Progress or just spoiled kids?

feralhound55 said:You’ve probably seen the headlines lately about parents complaining because their kids have to sit in classrooms hitting 90 degrees without any AC.

WTF???

I won't even get started on what it was like for me back in the early '90s—walking into crumbling schools with basically nothing. We all know how rough our school conditions used to be.

The real question is: Have we gone overboard with coddling kids? Do they have too much freedom and way too little responsibility? Or am I just starting to sound like my own parents with the whole "back in my day" routine?

More importantly, does this kind of "pampering" have anything to do with the rise in drug use, promiscuity, or even school shootings?

And why is there so little supervision these days? I’m not advocating for physical or psychological abuse, or locking kids in their rooms—I’m just wondering if, as a society, we haven't let things slide a bit too far.

Honestly, that question is rhetorical and pretty stupid. To me, the situation is so catastrophic that when we get old, we won't just be annoyed that kids won't give up their seat on the bus—we'll actually be terrified of them.
There are several reasons for this.
1. Nowadays, parents have zero time. They work all day, and by the time they get home, they're completely burnt out. The easiest way to handle the kids is just to buy them a TV or a PlayStation so they stop bugging you... I read somewhere that in England, parents are buying three-year-olds their own TVs.
2. Women are having their first kids much later now. Someone having a baby at 35 or older isn't really a young mom anymore; they're basically acting like grandmas. And as we all know, grandmas always had way more patience—sometimes infinite patience—so a kid could act out however they wanted. On the flip side, a 21-year-old mom (which used to be the norm) doesn't have the energy for every little tantrum and might actually snap and slap a kid if they push it too far...
3. Just like the world has become more insane, tense, and high-strung, there are more psychopaths out there who should never be allowed to have children or be parents. Of course, kids are just a mirror reflecting those psychopathic parents....
4. Even in preschool, there's this modern version of "socialized upbringing" where teachers aren't allowed to do anything to some shitty kid from a criminal family. A kid can hit people, scream, and cause chaos however they want, while the teacher is only allowed to "redirect their attention." It's the same story in school: kids do whatever they want, and if a teacher finally loses it and does something about it, they risk getting sued by a bunch of psychopathic parents.
5. When I was a kid, I knew I had a Cartoon coming on every single day. Sometimes, if there was a football game on, I knew I might catch another show during halftime. Otherwise, I was outside wandering around, riding my bike, playing with the neighborhood kids... and occasionally (very rarely), I'd spend a few bucks at the arcade. Today, kids have Cartoon and a million other channels, they've got VCRs, obviously they have PCs with endless games, and then some clueless parents go out and buy them a PlayStation on top of that. Kids today spend all day glued to these gadgets. All the games we used to play seem pointless and boring to them; they barely even know how to kick a ball or walk straight......
Because of the idiots who fulfilled their parental duties by buying their son the latest PlayStation, my own son felt frustrated because I refused to buy him something so unnecessary, sick, and idiotic—yet there were his classmates bragging about their PlayStations...
But like I said, there are just too many idiots having kids these days. That's the core issue.

Whether we are discussing school uniforms or even just that old concept of a designated corner for students—which, if I am being honest, could certainly be redesigned with much better taste today—I find myself leaning toward a positive view of such measures. It seems to me that having a standardized look prevents those glaring disparities in wealth among students from being so blatantly obvious through their clothing choices.

amberfox4 said:Whether we are discussing school uniforms or even just that old concept of a designated corner for students—which, if I am being honest, could certainly be redesigned with much better taste today—I find myself leaning toward a positive view of such measures. It seems to me that having a standardized look prevents those glaring disparities in wealth among students from being so blatantly obvious through their clothing choices.

That sounds absolutely terrible to me. People should be allowed to wear whatever they want—no one should be forced into some arbitrary rules or strict dress codes.👍

Emily Robinson4 said:That sounds absolutely terrible to me. People should be allowed to wear whatever they want—no one should be forced into some arbitrary rules or strict dress codes.👍

Personally, I find the whole situation quite acceptable, if only to prevent children from lower-income families from developing deep-seated insecurities caused by their wealthier peers—kids who are often poorly raised and under the impression that they possess greater inherent value simply because their parents insist on dressing them in designer labels for school. This is precisely why I maintain that our own childhoods were far healthier in this regard; back then, the concept of material wealth was virtually non-existent to us, nor did it hold any significant weight, as there was no constant emphasis placed on the socioeconomic disparities between students. As for what happens privately, outside the confines of the classroom, people should be free to dress however they please, but the school itself ought to function primarily as an educational and developmental institution.

I’m all for providing top-tier conditions for learning and education. Truly. But what really gets under my skin is the sheer reality of it all: kids these days just screw around in class. They don't listen, they don't engage, and they won't lift a finger for anyone! It feels like a total waste of taxpayer money to install high-end AC systems for students who couldn't care less, yet we can't ignore those handful of driven individuals who actually show up and put in the work. Those are the ones who deserve the best environment possible. Sure, things used to be subpar and nobody gave a damn back in the day, but times have changed—why shouldn't we aim higher? And yes, let’s be blunt: kids are spoiled. In America, it feels like we’re great at producing children, but we’ve completely failed at raising them. 👎

Paul White9 said:I actually started school at the same time you did. First off, it wasn't nearly as scorching hot back then, and as far as AC goes, almost no buildings had it... or rather, you couldn't even afford it if you wanted to. Air conditioning showed up sometime in the 90s and was insanely expensive, but now it's much more affordable. If you're thirsty, you drink a glass of water; if you're hot, you turn on the AC. My grandfather had absolutely miserable conditions at school compared to what I had, so progress has definitely been made. Why should we halt that progress just because we don't want to look like fools by "spoiling" kids with AC in classrooms?

Our generation definitely had computers—we had the Commodore 64, ZX Spectrum, Amiga 500, and Nintendo consoles long before the PlayStation arrived... so it's not true that we didn't have tech. Cell phones started popping up around '92 or '93. By '94, when we were starting high school, you were a total legend if you owned a phone because they cost like a thousand bucks back then. In elementary school, you were the big man on campus if your friends could come over to play "Commodore." It’s exactly the same dynamic as it is today.

Oh, I would absolutely not agree with you.
My generation didn't have computers (not like everyone has them now—basically everyone has one nowadays), I didn't have access to the internet (my folks finally got it when I was maybe a freshman or sophomore in college—they realized paying for postage was costing more than e-banking). I got a computer around '95—most things I learned through IT class (there were a few of us in class with a computer where we practiced, we studied for tests on the machines at school, explaining things to each other—that was the charm of high school life.
There were 37 of us in my high school class, and out of that, 3 or 4 girls didn't even have a basic phone at home (around the age of 15 to 19), mostly because they lived outside the city limits of Washington, D.C., like in a small town in USA, or some suburb.
I don't remember us taking cell phones on graduation trips (phone cards, landlines, doing homework via phone, etc.).
In an earlier post, I mentioned that AC used to be a luxury, but today it's a necessity.
So yeah, there are massive differences between our generation and the one growing up now.
We played in the yard, out in the street, playing standard games: tag, jump rope, hula hoop, hide and seek, snowball fights, etc.—going to the park, riding bikes, ice skating... whereas today, I'm scared to even walk down the street without getting hit in the head by something (thrown by kids).
I didn't get satellite TV until high school so I could better learn foreign languages since I was studying three of them; I didn't even have a TV in my room, but kids today have TVs in their rooms. We weren't allowed to talk back to our parents; we might have gotten a beating or not, but today those kids report it. And that's how we end up in this endless loop.

Honestly, kids these days are just numb and totally socially awkward.
It’s pretty standard now for elementary schoolers to have smartphones—which, fine, is great for parents wanting to track them—but on the flip side, it’s killing their ability to actually talk to people. I started elementary school back in the early 90s. Even though that wasn't ages ago, most of us didn't even have landlines yet. We used to hang out by literally walking over to a friend's house, ringing the doorbell, and when a parent answered, we'd say, "Hi, is Mark home?" Nowadays, I see kids who have zero social skills. They can't even strike up a conversation. I sell computers on the side, and I get high schoolers coming in all the time, and man, it’s pathetic how few of them can put a sentence together. A lot of them can't even handle basic interaction with a stranger like me—if you just walk up and say, "Hey there, how can I help you?" they practically shrink back in fear. Look, I was awkward too, but I finally grew a pair around 3rd or 4th grade when I had to face my buddy's older brother—this 6'5", 280lb dude with a voice like thunder.

Also, we didn't have a mountain of toys, but what we did have was physical stuff—toy cars, slingshots, bikes, you name it. We were actually developing motor skills. We were racing bikes, making bows and arrows, playing with slingshots. Where do you see kids doing that today? Personally, that's when I actually learned how to handle a screwdriver or any other hand tools. My sister works in a school and she's noticing more and more kids struggling with handwriting because they literally don't know how to grip a pencil—their fine motor skills are shot. These are the kids who just sit at home playing on their PlayStation or PC. In my opinion, parents are failing them here. Don't get me wrong, you shouldn't ban tech entirely—quite the opposite—but you absolutely have to limit it. It shouldn't be the *only* thing they play with.

And then you see these little kids in primary school already acting like they own the road on electric scooters. They're still growing! They need movement and actual activity, not just sitting there scooting around. Not to mention they have zero clue about traffic laws, they don't wear helmets, and they don't even turn on lights at night...

Bryan Watson said:Honestly, kids these days are just numb and totally socially awkward.
It’s pretty standard now for elementary schoolers to have smartphones—which, fine, is great for parents wanting to track them—but on the flip side, it’s killing their ability to actually talk to people. I started elementary school back in the early 90s. Even though that wasn't ages ago, most of us didn't even have landlines yet. We used to hang out by literally walking over to a friend's house, ringing the doorbell, and when a parent answered, we'd say, "Hi, is Mark home?" Nowadays, I see kids who have zero social skills. They can't even strike up a conversation. I sell computers on the side, and I get high schoolers coming in all the time, and man, it’s pathetic how few of them can put a sentence together. A lot of them can't even handle basic interaction with a stranger like me—if you just walk up and say, "Hey there, how can I help you?" they practically shrink back in fear. Look, I was awkward too, but I finally grew a pair around 3rd or 4th grade when I had to face my buddy's older brother—this 6'5", 280lb dude with a voice like thunder.

Also, we didn't have a mountain of toys, but what we did have was physical stuff—toy cars, slingshots, bikes, you name it. We were actually developing motor skills. We were racing bikes, making bows and arrows, playing with slingshots. Where do you see kids doing that today? Personally, that's when I actually learned how to handle a screwdriver or any other hand tools. My sister works in a school and she's noticing more and more kids struggling with handwriting because they literally don't know how to grip a pencil—their fine motor skills are shot. These are the kids who just sit at home playing on their PlayStation or PC. In my opinion, parents are failing them here. Don't get me wrong, you shouldn't ban tech entirely—quite the opposite—but you absolutely have to limit it. It shouldn't be the *only* thing they play with.

And then you see these little kids in primary school already acting like they own the road on electric scooters. They're still growing! They need movement and actual activity, not just sitting there scooting around. Not to mention they have zero clue about traffic laws, they don't wear helmets, and they don't even turn on lights at night...

This is a very insightful post; truly, you have hit the nail right on the head.👍

Alexander Myers30 said:I'm right there with you. The core of the issue is that times are changing; kids are more advanced now, and a seven-year-old often looks and acts like they're thirteen. These days, kids aren't satisfied with anything; if they don't have an Xbox or a PlayStation 2 or some other nonsense, they act like the world is ending.
They're under less supervision because parents are working themselves to death; life moves at such a breakneck pace today that there's just no time for anything else. 😢

Of course they're spread too thin when they're expected to buy three different smartphones for every single kid in the house.☕

Jason Campbell7 said:Look, those are extreme outliers—maybe 0.001% of kids—and using them as an excuse to ban shorts or anything else is honestly ridiculous. Take Japan, for example. Even there, where teen sexuality is a massive social issue and practically a trend, uniforms don't stop anything. If anything, some guys find the uniform look way more appealing than just seeing skin. Thankfully, we're worlds away from that kind of thing here in the States (both literally and figuratively).
Uniforms, if you ask me, only make sense in boarding schools—the kind we don't really have here. You know, places where parents intentionally pay a premium to hand over their child's upbringing to an institution. If that institution runs on strict discipline and the parents are totally on board with that style of parenting (regardless of the potential downsides), then fine, a uniform fits. In those cases, it's mandatory and baked into the tuition, so parents don't even have to worry about food, discipline, clothing, or basically any other need except during school breaks. But doing it this way? It’s just pointless.

Man, you clearly haven't walked through a high school hallway in a long time. My brother is in his junior year right now, but back when the girls were in middle school, they were showing up to class in bikinis and with their backs totally bare. It wasn't some tiny percentage, either. My own high school was full of girls wearing deep necklines and black thongs.

wirednomad67 said:Every single generation has its own version of the "PlayStation 2"—that one thing they think is absolutely essential for survival.
My mom always reminds me: "I bought you a laptop when you were thirteen, was it really such a huge crisis?" As if I didn't fight tooth and nail for my record player back in the day!!!!

Every adult has their own "back in my day, we didn't have that" story.
I look at my cousin—she's 14 and already obsessing over getting a scooter (which she'll definitely get at 16 since they're already paying for her driver's permit)... meanwhile, I was completely blindsided when my mom surprised me with driving lessons for my 18th birthday.

That's just how it goes...

I knew this kid out in California who ended up in a coma (thank God he's okay now) because he was riding a 150cc motorcycle at 14 without a license. His dad bought it for him...

Parents end up buying this kind of junk just to ease their own guilt, and honestly, it’s a total mistake.

Personally, I find it utterly distasteful when parents drag their children to shopping malls instead of taking them to a local park; it seems to me that the adults simply sit there sipping coffee while toddlers, aged anywhere from two to five, are left to run wild in the aisles around 8:00 PM. By that hour, a child should ideally be bathed, tucked into their pajamas, and waiting for their favorite cartoon to start. Now, I am perfectly aware that modern working hours have shifted and people aren't necessarily clocking out at 2:00 or 3:00 anymore—it’s more common to finish around 4:00 or 5:00—but staying up late and engaging in frantic activity until nearly midnight is simply not conducive to a child's well-being. I see this happening even with those who don't work such grueling hours, including stay-at-home mothers. A child requires structure, and there is absolutely no reason for them to be wide awake at 11:00 PM, hyperactively jumping around the house or tossing and turning because they weren't allowed to watch the show they were craving. Since I don't have children of my own, I expect someone will inevitably step in to lecture me and claim I have no idea what I'm talking about, so, fine, let me lecture myself. Perhaps I truly don't know. All I know is that a child's place isn't in cafes or sprawling shopping centers, unless, of course, there is quite literally nowhere else to leave them while running errands for groceries.

Jason Campbell7 said:What kind of school has a garbage principal who won't let kids dress how they want? Back in the old days, we showed up to school however we felt, but now they're trying to apply these "modern" pedagogical trends fueled by some sort of hypocritical moralizing... it's gross.

Back during the old era, my old elementary school had strict dress codes. Girls weren't allowed to wear short pants at all. It was always knee-length skirts paired with white crew socks or tights. We wore blue jumpers and standard black sandals from brands like Crocs or similar. And once you left school, you had to wear that orange scarf around your neck.😛😳😁

For gym class in the lower grades, we wore dark colored leotards, usually with short sleeves. In the higher grades, it was red, blue, or white shorts—the kind that look like briefs—and a mandatory white t-shirt. Boys wore blue or black shorts and a white t-shirt.

I can't say for sure if kids today are spoiled or not. I just know my generation was called spoiled because we wanted boomboxes and cassette tapes instead of old record players.😁Back then, a Pony bike wasn't cool; it was all about the BMX. I could go on forever.

As for the lack of AC in schools... that’s just a reflection of our national standards.

Personally, I think these kids are doing the right thing. Of course, they get labeled as spoiled automatically because they're pointing out the reality of our society and its standards. Nobody likes being told the truth. It’s not surprising. And let's face it, change is hard. Real change comes slow. Sometimes entire generations pass before anything actually shifts.

And naturally, the media jumped on that too.

All those comments from grandmas, grandpas, or parents saying "we managed," well, so can they... to me, that just shows a lack of empathy and twisted values. It’s a way to downplay what these kids are going through and the working conditions for everyone—not just students, but teachers and professors too. This has been happening in America for decades. Then people wonder why our education system is struggling. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Back in high school, we were told we were spoiled whenever we complained about the heat or the fact that there was no heating half the time because the district didn't have the budget for fuel. We'd hear how everyone else just dealt with it while the wood stoves were running.😁But even then, some of those teachers would admit they were freezing, and it was obvious they didn't want to be teaching in a cold classroom either.

Instead of trying to give the next generation the best possible start, we send them this message that they haven't "earned" having AC installed in their schools. It’s basically: "Screw you, we survived without it, so you will too." That’s our investment in the future. These same young people will one day raise their own children. That’s what our societal values look like today. It’s crazy when you think about it.

🙂

I suppose it’s just one of those things, but it really feels like we shouldn't be footing the bill for congressional parking.

Even some of the most bloated counties and towns... have the best parks... but since they lack daycare centers or the budget for new ones... or even paying staff... it doesn't matter. That's entirely on the people living in those cities. It's exactly my point... if parents don't feel the need to change things... we shouldn't tell the next generation to just deal with it and suck it up.🙂

amberfox4 said:Personally, I find the whole situation quite acceptable, if only to prevent children from lower-income families from developing deep-seated insecurities caused by their wealthier peers—kids who are often poorly raised and under the impression that they possess greater inherent value simply because their parents insist on dressing them in designer labels for school. This is precisely why I maintain that our own childhoods were far healthier in this regard; back then, the concept of material wealth was virtually non-existent to us, nor did it hold any significant weight, as there was no constant emphasis placed on the socioeconomic disparities between students. As for what happens privately, outside the confines of the classroom, people should be free to dress however they please, but the school itself ought to function primarily as an educational and developmental institution.

Uniform or not... kids (and adults too) will always find ways to show off... it's just human nature...🙂

A uniform itself doesn't primarily exist to bridge social gaps. It's more about showing belonging to a group, a school, or a community. It's for organization, discipline, and building work habits. Everything else follows after that.🙂

Wasn't the school year starting around mid-September (or maybe a little later 😁) just a few years back? Before they added those spring breaks or whatever else they've tacked onto the calendar alongside winter break...

Sarah James4 said:Uniform or not... kids (and adults too) will always find ways to show off... it's just human nature...🙂

A uniform itself doesn't primarily exist to bridge social gaps. It's more about showing belonging to a group, a school, or a community. It's for organization, discipline, and building work habits. Everything else follows after that.🙂

I suppose that's true, though I would argue that so much of this ultimately hinges on how a child is raised at home. A kid isn't going to feel the need to flaunt their wealth or compete over status if they were raised with proper values and haven't been exposed to toxic examples by their parents. In my view, children are most often just a reflection of the environment their parents have created.