Is this ageist? I often use shortcuts from “Generation theory” (Silent Gen, Baby Boomer, GenX, Millennial, GenZ, Gen Alpha) when talking about apparent characteristics of large groups of people based upon when they were born. I don’t hold them as solid absolute categories but I use them as “shortcuts”. I first heard of it growing up. Hated it when it was wrong and hated it even more when it was right. Yet I’ve found myself using it more and more through the years. I don’t use it for negative purposes. I don’t disparage generations (except my own which I feel I have a right to) and yet I can’t help but shake this nagging suspicion that I’m participating in ageism simply by using generation theory. Your thoughts?

Is this ageist?
I often use shortcuts from “Generation theory” (Silent Gen, Baby Boomer, GenX, Millennial, GenZ, Gen Alpha) when talking about apparent characteristics of large groups of people based upon when they were born. I don’t hold them as solid absolute categories but I use them as “shortcuts”.
 
I first heard of it growing up. Hated it when it was wrong and hated it even more when it was right. Yet I’ve found myself using it more and more through the years. I don’t use it for negative purposes. I don’t disparage generations (except my own which I feel I have a right to) and yet I can’t help but shake this nagging suspicion that I’m participating in ageism simply by using generation theory.
 
Your thoughts?
Part of the problem comes from an American subtext that sees “Lord of the Flies” as a documentary.“Without adults, children form gangs/tribes and gangs kill gangs and gangs are bad and a child can only be an individual if raised strictly by adults to shape them properly”.Freedom of assembly among kids scares many adults, particularly law enforcement but also teachers, parents, and such.The “children as clay” metaphor always bothered me, Very dehumanizing.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_of_the_Flies
—-
  Is it this one? If so, I forgot about this case – and I didn’t realize how revolutionary a decision it was. I heard a brief blurb about it a few years ago but I wasn’t researching gaming culture at the time.
https://www.rcfp.org/…/news…/regulation-violent-video-ga
The PMRC and other censorship groups had their fingers in so many things through the years.
====
 has become a common way people refer to large blocks of individuals based upon when they were born.It surprising that it it only came out in 1991 as it “feels” much older than that.It’s often used as a shortcut for “kids today” vs “back in my day” which is easily ageist.
====
  Really? Wow, that makes sense but I always thought of it differently. Perhaps it’s because I never read the novel or studied it. I only saw the movies and participated in discussions about its meaning.I got the sense that there was some kind of war going on but it felt as if the message was “if left to their own devices, children would become tribal” — and yet, the nuclear angle / kids mimick adults makes sense as an interpretation. I just missed that point entirely all this time.
====
 Ah – but that goes to prove my point: If people often take Lord of the Flies to mean “children are savages” and then enact laws using Lord of the Flies as an example of this to justify elimination of human rights to children, then even though it is based upon a misinterpretation of the novel, the very real impact of this common misinterpretation is worthy of consideration.
====
  Control of media availability to kids is a first amendment issue not only for the publisher but moreso for the kids themselves.Similar free speech challenges involve access to social media. [substitute sex offenders for kids and substitute access to social media for sale of violent video games and it’s the same case with the same ruling]
====
 Very true. I never liked the world of law and lawyers and judges and courts and the games they play and the unbelievable amount of laws minimally trained law enforcement officers are expected to enforce…
…but were I ever to decide to pursue law, it would be in child advocacy. It would be a salmon swimming upstream though and I don’t like the world of the courts so it’s unlikely I’d ever pursue it.
===
 I make greater impact doing what I do currently in this regard anyway. The world of law is a nasty place.
====
 ah yes, there’s that as well. I look forward to seeing what the new female lord of the flies has to offer when it comes out. There’s a few interesting ways they could take it and I’m curious what they do.
====
 I expect the usual “female Ghostbusters again?” articles but honestly I think this take on lord of the flies could be really interesting.Will they show the same tribalism? Will they fall into the fallacy of “if women ruled the world there would be peace” trope? Plus with evolutionary psychology being all the rage these days, I expect the movie to stir up quite a lot conversations when the storyline comes out.
====
  Roald Dahl was WONDERFULLY subversive in child rebellion – for me, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was very empowering. I saw the Matilda 1996 movie with one of my nieces when she was little and found it to be very empowering to kids as well. Even though the movie adaptations never do justice to books, as long as the central messages come across, I’m fine with it and I believe they did in these two Roald Dahl works.Even after his death, new things come out about this amazing children’s book author.
=====
  My experience with Avatar is unfortunately limited (although when I ran a Minecraft server for my nephew in 2012-2014, I put in an Avatar plugin which gave the various powers to the players, who earned the right to use it by simply being human to each other). But what I know of it is that it was amazing for an American series and the ethos of it reminded me somewhat of a TV show that was old when *I* saw it, on early 80s Nickelodeon. – the Tomorrow People – who were British preteens/teens who were the evolution of the human race (called “Homo Superior” – they referred to regular humans (usually adults) as “saps” (for homo sapien) which always made me laugh.While I didn’t have telekinesis nor could I “jaunt” (their word for teleporting) nor did I have ESP, I felt empowered by the idea that not only is it *possible* but that the revolution was in the hands of the young and ever since then I believed it always should be so and still do.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tomorrow_People
====
  He’s probably right but it was a much different world then as well.The generally accepted age of majority was 21 at that time but certain responsibilities were expected before then depending on your class, much as we have compulsory education today.Also, it’s possible that if children’s work was taxed (I don’t know if it was) and children were commonly working as of the age of 12, no taxation without representation might have applied along with first amendment rights — had it been challenged.But also, Justice Clarence Thomas would not likely have been on the Supreme Court until post Civil War, long after the era of the Founding Fathers.It still amazes me that fundamentally, to be under the age of majority makes you some form of legal Infante. Read that in the library somewhere around the age of 13/14 in my public library as a kid and I remember how angry I was about the ridiculousness… and disappointed because it explained so much about why kids are considered much differently than adults.
====
  It depends how it’s used. It’s for youth rights in the way of KidCo (often called the only right wing children’s movie ever made) but I’m concerned that it feeds into the illegal immigration agenda and empowerment can turn into abuse if there aren’t protected whistleblowing paths for abuses.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087550/
====
I think the premise of the story is that he started out with airbending but as he travelled with the help of his friends he gained the other three elementals over the course of the 3 year show.I didn’t watch it but I loved the premise. Also just learned it was an AMERICAN show, even though it looked like Japanese anime.
 I tend to like the “idea of things” more than the things themselves. Not watching much of the show kept the mystique alive about it. I’ve known a few people (ok, three) for whom the show was empowering and inspiring to them so I figure there must be something there, even if I wouldn’t be able to see it if I watched it myself.
—-
  hahah that’s maturity talking I think or respect . I went through that with Hunger Games. Knew too many people who saw it as “their book” or “their movie” to feel qualified to pass judgement. By avoiding reading the book and avoiding watching the movie, it keeps me away from that position, such as I have with DUNE where I had a LOT of trouble saying much nice about it once I’d seen it. It was VERY hard for me. I did it, but it was painful.
====
 Good citizenship – it’s something to live. Feels weird even talking about it. To borrow from that Fight Club line (a movie I never saw) “First rule of good manners is not mentioning how good your manners are”
salute
====
 Loosely generally accepted. Online services pick age 13 as “old enough to be responsible”. I say “soft” because I don’t think there’s a country that says “13 is the age of majority” but a lot of corporations consider 13 “old enough” to sign up for services on their own, and if someone is 13 and commits a crime, most people will say “he/she knew what he/she was doing”. That kind of thing.
===

Attachments

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


four × = 12

Leave a Reply