So, I'm doing the second chapter now. I must say, I now appreciate a little better the work that goes into those recaps at the Agony Booth.
He rants about how we're surrounded by sex and drugs and blah blah blah. I've heard it before, and I'm just going to come out and say it: Ever hear about the 60's? You know, psychedelia, the sexual revolution, free love, that sort of thing? Drugs don't really have the same kind of acceptance now, nor does random sex with strangers (thanks, AIDS).
Then he talks about what it's like to be a teen. Well, not really. He even says that these little anecdotes about sex, drugs, and rock 'n' roll are from his clients and that no adult understands the culture fully. This is good, except we run headfirst into the issue of skewing towards the troubled teens that I mentioned before. They don't send stable people to psychiatrists.
More talking about his troubled clients, and then how alcohol kills more than hard drugs. This is actually a good point, for one main reason: it's commonly and openly done by adults, but kids aren't allowed. It creates a certain amount of rebelliousness and shines light on hypocrisy for teens. The funny thing is that European countries don't have nearly the same kind of alcohol problems we do here, and that's despite having considerably lower drinking ages. It's the forbidden fruit thing.
He rattles off some numbers that I kind of doubt, they seem kind of overblown (50% of deaths are alcohol related? Really?), but I'm not going to go into it. More suspect statistics, and then ranting about how we're not doing enough. So.. very... dull...
Well, actually, there's something interesting here in that he says that other country's might be amazed at the whole thing. Well, no, not really. Most Western countries do approve of booze, so... yeah. Anyway, not that great a metaphor.
Now he rants about the other drugs, the illegal ones. God, it's like health class all over again. At least he won't show us line drawings of naked people... right? Please say he won't. Please? Anyway, drugs are purer now. Yawn. Say something I haven't heard before, dammit!
Oh, and then he says how adults don't make sense with this whole drug thing. I think he should continue on this angle- namely, very few people are logical and rational. I'm sorry, but that's the facts as I've seen time and time again.
Sigh. Teen drug use is spreading. Yeah, I'm certain he's right here. Hey,the 60's called, they want their drug abuse back. That's their shtick. ("I Am the Walrus," anyone?).
Ah, yes, the sex page. This should be a hoot.
Let's see... you wanted to get laid as a teen (no duh)... oh, right after I start the 'settle down, this could take a while' format, we hit something. Okay, here goes.
He says that we let more sex references in 'family hour' television. Um, dude, that's what I like to call "No big deal." Either you're too little to get it, or you get a little chuckle. It's nothing. I mean, this is almost like saying that acknowledging sex exists is bad. And that's just stupid.
And then a six-year-old corrupted by South Park by a friend. Now, I don't really watch South Park- from what I've seen of it, it seems to be the kind of show that confuses vulgarity with humor- but this is kind of dumb. Basically, they taped it and then tricked their parents into believing they weren't seeing it with a VCR trick. I can't bring myself to care.
Then he talks about early puberty onset and tells an admittedly disturbing tale of six-year-olds playing a game of stripping. Um, okay, that's odd, but, um... yeah.
Then he talks about how 'scary' this is because of drug experimentation. Okay, what the hell is wrong with you. These things that you're talking about have absolutely no relation whatsoever. This is what I like to call a 'non-sequiter.'
He then says that boys who have sex too early become "emotionally cold and cynical." I don't know that that's such a bad thing, though. I'm a heavily cynical person, and it all boils down to knowing how people work. I think it's just rational, but maybe I'm wrong. I don't think I am.
Okay, blah blah blah kids have more sex blah blah blah statistics blah blah blah look just shut the hell up already. This book... ugh. It's like I'm getting hit over the head with a Grecian column made of obviousolium.
Girl upset who does drugs and sex. Yeah, okay, it happens, I know this, do you think that I didn't? Maybe he thinks the parents need to be written a huge reality check. That would justify it, I guess.
And now we're moving on to music. Okay, I'm calling shenanigans on this one two- "what your kid refers to as rock 'n roll?" Seriously? How clueless are you? First off, rap and R&B are the most popular genres right now. Secondly, what I call rock 'n roll is a now-defunct genre from the 50's that evolved into what is now called 'rock.'
Oh, I was wrong. Sorry, I won't jump to conclusions again. Basically, 'rock 'n roll' is a term that "encapsulate[s] all of the other forms of adolescent acting-out behaviors." I still call shenanigans, because I have never heard this term used anywhere by anyone else.
He states that youth violence has gone down. Thank you. I am so sick of people saying that it's gone up when it just #$*!ing hasn't. He seems to be fed up with the insane rules and restrictions and paranoia. See, we can agree on stuff! Oh, and then he says that it's 'not necessarily' "reacting hysterically to overpublicized rage events" and that, once again, it's a cultural shift. Why do I suspect I'm about to hear of things that I have never seen happen?
Okay, kids hit unfaithful girlfriends. Never heard that one before. Son threatens violence to his mother. Once again, a nutjob can not be taken to account for the whole. He notes that it happened several times. Gasp! A couple dozen families have major issues with violence? Wow, that's so totally indicative of the whole, because it's not like there are thousands of families in the nation!
He says the violence has gotten worse. Worse, but less frequent? I dunno, seems fair to me.
And now it's on to the acceptance of guns. I just can't make myself care. Ah well. It think I'm going to fastforward a bit, if anything interesting or different happens, I'll go in depth. If not, you didn't miss anything.
...
More violence on TV. Shut up.
Violence in video games gets a passing mention, I'm sick of that, too.
Here's something. He says that studies have only found a correlation between increased severity and increased media violence. Unsurprisingly, he doesn't actually cite any of these studies. He then goes on to insinuate that this is all a technicality and it's 100% certain that increased media violence is a problem but the companies don't want you to think that. I don't need to tell you how stupid that is. He says he asked kids about it and they said it did affect them. The funny thing is, this proves nothing because the logic is "how can I see that all my life and not be affected?" which is the same exact logic they've used before. And I have an answer, too- you're a functioning human being who can tell the difference between people getting beat up and cheap laser effects setting off sparks around an incredibly fake monster suit (yes, I am talking about Power Rangers here. My mom never let me watch that show when I was young enough to want to because it was 'too violent.' At this point, though, I couldn't care less because Power Rangers is incredibly dumb). He then gives some BS about how it's because that's what are society is like. Wait, what? This guy makes no sense. I might not be describing what he's saying well enough, but trust me- there is no good explanation given for any of this nonsense.
He then talks about parental beatings and how they're bad. Glad to see that. I'm pretty sick of parents lamenting about how they can't hit their kids and that's making them turn out bad, because that's nonsense.
There's more suicide. Yeah, yeah, yeah, shut up. It's nothing new. He then says that you can look at a sleepover party and two of the kids will have 'come close' to killing themselves. He does know that the 'two out of ten' does not literally mean that any given ten kids will have two who exhibit a behavior, right?
Now he says to get rid of guns because your kids can kill with them. No crap. I'm for gun control, though- look, Mr. White-Middle-Class-Suburban-Dad-Who-Doesn't-Hunt, NOTHING is going to come in the middle of the night and kill you, okay? You DO NOT NEED A GUN.
Evidently, trickle-down works with 'the economics of guns.' I understand it's a metaphor, but TRICKLE-DOWN DOES NOT WORK.
He argues against guns, but not very well and it's all very stupid. Basically, all teens are troubled and will use guns to do bad things if they get the chance. Guns are too effective at killing (well, duh). Locks won't keep your kids away (the key has to be somewhere, right?) He says that he can name six kids who killed themselves with guns that were locked up in six seconds. That's not a good argument, actually. All that proves is that six kids did and you memorized the names.
And... the 'kids have gotten so violent' bit is over. Good. It was stupid.
Well, it's over. No more preview chapters. He also wrote a book for teens, though...
He rants about how we're surrounded by sex and drugs and blah blah blah. I've heard it before, and I'm just going to come out and say it: Ever hear about the 60's? You know, psychedelia, the sexual revolution, free love, that sort of thing? Drugs don't really have the same kind of acceptance now, nor does random sex with strangers (thanks, AIDS).
Then he talks about what it's like to be a teen. Well, not really. He even says that these little anecdotes about sex, drugs, and rock 'n' roll are from his clients and that no adult understands the culture fully. This is good, except we run headfirst into the issue of skewing towards the troubled teens that I mentioned before. They don't send stable people to psychiatrists.
More talking about his troubled clients, and then how alcohol kills more than hard drugs. This is actually a good point, for one main reason: it's commonly and openly done by adults, but kids aren't allowed. It creates a certain amount of rebelliousness and shines light on hypocrisy for teens. The funny thing is that European countries don't have nearly the same kind of alcohol problems we do here, and that's despite having considerably lower drinking ages. It's the forbidden fruit thing.
He rattles off some numbers that I kind of doubt, they seem kind of overblown (50% of deaths are alcohol related? Really?), but I'm not going to go into it. More suspect statistics, and then ranting about how we're not doing enough. So.. very... dull...
Well, actually, there's something interesting here in that he says that other country's might be amazed at the whole thing. Well, no, not really. Most Western countries do approve of booze, so... yeah. Anyway, not that great a metaphor.
Now he rants about the other drugs, the illegal ones. God, it's like health class all over again. At least he won't show us line drawings of naked people... right? Please say he won't. Please? Anyway, drugs are purer now. Yawn. Say something I haven't heard before, dammit!
Oh, and then he says how adults don't make sense with this whole drug thing. I think he should continue on this angle- namely, very few people are logical and rational. I'm sorry, but that's the facts as I've seen time and time again.
Sigh. Teen drug use is spreading. Yeah, I'm certain he's right here. Hey,the 60's called, they want their drug abuse back. That's their shtick. ("I Am the Walrus," anyone?).
Ah, yes, the sex page. This should be a hoot.
Let's see... you wanted to get laid as a teen (no duh)... oh, right after I start the 'settle down, this could take a while' format, we hit something. Okay, here goes.
He says that we let more sex references in 'family hour' television. Um, dude, that's what I like to call "No big deal." Either you're too little to get it, or you get a little chuckle. It's nothing. I mean, this is almost like saying that acknowledging sex exists is bad. And that's just stupid.
And then a six-year-old corrupted by South Park by a friend. Now, I don't really watch South Park- from what I've seen of it, it seems to be the kind of show that confuses vulgarity with humor- but this is kind of dumb. Basically, they taped it and then tricked their parents into believing they weren't seeing it with a VCR trick. I can't bring myself to care.
Then he talks about early puberty onset and tells an admittedly disturbing tale of six-year-olds playing a game of stripping. Um, okay, that's odd, but, um... yeah.
Then he talks about how 'scary' this is because of drug experimentation. Okay, what the hell is wrong with you. These things that you're talking about have absolutely no relation whatsoever. This is what I like to call a 'non-sequiter.'
He then says that boys who have sex too early become "emotionally cold and cynical." I don't know that that's such a bad thing, though. I'm a heavily cynical person, and it all boils down to knowing how people work. I think it's just rational, but maybe I'm wrong. I don't think I am.
Okay, blah blah blah kids have more sex blah blah blah statistics blah blah blah look just shut the hell up already. This book... ugh. It's like I'm getting hit over the head with a Grecian column made of obviousolium.
Girl upset who does drugs and sex. Yeah, okay, it happens, I know this, do you think that I didn't? Maybe he thinks the parents need to be written a huge reality check. That would justify it, I guess.
And now we're moving on to music. Okay, I'm calling shenanigans on this one two- "what your kid refers to as rock 'n roll?" Seriously? How clueless are you? First off, rap and R&B are the most popular genres right now. Secondly, what I call rock 'n roll is a now-defunct genre from the 50's that evolved into what is now called 'rock.'
Oh, I was wrong. Sorry, I won't jump to conclusions again. Basically, 'rock 'n roll' is a term that "encapsulate[s] all of the other forms of adolescent acting-out behaviors." I still call shenanigans, because I have never heard this term used anywhere by anyone else.
He states that youth violence has gone down. Thank you. I am so sick of people saying that it's gone up when it just #$*!ing hasn't. He seems to be fed up with the insane rules and restrictions and paranoia. See, we can agree on stuff! Oh, and then he says that it's 'not necessarily' "reacting hysterically to overpublicized rage events" and that, once again, it's a cultural shift. Why do I suspect I'm about to hear of things that I have never seen happen?
Okay, kids hit unfaithful girlfriends. Never heard that one before. Son threatens violence to his mother. Once again, a nutjob can not be taken to account for the whole. He notes that it happened several times. Gasp! A couple dozen families have major issues with violence? Wow, that's so totally indicative of the whole, because it's not like there are thousands of families in the nation!
He says the violence has gotten worse. Worse, but less frequent? I dunno, seems fair to me.
And now it's on to the acceptance of guns. I just can't make myself care. Ah well. It think I'm going to fastforward a bit, if anything interesting or different happens, I'll go in depth. If not, you didn't miss anything.
...
More violence on TV. Shut up.
Violence in video games gets a passing mention, I'm sick of that, too.
Here's something. He says that studies have only found a correlation between increased severity and increased media violence. Unsurprisingly, he doesn't actually cite any of these studies. He then goes on to insinuate that this is all a technicality and it's 100% certain that increased media violence is a problem but the companies don't want you to think that. I don't need to tell you how stupid that is. He says he asked kids about it and they said it did affect them. The funny thing is, this proves nothing because the logic is "how can I see that all my life and not be affected?" which is the same exact logic they've used before. And I have an answer, too- you're a functioning human being who can tell the difference between people getting beat up and cheap laser effects setting off sparks around an incredibly fake monster suit (yes, I am talking about Power Rangers here. My mom never let me watch that show when I was young enough to want to because it was 'too violent.' At this point, though, I couldn't care less because Power Rangers is incredibly dumb). He then gives some BS about how it's because that's what are society is like. Wait, what? This guy makes no sense. I might not be describing what he's saying well enough, but trust me- there is no good explanation given for any of this nonsense.
He then talks about parental beatings and how they're bad. Glad to see that. I'm pretty sick of parents lamenting about how they can't hit their kids and that's making them turn out bad, because that's nonsense.
There's more suicide. Yeah, yeah, yeah, shut up. It's nothing new. He then says that you can look at a sleepover party and two of the kids will have 'come close' to killing themselves. He does know that the 'two out of ten' does not literally mean that any given ten kids will have two who exhibit a behavior, right?
Now he says to get rid of guns because your kids can kill with them. No crap. I'm for gun control, though- look, Mr. White-Middle-Class-Suburban-Dad-Who-Doesn't-Hunt, NOTHING is going to come in the middle of the night and kill you, okay? You DO NOT NEED A GUN.
Evidently, trickle-down works with 'the economics of guns.' I understand it's a metaphor, but TRICKLE-DOWN DOES NOT WORK.
He argues against guns, but not very well and it's all very stupid. Basically, all teens are troubled and will use guns to do bad things if they get the chance. Guns are too effective at killing (well, duh). Locks won't keep your kids away (the key has to be somewhere, right?) He says that he can name six kids who killed themselves with guns that were locked up in six seconds. That's not a good argument, actually. All that proves is that six kids did and you memorized the names.
And... the 'kids have gotten so violent' bit is over. Good. It was stupid.
Well, it's over. No more preview chapters. He also wrote a book for teens, though...
No comments:
Post a Comment