You know, when I was a kid I had intensely overprotective parents. But at the same time, no one had a cell phone. No one had a laptop that was being used to spy on you and partof growing up was learning about lying -- how to get away with stuff ("I couldn't find a payphone.") and the very real consequences of lies when you got busted. Maybe less sneaky kids will make better business leaders. On the other hand, maybe less sneaky kids just produces a generation that expects to be policed into utter conformity. I don't know, but it sure does make me nervous (an aside: is Buffy the last teen-focused show that was a big hit where kids get away with stuff because everyone doesn't have a mobile?).
You know, when I was a kid I had intensely overprotective parents. But at the same time, no one had a cell phone. No one had a laptop that was being used to spy on you and partof growing up was learning about lying -- how to get away with stuff ("I couldn't find a payphone.") and the very real consequences of lies when you got busted. Maybe less sneaky kids will make better business leaders. On the other hand, maybe less sneaky kids just produces a generation that expects to be policed into utter conformity. I don't know, but it sure does make me nervous (an aside: is Buffy the last teen-focused show that was a big hit where kids get away with stuff because everyone doesn't have a mobile?).
no subject
Date: 2010-02-18 06:38 pm (UTC)Re: the girl arrested for doodling. So, before Columbine, adults ignored violently unbalanced teens, and thought that letting kids fend for themselves against said violently unbalanced teens was a Wonderful Character-Building Experience. After Columbine, they presume every student is a violently unbalanced teen?
I can see some of zero tolerance as a means of avoiding being accused of favoritism by parents, but I also wonder if it is also a sign of how much Columbine (and later, 9/11) were such profound shocks to American society that paranoia has arisen as a coping mechanism.