What is wrong with people? (specifically young males)

[Gotrek1966]

Couldn't agree more. Just spent an entire day listening to a mental health worker who deals with young people, a lot of the problem (their words not mine) stems from lack of boundary lines and the fear of parents and those in authority to enforce them due to litigation issues. As well as where today's society is heading with dealing with these issues. An interesting day.

The days of people in general knowing and being taught right from wrong seems to have gotten lost somewhere.

[Jez]

Revisionist nostalgia.

I'm sorry, do you have any actual concrete examples of how society's morality has degraded since the 1920s? You allege that we now take certain forms of behaviour less seriously now, can you narrow that down a little? Some statistics would be great too. Absent any of the above I'm afraid your post just comes off as the same intergenerational whinging that has been going on for millennia, and it saddens me to see people hailing it as having any kind of real insight.

Comparing rates of imprisonment from the 1920s to 2009 reveals that in 1920 there were 51.61 people in prison per 100k of population, that number is now closer to 175 per 100k; a far cry from somehow taking illegal behaviour less seriously. If anything, our willingness and our capacity to imprison people for criminal offences have both increased.

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf ... DE00256331
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf ... 4.4.5.3%29

Moreover, a 2001 report from the director of the Austalian Institute of Criminology opens by saying that: "Australia was a less violent society at the end of the twentieth century than it was at the end of the nineteenth or eighteenth centuries." While he goes on to note the difficulty of comparing crime statistics from such different times, I am certainly more likely to take his word over yours when it comes to this kind of discussion.

As for your predictable raising of the issue of corporal punishment...

Numerous studies exist that have linked the corporal punishment of children to child depression, cruelty to animals, and even future likelihood to commit spousal abuse and other forms of violence.

"Parental Discipline and Abuse Potential Affects on Child Depression, Anxiety, and Attributions, Christina M. Rodriguez, University of Utah" 2003
"Exploring the Link between Corporal Punishment and Children's Cruelty to Animals, Clifton P. Flynn, University of South Carolina Spartanburg" 1999
"Corporal Punishment in Adolescence and Physical Assaults on Spouses in Later Life: What Accounts for the Link?, Murray A. Straus and Carrie L. Yodanis, University of New Hampshire" 1996

If you can't access JSTOR to find those articles, I also found a 1998 set of guidelines from the American Academy of Pediatrics that found much the same thing: "Despite its common acceptance, and even advocacy for its use, spanking is a less effective strategy than time-out or removal of privileges for reducing undesired behavior in children. Although spanking may immediately reduce or stop an undesired behavior, its effectiveness decreases with subsequent use. The only way to maintain the initial effect of spanking is to systematically increase the intensity with which it is delivered, which can quickly escalate into abuse. Thus, at best, spanking is only effective when used in selective infrequent situations."

...

"Parents who spank their children are more likely to use other unacceptable forms of corporal punishment. The more children are spanked, the more anger they report as adults, the more likely they are to spank their own children, the more likely they are to approve of hitting a spouse, and the more marital conflict they experience as adults. Spanking has been associated with higher rates of physical aggression, more substance abuse, and increased risk of crime and violence when used with older children and adolescents.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/c ... 4/723.long

In addition, one particular study I found that looks at disciplinary approaches and problems within schools over several decades in the US concluded by saying that: "From this brief review, it is clear that the relationship between school violence and discipline is more complex than we often assume. Focusing on the technology of discipline as a quick fix to problems plaguing schools does not address the deeper malaise affecting the wider system."

"The Status of School Discipline and Violence, A. Troy Adams, American Academy of Political and Social Science" 2000

As for the human brain I would contest that it is not 'designed' by anyone. You can get immediate compliance from a child by hitting them, and it's certainly easier to hit a child than it is to try and understand why they aren't doing what you want. But while you may get compliance in the short-term, you are also teaching a very influential child that it is acceptable to hit someone if they're doing something that bothers them, you are teaching them to externalise their issues with other people. Meanwhile you're not teaching them how to resolve their issues with another person using words or through thinking about why the other person may not be doing as you expect/think is reasonable.

The internet is certainly a new and rapidly moving frontier, but I think a lot of the perception around the negatives of social media and the internet is simply a result of more awareness of anti-social behaviour in an era of mass media and sensationalist journalism. Certainly virtually every new form of media goes through a period wherein it is regarded by much of society as being responsible for societal doom, and I imagine we will adapt to the internet slowly but successfully with no real long-term issues.

Anyway, that's just my take on it as a 21 year old male.

[André Axe'm]

Its not a problem of morality, its a problem of manners.

[MunchY]

Science

Well said. Some interesting stuff there that a lot of people in this thread could benefit from reading.

[Nightstaar]

Its not a problem of morality, its a problem of manners.

Manners are just an extension of morals...

[RogerTheIncredible]

Lolwut?

[hellbender]

You got no facts

I'm sure there are sources around, but i cant be bothered searching for them. Do you have sources that prove that society has not degraded in certain area's?

I also have no doubt that things appear more prevalent because of our media, but that doesn't change the fact that there is more potential for greater behavioural indiscretions now with the web and anonymity allowing no accountability. Furthermore the consequences of the offenders actions are not necessarily seen by the offender, as such there is a form of detachment from their actions.

Moreover, a 2001 report from the director of the Austalian Institute of Criminology opens by saying that: "Australia was a less violent society at the end of the twentieth century than it was at the end of the nineteenth or eighteenth centuries." While he goes on to note the difficulty of comparing crime statistics from such different times, I am certainly more likely to take his word over yours when it comes to this kind of discussion.

This simply looks at violent behaviour, i have no doubt that australia is a less violent society now. I am talking more about behaviour as discussed by the OP.

Quoting Crime Stats

That can be interpreted in two ways. One being that more people are conducting criminal activities and therefore need to imprisoned or as you say we have taken a harder stance and are imprisoning more people. It could also be a combination of both?? However i'm not talking about criminal activities and behaviour, just unacceptable and moral behaviour.

"Parental Discipline and Abuse Potential Affects on Child Depression, Anxiety, and Attributions, Christina M. Rodriguez, University of Utah" 2003
This paper is talking about children ages 8-12. But also indicated that excessive forms of physical punishment fuelled aggressive/depressive/anxious behaviour in children.

"Exploring the Link between Corporal Punishment and Children's Cruelty to Animals, Clifton P. Flynn, University of South Carolina Spartanburg" 1999
This paper indicates that children who are excessively punished via corporal punishment are more likely to be cruel to animals.

"Corporal Punishment in Adolescence and Physical Assaults on Spouses in Later Life: What Accounts for the Link?, Murray A. Straus and Carrie L. Yodanis, University of New Hampshire" 1996
This paper indicated that excessive corporal punishment is the reason behind later violence between spouses.

The common thread of these papers is that they base their facts on a trend towards excessive corporal punishment and its effects and draw a conclusion that in general corporal punishment has negative impacts. They also only focus on the statistical range that have had excessive punishment and their aggressive/cruel/violent tendencies. They do not look at other statistical ranges such as the behaviour of children who do not receive any form of corporal punishment at any stage, specifically their attitude in society, behaviour in general towards others, authoritative powers and general discipline.

I agree that excessive corporal punishment is bad for a child. I never said that corporal punishment was the only form of disciplinary action that should be used. I stated that emotional pain through deprival of pleasure i.e. video games, food etc is another effective method, i could add time-out to the emotional form of punishment too. I would use physical pain as a last resort or a means for a quick response (i.e. a dangerous situation).

If you can't access JSTOR to find those articles, I also found a 1998 set of guidelines from the American Academy of Pediatrics that found much the same thing: "Despite its common acceptance, and even advocacy for its use, spanking is a less effective strategy than time-out or removal of privileges for reducing undesired behavior in children. Although spanking may immediately reduce or stop an undesired behavior, its effectiveness decreases with subsequent use. The only way to maintain the initial effect of spanking is to systematically increase the intensity with which it is delivered, which can quickly escalate into abuse. Thus, at best, spanking is only effective when used in selective infrequent situations."

Again i couldn't agree more with this statement, and i never stated that spanking or similar form of punishment was the primary means of punishment or that it should be used frequently.

In addition, one particular study I found that looks at disciplinary approaches and problems within schools over several decades in the US concluded by saying that: "From this brief review, it is clear that the relationship between school violence and discipline is more complex than we often assume. Focusing on the technology of discipline as a quick fix to problems plaguing schools does not address the deeper malaise affecting the wider system."

"The Status of School Discipline and Violence, A. Troy Adams, American Academy of Political and Social Science" 2000

This was interesting, i didn't read it all, but it is only drawing a conclusion on violent behaviour and concluding that violent behaviour is not effectively solved at school, but where the source of such violent behaviour comes from. I would have to agree with this, but i am talking in more general terms of discipline.

However, after reading those papers i can see that dealing with teachers impartiality, consistency and restraint is actually the greater problem with corporal punishment in schools. Under the right circumstances and with a well trained teacher corporal punishment is an effective measure of discipline, however as the right circumstances and a well trained teachers are not always attainable i would have to concede that its best not to use corporal punishment in schools.

Also perhaps i should clarify my position on corporal punishment in schools, i do not think methods such as flogging or severe pain should be used. Merely a slap on the wrist with a ruler type punishment. However it would be different at home and have a correlation to the severity of the bad behaviour/action.

As for the human brain I would contest that it is not 'designed' by anyone. You can get immediate compliance from a child by hitting them, and it's certainly easier to hit a child than it is to try and understand why they aren't doing what you want. But while you may get compliance in the short-term, you are also teaching a very influential child that it is acceptable to hit someone if they're doing something that bothers them, you are teaching them to externalise their issues with other people. Meanwhile you're not teaching them how to resolve their issues with another person using words or through thinking about why the other person may not be doing as you expect/think is reasonable.

That is a very simplistic view. Let me start by clarifying that as the child ages, i think the use of smacking them becomes less effective compared to reasoning. Obviously smacking a 16yo is going to have less effect than a 6yo. Also sometimes children do stupid things or bad things just because they can or want to push the boundaries, as such a smack can be more effective. I would also consider that once a child has reached 8-10yo smacking should only be used as a severe punishment and not as a regular form of punishment.

As for externalising issues... the child will only be experiencing such punishment from their parents or adults, not from their peers. Furthermore by reducing the amount of punishment via smacking as the child ages, they is able to associate the act of hitting was to discipline them as children, not as a general means to behave towards others. There is a distinction here, which draws the line on acceptable behaviour towards others who aren't doing what you want etc.

When used responsibly and in the correct manner smacking is an effective and not damaging method of discipline. The negative effects seen when smacking is due to excessive or an incorrect approach.

Anyway i do not intend this to become a debate about corporal punishment, so i'm going to leave it there. I also have no doubt that society will be able to adapt to the internet. I just think it will take a while, with many failed and ineffective attempts. In the mean time we will just have to put up with what goes on and deal with the generations who did not have adequate policing and discipline regarding the web.

Also i'm a 24 yeah old male, so its not just an intergenerational whinge.

[DeusIgnis]

/thread.....

[Jez]

I'm sure there are sources around, but i cant be bothered searching for them. Do you have sources that prove that society has not degraded in certain area's?

You're asking me to prove a negative? The burden of proof is on you to show how society has degraded in certain areas, if that is your contention.

I also have no doubt that things appear more prevalent because of our media, but that doesn't change the fact that there is more potential for greater behavioural indiscretions now with the web and anonymity allowing no accountability. Furthermore the consequences of the offenders actions are not necessarily seen by the offender, as such there is a form of detachment from their actions.

I'm not sure I agree with there being no accountability, we've seen on this very forum news stories and general chat topics concerning the criminal punishment of facebook 'trolls' and other people who engage in anti-social behaviour online, with differin opinions as to whether it's appropriate. I think the XBL examples posted earlier are an example of poor moderation, rather than zero accountability. As XBL is a paid service I really think the standard of moderation should be higher, I think if people lost the ability to send messages if they abused it with that kind of infantile **** they'd soon lose their stomach for it.

This simply looks at violent behaviour, i have no doubt that australia is a less violent society now. I am talking more about behaviour as discussed by the OP.

Well then maybe pessimistic threads like these that bemoan the youth are not quite as accurate or relevant as they appear to be.

That can be interpreted in two ways. One being that more people are conducting criminal activities and therefore need to imprisoned or as you say we have taken a harder stance and are imprisoning more people. It could also be a combination of both?? However i'm not talking about criminal activities and behaviour, just unacceptable and moral behaviour.

I would say on the whole we are a more accountable and transparent society when it comes to unacceptable and immoral behaviour than we were in the past.

The common thread of these papers is that they base their facts on a trend towards excessive corporal punishment and its effects and draw a conclusion that in general corporal punishment has negative impacts. They also only focus on the statistical range that have had excessive punishment and their aggressive/cruel/violent tendencies. They do not look at other statistical ranges such as the behaviour of children who do not receive any form of corporal punishment at any stage, specifically their attitude in society, behaviour in general towards others, authoritative powers and general discipline.

They also note that parents who start using more acceptable forms of corporal punishment (ie smacking or spanking) are statistially more likely to escalate that punishment when it stops giving the immediate result it initially did.

I agree that excessive corporal punishment is bad for a child. I never said that corporal punishment was the only form of disciplinary action that should be used. I stated that emotional pain through deprival of pleasure i.e. video games, food etc is another effective method, i could add time-out to the emotional form of punishment too. I would use physical pain as a last resort or a means for a quick response (i.e. a dangerous situation).

I don't think physical punishment has a place in a teacher-student or parent-child relationship, and I think the science backs me up here. I hope when you say depriving a child of food you're talking about denying them dessert and not actually denying them food altogether though...

This was interesting, i didn't read it all, but it is only drawing a conclusion on violent behaviour and concluding that violent behaviour is not effectively solved at school, but where the source of such violent behaviour comes from. I would have to agree with this, but i am talking in more general terms of discipline.

However, after reading those papers i can see that dealing with teachers impartiality, consistency and restraint is actually the greater problem with corporal punishment in schools. Under the right circumstances and with a well trained teacher corporal punishment is an effective measure of discipline, however as the right circumstances and a well trained teachers are not always attainable i would have to concede that its best not to use corporal punishment in schools.

Also perhaps i should clarify my position on corporal punishment in schools, i do not think methods such as flogging or severe pain should be used. Merely a slap on the wrist with a ruler type punishment. However it would be different at home and have a correlation to the severity of the bad behaviour/action.

I made the comment about intergenerational whinging because this argument reeks of nostalgia and selective memory. I'm sure the 20 and 30 year olds that were around when you were in school complained about how undisciplined children were, and how terrible it was that children were only allowed to be rapped on the knuckles with a ruler and weren't able to be caned any more. Absent any actual statistical information as to whether children today are more violent or antisocial than their predecessors everything just becomes rather baseless speculation. My own money would be on the fact that the behaviour of kids is fairly constant along a spectrum of bad to good behaviour, and the adults bemoaning the youth of succeeding generations is also pretty constant regardless of actual merit.

That is a very simplistic view. Let me start by clarifying that as the child ages, i think the use of smacking them becomes less effective compared to reasoning. Obviously smacking a 16yo is going to have less effect than a 6yo. Also sometimes children do stupid things or bad things just because they can or want to push the boundaries, as such a smack can be more effective. I would also consider that once a child has reached 8-10yo smacking should only be used as a severe punishment and not as a regular form of punishment.

As for externalising issues... the child will only be experiencing such punishment from their parents or adults, not from their peers. Furthermore by reducing the amount of punishment via smacking as the child ages, they is able to associate the act of hitting was to discipline them as children, not as a general means to behave towards others. There is a distinction here, which draws the line on acceptable behaviour towards others who aren't doing what you want etc.

When used responsibly and in the correct manner smacking is an effective and not damaging method of discipline. The negative effects seen when smacking is due to excessive or an incorrect approach.

Today there was a news story regarding comments Andrew Scipione made about childrens emulating things they see in the media. You know what is a bigger influence on children? The behaviour of the adults, teachers, and role models around them. When a child sees an adult hit them or another child to force immediate compliance they don't think "this grown up is an authority figure distinct from myself and other children and so he's allowed to use violence", they think "that grownup used violence on someone smaller to get their way", and (as evidenced by the study I linked to before) they take that lesson to heart and are more likely to use violence to solve their own problems when they grow up.

[ginji]

Over the weekend at Young someone threw a beer bottle at an Ambulance as it was leaving with an 18 year old male patient from a party, breaking both rear windows and rendering the Ambulance useless until it gets fixed. http://t.co/lducooNU

Deplorable behavior!

[MuscularTeeth]

im 32.
most of the people i work with are in their 50's +

and id easily get along with them, whilst i struggle with the younger ones i meet - including our youngest member here who is 24 (and has taken a sickie today.. again).

what they (the older builders, reps, office peeps) do say, and i've since noticed, is the younger ones don't look you in the eye.

[matthewdev]

@ Jez - just a thought from personal experience, when I was younger I preferred physical punishment when I was being disciplined. At least it was over and done with reasonably quickly. Nothing worse than being sent to my room for hours on end...

Again from my own experience the amount of douche-baggery is hugely different depending on what games are being played. Simulator players I find are the most respectful while FPS games usually contain the most ****. I can imagine there is much greater reason to get annoyed in a FPS game over a simulator but I also think that they attract different kinds of people. In my mind this has greater correlation than age does in looking at amounts of douche-baggery.

[Yurtles]

I can't find the link (My Google-fu is weak ) but there was an excellent article about this sort of thing I read ages ago. Had some great references to London 100 years ago and reports of how young, drunken hooligans were completely destroying life as they knew it, no respect for anyone, destruction of property, etc, etc.

This isn't a new thing. There has always been this aspect to society and it has never "taken over". Some people are dicks just as other people are great humanitarians, that's just life.

[Ralph Wiggum]

"What is happening to our young people? They disrespect their elders, they disobey their parents. They ignore the law. They riot in the streets inflamed with wild notions. Their morals are decaying. What is to become of them?" - Plato, 4th Century BC

"The young people of today think of nothing but themselves. They have no reverence for parents or old age. They are impatient of all restraint... As for the girls, they are forward, immodest and unladylike in speech, behavior and dress."
Attributed to Peter the Hermit, AD 1274