Are we guilty of not seeing things like a kid does?

[Eamonn]

I'm very happy being an adult.

Every now and then I do maybe wish I was 20 years younger.

After kayaking 60 miles I was ready for a total back replacement!

At times I have a problem seeing things the way the youth I serve see them.

I forget that they are not educated the same way that I was.

That some things I seen as being a high priority are not as important as they once were?

I forget that they are exposed to so much more than I was. Some good and some really bad stuff.

Of course this might all just me getting old and not remembering?

Eamonn.

[Gold Winger]

Sure, that's been the case for about 2 zillion years.

 

The problem that I see is that where previous generations went out and discovered fun or were shown fun by the just slightly older (swimming holes, tree climbing, building go-karts, racing trains, picnics, pick up football, etc.) too many of today's youth expect fun to be delivered to them in a pre-pacakged form: video games, amusement parks, laser tag arenas.

 

So we look at something and say either "I remember that being fun" or "That looks like it might be fun" and the youth look and just blink and say "huh?"

[Lem]

The Dangerous Book for boys gives my sons and their buddies the inspiration to do things outside. But I am recruited often to insure that some of the projects get safely under way. I don't feel like a helicopter parent if I help my son and his friends get a tree house under way ( a pretty tricky operation- even for two adults I discovered). But I won't tell them how they should play in their tree house.

 

Us parents supply some material and technical support for the projects of the young.

 

Jeff

[Eamonn]

"too many of today's youth expect fun to be delivered to them in a pre-packaged form: video games, amusement parks, laser tag arenas."

If this is the case?

If we want (I'm not saying that we do!) to affix blame or point the finger? We can't blame the youth, after all we the adults made it this way.

Someone in another thread said that Boy's Life was not as good as it used to be. Today it has more flash and less substance. I haven't really taken a lot of notice, I do know that back in the day when I was at school, the teachers seemed happy to tell us to read X number of chapters and inform us that there would be a test.

Now it seems that kids are entertained by the teaching staff and tests are more about being able to find the information than knowing the right answers.

Again this isn't the fault of the kids.

Eamonn.

 

[evmori]

Some adults made it that way Eamonn. Those who chose to let TV babysit their kids. It makes it tougher for those of us who didn't operate like that!

 

There is nothing inherently wrong with video games. The problem comes into play when video games become more important than other things like talking to people face to face, etc.

[Gold Winger]

You're right, it isn't the fault of the kids. It is the fault of the whole village.

 

Even moms who don't need to work, work for personal satisfaction and leave their children in daycare which isn't a good environment for exploring boundaries.

 

Parents use the TV as a baby sitter.

 

Video games have little or no restrictions on them.

 

Play dates. Years back my son was asked to come over to a friend's house from 1 to 3 PM. Why the restrictions? Because another friend was coming over for the 3-5 slot and he couldn't have two friends there at once. A friend told me that her daughter used to just go next door and knock to see if her friend could come out. The neighbor mom called and said that wasn't acceptable because they might have plans and didn't want to have to tell the little girl "sorry, she can't come out."

 

Parents want to structure the heck out of every activity to the point that far too many kids don't even realize that there is a box, let alone think outside of it.

 

Back to video games. I think that for far too many kids, unbridled access to video games has basically ruined their childhoods.

[AnniePoo]

"Even moms who don't need to work, work for personal satisfaction and leave their children in daycare which isn't a good environment for exploring boundaries."

 

How about dad's who don't need to work, but do for personal satisfaction?

 

 

 

[Gold Winger]

There's a reason that historically mothers took care of the children, they're better qualified.

[Nike]

The reason that mothers traditionally took care of children is because after nine months of pregnancy plus labor, delivery, nursing, and weaning, we're much less likely to kill them.

 

I am frequently accused of not understanding what "Fair" means. I try to see it from his POV, but I'm the mom now and I have way more factors to take into account than just one child's preferences.

[asm 411]

The reason it is so important the Scouts pick the activity is because no matter how cool an adult thinks something is we can not really know. We don't really have their perspective.

 

For instance I really want to go to Philmont. The Scouts in out troop want to go to Sea Base. If I were to do all the up front work for Philmont I could probably get a bunch of them to go but maybe not enough to fill a crew. Perhaps after they go to Sea Base they will want to give Philmont a try. Don't know. For that matter in two years when the ones who are currently too young to go are old enough the preference may be the other way around. Won't know until we ask again next year.

 

Sadly I have have no desire to go to Sea Base but luckily the Scoutmaster would really like to do both.

[IM_Kathy]

>>> "The reason that mothers traditionally took care of children is because after nine months of pregnancy plus labor, delivery, nursing, and weaning, we're much less likely to kill them."