jnastynebr Posted July 29, 2010 Share Posted July 29, 2010 Victoria's Secret is not all lingerie and sexy stuff ya know....you can get some big fuzzy PJs too!! Age appropriate! Yeah man, its not all whips and chains. They sell normal underwear, too. I just dont see why a person would spend $20+ on one pair or underwear when you can buy a 4 pack of JC Penny boxers for $12. If your 15, no one is supposed to see your underwear anyway. Unless your at a sleepover and you have a pillow fight. Which would be sweet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artie Owl Posted July 29, 2010 Share Posted July 29, 2010 Fred; you're falling prey to a very common misunderstanding here. Society isn't in a downwards spiral to damn nation, although it's easy to feel that way sometimes. The "evils" of society that make kids do drugs, have sex etc will always be, and always have been present. Basically when people say "this didn't happen" back then, it did, they either didn't know about it, or don't remember it. It's very easy to feel this way especially when it's a different experience than what you had at that age. Essentially every culture, every group of people end up feeling that their generation's ideals and such are the superior ones. I.E the "Greatest Generation" (who had two major world wars, developed nuclear weapons, caused the majority of emissions that have been poisioning the ozone etc) believe that we should go back to the ideals of the 50's when intollerance for anyone other than white men was rampant, (including women.) Basically what I'm saying is that we all have faults and things that different groups of people aren't going to agree with based on their own ideals developed in our younger days. Don't worry though, it's normal, we all do it. But essentially our society hasn't been getting any stupider, or sluttier or more immoral, it's just that with all the extended amounts of global communications and instantaneous news transmissions we hear about it WAY more than any other generation has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Bill Posted July 29, 2010 Share Posted July 29, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S t e v e Posted July 29, 2010 Share Posted July 29, 2010 i like young girls in short skirts... case closed :- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grampa Posted July 29, 2010 Share Posted July 29, 2010 Teenageness is a fairly recent development. The America of our Founders had children and at a certain age - about 14 or 15 - they became working adults and parents They didn't have this leisure class we call the "teen years". Very typical of agrarian societies. Now we need to "protect" them, we don't think they are mature enough for adult behavior and it is upsetting when they do act like adults. It is all a result of our development as a growing, industrial society and we have to accept it and adapt, we can't go back to some idealized "Good Old Days". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShredAstaire Posted July 29, 2010 Share Posted July 29, 2010 Stop it stop it!!! it's already deaaaaaaaad!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Izzy Posted July 29, 2010 Share Posted July 29, 2010 oh brother[blink] Nothing has changed.... In the 70's girls wore shorty shorts..... So did the guys for that matter[biggrin] LOL[blush] .... I have a 12 year old daughter' date=' so I get the whole thing, and I certainly remember girls at the age of 12 when I was young.... I coach girls softball, and ol' saying still stands true today... "Girls will be Girls and boys will be boys." However Fred, I do have issue with your assumptions on how you can make a judgement call on young females persona and behavior patterns, according to where they shop[confused'] .... I think you're cool, but IMO you're the one with the problem on this particular subject matter.... not the girls. Oh, this is good! I was just thinking, "didn't the 70s have sleazy looking kids about on stilts...erm, platform shoes?" I shop at Vicky's and mostly get boring cotton panties, the occasional hoodie, and sports bras, so a teen could just be getting lotion. The notion that teen girls shouldn't wear sexy underpants before they're legal to drive is silly. Just 'cus you wear sexy squirrel covers don't mean you're a ****. I have a very VERY shy and guarded friend in her early twenties. I know what panties she wears cus, of course, being girls, we shop together and spend the night together, and pillow fight and wrestle in our underwear. Her panties are SEXY! You would never guess, she looks like a school teacher... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S t e v e Posted July 29, 2010 Share Posted July 29, 2010 Stop it stop it!!! it's already deaaaaaaaad!!!! on the flip side...i think this thread could get better :- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grampa Posted July 29, 2010 Share Posted July 29, 2010 Stop it stop it!!! it's already deaaaaaaaad!!!! You don't have to look at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shnate McDuanus Posted July 29, 2010 Share Posted July 29, 2010 Teenageness is a fairly recent development. The America of our Founders had children and at a certain age - about 14 or 15 - they became working adults and parents They didn't have this leisure class we call the "teen years". Very typical of agrarian societies. Now we need to "protect" them' date=' we don't think they are mature enough for adult behavior and it is upsetting when they do act like adults. It is all a result of our development as a growing, industrial society and we have to accept it and adapt, we can't go back to some idealized "Good Old Days".[/quote'] Very wise, succinct observation. You don't have to look at it. Oh, this one's good too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jantha Posted July 29, 2010 Share Posted July 29, 2010 Blaming anything outside of the home is just shirking responsibilty. Parents have far more effect on their children than society for the first' date=' most important early years. Poor parents always want to blame someone else.[/quote'] :- ... sorry I still don't buy it. Sure, in the early years, you need to instill all the values you can.. and hope that stays with your kids. However, I think blaming parents in 100% of the cases is a cop out. Kids have, and always will have their own mind. That's what makes them human. I've had many friends (and relatives) who were raised by "good parents". Parents that were morally upright, religious and they raised their kids properly. These friends (and relatives) rebelled once they hit their early teens... and rebelled BAD. For no good reason in my opinion. Their parents did not ask for, nor did they deserve the treatment they received. No one can make me believe that these cases were caused by bad parenting. Anyway.. yes this thread can die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FirstMeasure Posted July 29, 2010 Share Posted July 29, 2010 Oh' date=' this is good! I was just thinking, "didn't the 70s have sleazy looking kids about on stilts...erm, platform shoes?"I shop at Vicky's and mostly get boring cotton panties, the occasional hoodie, and sports bras, so a teen could just be getting lotion. The notion that teen girls shouldn't wear sexy underpants before they're legal to drive is silly. Just 'cus you wear sexy squirrel covers don't mean you're a ****. I have a very VERY shy and guarded friend in her early twenties. I know what panties she wears cus, of course, being girls, we shop together and spend the night together, and pillow fight and wrestle in our underwear. Her panties are SEXY! You would never guess, she looks like a school teacher... [/quote'] Squirrel Covers?!?!? LMFAO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grampa Posted July 29, 2010 Share Posted July 29, 2010 :- ... sorry I still don't buy it. Sure' date=' in the early years, you need to instill all the values you can.. and hope that stays with your kids. However, I think blaming parents in 100% of the cases is a cop out. Kids have, and always will have their own mind. That's what makes them human. I've had many friends (and relatives) who were raised by "good parents". Parents that were morally upright, religious and they raised their kids properly. These friends (and relatives) rebelled once they hit their early teens... and rebelled BAD. For no good reason in my opinion. Their parents did not ask for, nor did they deserve the treatment they received. No one can make me believe that these cases were caused by bad parenting. Anyway.. yes this thread can die. [/quote'] I have found that kids raised in religious families rebel harder when they do. It's a reaction to the percieved "repression" of the religion. If kids are raised to think, they are less likely to do stupid things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dem00n Posted July 29, 2010 Share Posted July 29, 2010 So your saying atheist kids are smarter? No but ive seen that alot of atheists are mostly in the honor role or have some form of smartness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jantha Posted July 29, 2010 Share Posted July 29, 2010 I have found that kids raised in religious families rebel harder when they do. It's a reaction to the percieved "repression" of the religion. I fully agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted July 29, 2010 Share Posted July 29, 2010 don't worry fred' date=' the older you get the less "wrong" it gets [biggrin'] No offense meant, but dude you are creepy! They are 15! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimbabig Posted July 29, 2010 Share Posted July 29, 2010 No offense meant' date=' but dude you are creepy! They are 15![/quote'] There's a word we have for adults who like children? whats it called? I can't seem to remember. (I kid, I kid.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted July 29, 2010 Share Posted July 29, 2010 I think there needs to be a definition of "religious families." There are a lotta variations on religious practice and cultural traditions involved. Some religious/cultural traditions by intent will be pretty loose on a lotta stuff until a "kid" decides it's time to marry and settle down, then they functionally fully join the religious institution and take on an "adult" role. In other religious/cultural traditions, training in logic and basic guidelines for treating others well take the lead from very young ages and forward. I had a friend in college who was the son of a mainline U.S. Protestant denomination minister. His comment was that "Preachers' kids may be wild as a pet coon when they're growing up, but I've never met one that was mean." m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookieman15061 Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 I have found that kids raised in religious families rebel harder when they do. It's a reaction to the percieved "repression" of the religion. If kids are raised to think' date=' they are less likely to do stupid things.[/quote'] Or the family is so liberal there's no rules to rebel against and even if they did no one would notice. Perception is the key here grampa. and who raises their kids not to think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silenced Fred Posted July 31, 2010 Author Share Posted July 31, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockstar232007 Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 Don't worry Fred. You're definately NOT alone on this! When I was in middle school (in the mid-late '90s), girls were allowed to wear boxer shorts (underwear) to school...some of them with nothing on underneith! That ALL changed when they started showing up prego (which was about 35% of them). The sad truth is, it's only going to get worse with every passing generation, because more and more parents are putting their "parental duties" on the back burner for various reasons, and basically let their children get away with murder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS44 Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 honestly, I've seen some girls come to school wearing basically nothing, it's ridicul0us that they get away with it. It's not like the crazy clothes of the past either. I wish they could learn the definition of "fully clothed", because honestly I don't find that atractive (everything hangin out, where's the mystery in that?). Maybe I'm biased towards thiking that girls who don't cover themselves fully arent the brightest, might just be the age group I'm exposed to at school <shrug>. I don't find it attractive, it screams immaturity and "hey look at me!". Yes maybe you saw odd clothes in the 80s, and other decades closer, but hows about the 40s? Not so much eh? Before that? Even less. Maybe it's effected by how the media portrays the so-called "celebrities", always noting that they look good/bad. <shrug> I'm fine with Uggs (even thought I really don't understand why people think they look good), but some of these girls wear so little on their lower body that their shirts cover up the bottom of their shorts, thats a bit much IMO. Not really including the common dress of people these days. It amazes me that these 13 year old guys and girls, post pictures on facebook of them guzzling beer. I've seen 'em, and how the hell do they expect their parents not to see it? All the parent'll see is "<inset son/daughters name here> was tagged in a photo!" and poof. I agree to a certain extent with the kids growing up in religous families. My parents never forced it down my throat, they rarely forced me to do anything of that sort, and it worked in the sense that I grew into believing it (not a place for religous debates thanks), but I know loads of people who's parents tried to force it into them, it doesnt work that way. When you try to force people into something, consistantly, they're bound to try to do something about it (The British tried to tax us, we rebelled, and won. Simlar idea, much smaller scale). A lot of the people who's parents tried to force them into it, (the ones I know at least) ended up having drug and alcohol issues, maybe coincidence, maybe rebellion, maybe peer pressure <shrug> or any combination of the three. My real issue with kids these days is, it seems that a ridiculous percentage of them, are about as eloquent as I was in the third grade. It doesnt convey a sense that the teen you're talking to is intelligent. I've had kids yell at me for using "big words", what the hell is that? So I have a vocabulary outstripping that of a chimp, should I be yelled at for it? Full grown men, should not be looking at 15 year old girls at all, no matter how much they leave open for plain viewing. That's just plain wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GIANTRobOT420 Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 [YOUTUBE] [/YOUTUBE] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artie Owl Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 Since this thread won't die. Courtesy of verydemotivational.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 DAS44 I've a hunch we're pretty much in agreement even though I'm likely yet an earlier generation. Yeah, in ways I'm more concerned about the vocabulary and grammar of today's teens. The clothing, sex mores, etc., however, are all part of the overall coarsening of the culture. I'm less concerned about that in ways because it's cyclical and always has been. But ... I blame a lotta the vocabulary and grammar difficulty on a combination of cultural factors. For example, I got into a nice little political discussion with a friend on the opposite side of the spectrum the other day and ... we both ended up commenting that today's "kids" wouldn't have had the slightest idea what we were talking about as we ranged through history, constitutional law, economics, bits of legislation from 50 years ago... Where I live we have pretty decent schools, lots of opportunities for kids. But again, I don't think they have the opportunity for "depth" in learning that my generation had whether in "fixing cars" or in literature. There's too much else available for them to do to try lots of stuff. In fact, that's pretty much the "Middle School" concept that hits kids when I was starting to get reeeeally into more complex literature and history. Instead, they're encouraged to sample more stuff. I'm not sure which is better overall. As the "old guy," I should have stronger opinions, perhaps. But let's leave it at this: Kids today (as in folks under 40) have far less training and concept of allegory and metaphor than in prior "educated" generations. This means that even history and lit have less value to the maturation process. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.