying to make, however poorly, is that cultural artefacts are themselves shaped by and a reflection of the society in which they are produced, at least in some part and to some (varying) degree.
If we take, say, The Body - the boys in that story act and speak as they do because they are a reflection of (American, and specifically Maine) society at a specific time. The same is true for other, perhaps darker SK works, so if the question becomes one of 'Why is X character so evil?' the answer is 'Because he is a reflection of [an aspect of] society at that point in time. Exaggerated to some degree, perhaps, but there.'
Put another way and with another author's work as an example: If serial killers/psychopaths/sociopaths did not exist in society, would Thomas Harris have ever envisioned Hannibal Lecter?
Even allowing for imagination being the powerful thing it is, it's really only soil for the ideas seeded there. Science fiction exists because it's a form of answering some fundamental questions - Who are we? Are we alone? If not, what's out there? What does our future hold? - so the seed is there. Horror - the vampire, the werewolf, the zombie, the ghost - most likely stemmed from a seed planted by wondering 'Just what might be out there in the forest and the dark?'
So, culture is a reflection of society but does very, very little to shape it, while society shapes culture but does not reflect it much (if at all).
At least partly. Society certainly has an influence but i tend to agree with you. If you put children to the world you have to raise them. Parents play a more important role than society when it comes to things like that.
Just curious. You talk like these kids are without their parents all day because of work. Before school isn't there some kind of Pre-school you can go to if you like. Where there is a grownup that make sure they don't drift or something. Or after school isn't someplace these kids could go to if they wanted. I know I never cared for these places. I liked to play at home or with a friend somewhere after school but many paents asked their kids to go there. Guess it was a safety with a grownup around that could answer questions.
Excuse me for saying so, but they don't mention that the guy ever rode on my ambulance for a week; I can guarantee that "reporter" who wrote the article that most of these people who truly ARE "obsessed with violence" haven't seen any real violence of any kind.
When I worked at the Trauma Center, which is another one of my jobs (it seems you can't live as an EMT if you DON'T have 2 or three additional jobs) this guy came in dressed like he enjoys watching horror movies and being in a "culture of violence," he looked like a total Goth if guys can be that. I only hear of it in connection with girls, but he looked like one. Except that when he saw blood on his girlfriend he didn't just do one or the other, vomit or pass out, he did both. First he vomited and then he passed out, and he hit his head on the floor when he fell so he became an additional patient. Then passed out when he saw his own blood.
I'm telling people: most horror movies, ESPECIALLY the Slasher blood&gore types, have nothing on what it's really like to see this stuff on a daily basis.
And neither do most reporters. I've seen THEM faint at what one of our surgeons called "a few red blood cells."
Granted, it was way more than a few, but these were Journalism students who wanted to do medical stories, who'd been bragging about how they could handle anything they were about to see, and they all three fainted at the first incision the surgeon made.
In summary, I don't agree with the implication made by the paragraph of the article.
It's also statistics 101, NEVER assume causality. Even if there is a positive correlation you have to prove cause and effect. Just because X and Y both go up doesn't prove X caused Y. It could be the other way around or there could be an unrelated Z that causes both. And even if there is a very large correlation coefficient it is still possible X and Y are unrelated. Everyone, journalists, politicians, housewives, truckers, you, me, etc. make this mistake.
Its always darkest before the doom!
I'm sorry that you had to go through that.
Why doesn't anyone blame the real culprit..political correct crap. As the mother of a fourteen year old daughter, I have to say...kids need to learn how to kick each other's' a**es This isn't the politically correct viewpoint but then neither is punishing kids today. Seriously, my daughter was bullied in such a bad way last year it made her depressed. We did the whole talking to the parents, principal and all the other politically correct bullsh*t that is fed to everyone today. None of it worked. You know what did, I gave her permission to knock the girl on her a**. Guess what, the bullying stopped. Kids, all kids, are mean. They always have been. However when we take away the things they need in order to survive in this world then we also reap the consequences of them taking matters into their own hands. All the school shootings are a testament to that fact. We have to as a society stop punishing parents for disciplining our children and remember that this generation is the one that doesn't allow a swat on the buttock so to speak. We need to stop saying oh that will hurt their ego or that's their privacy. Screw that, you are not an adult, you have no privacy you have no rights. You are a child and you will follow the rules. Who cares about why they are breaking them...they're doing it because they are kids...and that's what kids do. I think if people want to blame anyone, it should be DR SPOCK, who didn't have children but was sure he knew how to raise them. There are children out there who are in serious need of help. If the dam SRS would stop making calls anonymous you might find they would be able to get to the children who really need help and stop wasting time on frivolous calls from an ex who is just trying to get out of child support. I am so tired of the media blaming everyone but the true culprit, and that's political correct crabapples. It may not be nice, but it is true. Oh and BTW you haven't raised a child until you have had a rebellious teenage girl, because they go for the jugular every time and when they do, all they really want is to get your attention. Stop blaming start paying attention and remember that we were allowed to get a swat and survived...we were not given our way on everything.
There's nothing like the taste of your own blood to get rid of all the erroneous bull-shiest in your head.
Good for you - it is true. I had a friend whose son created a fake Facebook page for an unpopular girl in his class so that he and his friends could make fun of her on-line! (Well I would not call her a friend - a former coworker I had to put up with is more like it!)
My son got bullied too and he went to a Catholic school where they had to wear uniforms, so no matter how much you try to protect them, some azzhat is going to rag on them!
So true. I think it's just the way growing up is. I would love to send my children to a private school, but they don't have any here.
It cost 2000 dollars every year and it also took him an extra year to graduate as he needed a teacher's aide (cognitively challenged) but he is a great kid - very kind and loving.
My younger daughter has learning issues and is also a bit cognitively challenged. I can't stand that some of the teachers here try to limit her. She has more compassion than most adults I know. She is a little slow when it comes to reading, but when she has it, it's wonderful. She works very hard to maintain her grades and says when she grows up she wants to be a doctor. I overheard a teacher tell her that she should aim lower. I sent my daughter to the playground and had a little talk with that particular teacher. If I could send one of my children to private school it would be her. I refuse to limit her in anything she does. I just can't see wiping out her dreams because some stupid testing says so. What if somewhere in that mind of hers is the cure for cancer or whatever. I think one of the reasons we have issues in the school system is because of people like that teacher. If you are going to be a teacher, then you have to be willing to accept the fact that there is also such a thing as determination. My daughter who is amazing, has such a spirit and strong determination in her. If a teacher can't see that in every child then they shouldn't teach. Stop categorizing them. My son who is ADHD just graduated and he has such a high IQ that they didn't know what to do with him in junior high. When he graduated high school, he also earned a two year college degree in gen ed courses. His last semester in school was literally just for killing time. He didn't even need the courses but he wanted to graduate with his class so he took an entire semester of electives. He is also another reason I believe you shouldn't label kids. They are all different and all have their own unique qualities. You never know what they are going to do when you give them the chance. Oh and he is a horror fan, loves horror movies, plays violent video games and even created his own.
Read to your children, be there when they fall, pay attention to who they are and fight for them when you want to sleep.
some of us take "censorship" very seriously ...
we fight against it...and now we a situation where an author is censoring his own book.
King has taken Rage out of print. After Columbine, King had the story removed from all
future printings. This is his right of course...but many of us dont like it. Not at all.
King has said he's against government censorship but he believes strongly in
"self censorship" . People should censor themselves he says. Like with the issue of
"guns" , People can refuse to own them ...or what ever. (I will post a video of King
talking about this soon)
We THINK ITS IS DAMN POOR LOGIC ; to equate works of art with "Guns"
Works of fiction, music, or art...can not be compared to something like guns...
Its silly to do so.
We do not believe the general public should be licensed to censor anything.
We do not trust the public anymore then we trust the government.
By Kings logic, we must remove every Ozzy Osborn and AC-DC record because one kid in
south Dakota killed himself in 1986.
Ten giga-billion people have read Rage and didn't hurt anybody, we can NOT change the
rules to accommodate the "two kids" that would hurt people....(out of six-tupple quad-billion)
let me also say the NO ONE loves King more then me. no one.
If I were the best selling author OF ALL TIME I might have a different attitude then I have now.
It is EASY for me to take the high road... I am not in King shoes.
Taking Rage out of print does no good; and leaving it...would do no harm.
I can not find the video I was looking for but this is good.
This was a personal choice for him and I get it. There are a lot of people who hold him in such high regard and he sees that and takes responsibility not for the shootings but for trying to set a good example. As artists, writers and even film makers we often forget that there are going to be people who blur the lines between what is real and what is make believe. Unfortunately things like this were more of an impossibility than a probability and it goes to show how times have changed. The phrase kill or be killed has slowly taken over our society and the kids are the ones suffering for it. I think this, as a well respected author, is his way of saying this is how I respond to the violence. Rage, I remember reading that when I was a rebellious teen. To me it was an awesome story because it spoke the truth about how I was feeling at the time. I wanted to shout to the world about how much pain and anger I was feeling but I didn't have to because King did it for me. It was also the book that inspired me to start writing in the first place because it was so real to me as a teen. I thought wow I can write a story about that stupid guy in some class and have him die in a horrible way. And I did. I think this choice was my individual choice and that particular hobby turned into something more.
I went to one part of my schooltime. I got stabbed with a knife. There are some really spoilt brats in private schools (am sure there are in public too). Sure, violence can solve a situation but it is a last resort. As long as people remember that you can use it. Sorry for your daughter. Hope it is better now and i think it was a good advice you gave her.
Sorry 'bout the delay. Busy.
There are before- and after-school clubs for kids to go to - my mom works in one - but there's no actual 'guidance' there. It's childminding, but without any real power. For example, if a child misbehaves - say Kid A smacks Kid B in the face with a building block - there are strict guidelines governing how that child can be dealt with, and under no circumstances can the minders use so much as a sharp tone. That's considered to be 'getting in their faces' and can land the adult in very hot water.
The real reason for the softly, softly approach comes down to one thing: the fear of being sued. Schools and teachers were getting hit with a lot of suits about 10 or so years ago (the country seemed to go mad with the 'compensation culture' - people received payouts in all kinds of situations where you'd have thought common sense would have prevented the 'accident' in the first place, etc). Because of that, and heavier than normal payouts being awarded in cases of 'emotional distress', instructions were issued that effectively meant that kids could turn around to teachers and abuse them, but the teacher wasn't allowed to do or say anything back that might result in 'distress'.
Some kids, but by no means all, naturally took advantage, and in some cases it even extends to the home. I've heard of cases where a parent has issued an instruction or forbidden a certain thing, and the kid's threatened to call Childline and report them for 'abuse' (which cheapens the genuine suffering of other kids and demeans the charity's cause).