I don't think its entirely true, but I suppose a majority of children to adopt habits from their parents as they do not know right from wrong, so they learn it from their parents.
Children tend to adopt the habits you never thought they would. They take all the bits you didnt like and locked away and bring em right back out. Its like they teach you to deal with yourself. As you say kevin, its not a certainty, but kiddie see kiddie do is quite close to an absolute truth. The only thing that gets in the way is education and peer groups. Peer groups tend to be the stronger of the two so even with education kids are likely to end up smoking if all their friends do it. If you grow up in certain circumstances you are likely to turn out in the way that is expected. i.e. live on a shitty estate with neds and drugs and violence... its unlikely you will break away unless your peers are the ones who dont get involved (someone like me) or unless you get some kind of like epiphany.
Props to Holden012 for starting a thread on this, I think it's a great in.
This advertisement is a good starting step to setting the cultural factors that cause so much concern about Australia's youth (and, because Australia is a relatively close reflection of America, the broader Western world). As analogmunky has stated, it's definitely related to alcohol, drugs, violence and ESPECIALLY smoking etc. and would be a simple, powerful basis for a model on why location is what really dictates how well you do in life: because of the people around you.
I would like to assert that this is also part of why:
* Median age of first sexual intercourse is falling. * Violent youth crime is rising. * Abused kids tend to become abusive adults. * Alcohol abuse runs in families.
And I'd like to add that across ALL nations and parts of nations, there is only one direct association with low crime rates and higher affluence: level of education.
I have a theory, not a professional theory, but every once in a while a culture change occurs, and the effects of that culture change can last for 100 years. One a new culture change occurs, it will reflect the exact opposite of the previous ones' effects.
During the 1500s, there were prostitutes at the age of 15, and people were okay with it. During the 1800s, women were more decent. During the 1950s, women were more sexual. Pinpointing the exact culture change is difficult, as it could trace back to the 1920s with the flappers. It could happen in the 1300s when the Dark Ages were at its peak. This is pretty much based on Europe and the US alone, so it's not really good.
It's great that someone is finally doing something about this. I hope other nations adopt this commercial or at least variations of it, as I can see how it might be a little extreme for some viewers. It started out a little mild, and not all that strange, and then it moved into the violence, drug abuse, etc. And it just kinda hit home, because you see people like that everyday.
The problem is, people HATE change. People are reluctant to change even when they are destroying themselves. I doubt that trailer trash would even consider changing because they are ruining his children and, in an way, ruining society.
It's sad to see that, or at least know that it is happening.
And it just kinda hit home, because you see people like that everyday.
Let's introduce a few branches to this thread then!
I'm going to bring up a sore issue: video game ratings and censorship. While I don't disagree that the excessive violence in videogames probably contributes to violent behaviour in youth, or rather, the desensitisation to said violence, leading to a lack of empathy and remorse that, I suppose, disinhibits the behaviours... I don't think that attempts to forcible removal of exposure is going to help. Why? Well, banning videogames in a country will only contribute to piracy for one thing! For another, it's not striking at the root of the issue.
The problem is, people HATE change.
I would nitpick and say that people hate starting change. Law of inertia!
There has to be a law stating that at least one of the parents need to have a certain level of education to at the very least give the child a shot at growing up as a courteous law abiding person.
One of the best science fiction short stories (and it's not really science fiction, more like speculative fiction) I have read is a story in which a young man is attempting to sit an exam which will grant him a Parenting License. If only I could remember who wrote it!
However as things stand I suspect that society is not conducive to such a system because:
1) To be able to have children is seen to be part of the unalienable rights of human beings. 2) Educated people are generally caught up in the maddening workaholic rat race and have less time for their kids than is desirable.
Maybe I'm a special case, but I've been playing violent shooters and such since I was 10, and I'm still remorseful about senseless violence. When I was 13 I actually stopped watching the news, because I hated to constantly hear about the shootings, and stabbings, and death; thankfully I got over that. But I can see what you mean, considering in late '09, two kids in my area got into a fight where one took an axe to the other ones face. The sad part is no one even batted an eye.
It's just sad seeing two uneducated parents trying to raise a child, or better yet two ghetto people. There has to be a law stating that at least one of the parents need to have a certain level of education to at the very least give the child a shot at growing up as a courteous law abiding person.
I do agree to it, to an extent. The government shouldn't prevent you from having intercourse with one another, but if you are pregnant, you have to take child raising courses. People will obviously oppose to this and say that this is Communism and Big Brother and all that shit, but it's really not.
One of the best science fiction short stories (and it's not really science fiction, more like speculative fiction) I have read is a story in which a young man is attempting to sit an exam which will grant him a Parenting License. If only I could remember who wrote it!
In the Giver they had to send an application to get married and receive children. Is that the novel?
I'm pretty sure that is what you're talking about. That would also be a good way to control the population, I recently watched the movie Idiocracy, and was surprised at how accurate it was. Have you noticed how the smart people think conservatively and have 2-3 kids at most. While the idiots who do stupid things like those described in the commercial sit there and have 10?
Maybe I'm a special case, but I've been playing violent shooters and such since I was 10, and I'm still remorseful about senseless violence.
Exposure once sensitivity has been established in some kind of solid cognitive framework shouldn't be a problem. I was similarly sensitive as a child and avoided violence in media like the plague until my teens. By this point it should be plenty understandable that playing a game (even violent) generally revolves around the completion of a goal (unless you're playing something like Every Day The Same Dream by Molleindustria, haha), so the effect should be at a different level altogether. If a kid then claims to use a violent videogame as inspiration for doing a Columbine, I'd worry that something went wrong earlier up the line.
In the Giver they had to send an application to get married and receive children. Is that the novel?
It was a very short story, but the theme certainly runs in fiction a fair bit!
If a kid then claims to use a violent videogame as inspiration for doing a Columbine
Their inspiration was hitler wasn't it? I'm not disagreeing with you just wondering, I was around five when it happened, so I have next to no info. on it.
