The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
This just in: Mr. Rogers corrupted our youth!
Hi I'm Vee!
Formerly VH; She/Her; Is an E X P E R I E N C ERegistered User regular
Formerly VH; She/Her; Is an E X P E R I E N C ERegistered User regular
I'm aware that this story is a bit old, but I haven't seen anything on it in D&D besides a few posts in one of the [chat]s, so I thought I'd bring it up for discussion.
A quick summary: A finance professor named Don Chance at LSU claims that Mr. Rogers is to blame for a sense of entitlement among college students these days.
The article.
Some excerpts:
Who should pick up on this but Fox News? They spent a good amount of time discussing what a horrible influence Mr. Rogers was.
As for my opinion, I thought the Fox News report was disgusting and hateful, to be honest. Instead of just reporting on it (even with an incredibly biased opinion), the commentators basically poked fun at him, one of them even calling him evil (jokingly, of course). But then, I've come to expect this kind of behavior from Fox News, and I'm willing to admit that I might be being a little oversensitive about it (the reason for which will become apparent later).
The Fox News report mentions a study by this LSU professor, but I wasn't able to find any actual study he did besides drawing conclusions based on his observations of his students. So clearly, using the study as "proof" of his conjecture is ludicrous. I'm not sure about the validity of the San Diego State study referenced in the article, I was unable to find it (my google-fu is weak).
However, aside from the hyperbole and idiocy, it's possible that these people have a point. Did Mr. Rogers really contribute to a feeling of entitlement among his viewers? Is he solely or partially responsible for this apparent trend, or is he not responsible at all?
My thoughts:
I'll go ahead and come out and say that Mr. Rogers is one of my heroes. I honestly believe that he was one of the kindest, most good-hearted, generous people to live since Jesus Christ (assuming he existed). This is why I couldn't finish the youtube video the first time I saw it, because I had literally gone temporarily blind with rage (seriously, I couldn't see for, like, five seconds). The thought of how anybody could treat so poorly the memory of this man makes me want to do things the mere mention of which on an internet forum would cause the FBI agents monitoring my computer to raid my house and take me to an underground detention facility where I would be denied a lawyer and basic rights and tried by a military tribunal. So it's entirely possible, even likely, that my opinion is heavily biased.
That being said, I don't believe that Mr. Rogers is the cause of this much-touted "feeling of entitlement" among students today. I think that not only was Mr. Rogers not a bad influence, he was in fact a very good influence on child development. Mr. Rogers came at a time when children in general were treated with a "seen and not heard" mentality. My mother and father both have told me about their childhood, and while they certainly weren't mistreated (my grandparents are very nice people), there was little to no outlet for talking out their feelings and frustrations. Mr. Rogers changed all that. In contrast to the attitude that children were little more than glorified pets, Mr. Rogers let children know that they were unique and, yes, special. He gave them an outlet for their emotions, letting them know, in essence, that not only is it okay to have feelings, it's normal.
It's entirely possible that a child growing up with only Mr. Rogers for guidance might end up with a feeling of entitlement. Fortunately, that's a situation that the majority of children do not have to endure. See, we have these things called "parents", two adults that are supposed to provide support, direction, and context. Children don't grow up in a vacuum. Parents should be telling their children that, yes, they are special, but work ethic and a good attitude are integral to their existence in our society. Mr. Rogers fills a niche; he's not a parent. He accomplished his goal, which was to give children self-esteem, a critical aspect of any child's development. In my opinion, this whole idea is just one more way to remove responsibility from the parents.
I hate to use anecdotal evidence, but I think it's relevant here. I watched Mr. Rogers all the time when I was growing up. He made me feel good about myself, even though I was constantly picked on in kindergarten and elementary school. My parents encouraged this feeling in me, leading to the intensely self-confident individual I am today. But have no doubt, self-indulgent, spoiled behavior was not tolerated in my parents' household. Any petulance was quickly met with punishment, whether it was taking away something I enjoyed, confining me to my room or the chair in the living room, or even just dealing with frosty glares and the silent treatment from my mother. Even now, I don't feel entitled to anything; I know that if I don't get something, it's usually because I didn't try hard enough. I'm not saying that the techniques my parents used with me should be applied universally (although I could argue that they should). What I am saying is that it is certainly possible for a child to have a good self-esteem without feeling entitled.
tldr: A professor from LSU blames Mr. Rogers for a feeling of entitlement among college students. Fox News picks it up and says horrible things about him.
Topics for discussion (pick any or all):
1. Does this "feeling of entitlement" actually exist? Can someone find that study so we can scrutinize it?
2. Assuming it does exist, how much of an effect did Mr. Rogers have on it? Is he solely responsible, partially responsible, or not responsible at all? Why?
3. Do you feel that more and more, parents are finding other influences to blame for behavior in children when truly the responsibility lies with the parents? Is Mr. Rogers just the next Doom or GTA?
4. What the fuck, Fox News? You had to pick on Mr. Rogers?
A quick summary: A finance professor named Don Chance at LSU claims that Mr. Rogers is to blame for a sense of entitlement among college students these days.
The article.
Some excerpts:
The Wall Street Journal wrote:Don Chance, a finance professor at Louisiana State University, says it dawned on him last spring. The semester was ending, and as usual, students were making a pilgrimage to his office, asking for the extra points needed to lift their grades to A's.
"They felt so entitled," he recalls, "and it just hit me. We can blame Mr. Rogers."
Fred Rogers, the late TV icon, told several generations of children that they were "special" just for being whoever they were. He meant well, and he was a sterling role model in many ways. But what often got lost in his self-esteem-building patter was the idea that being special comes from working hard and having high expectations for yourself.
Now Mr. Rogers, like Dr. Spock before him, has been targeted for re-evaluation. And he's not the only one. As educators and researchers struggle to define the new parameters of parenting, circa 2007, some are revisiting the language of child ego-boosting. What are the downsides of telling kids they're special? Is it a mistake to have children call us by our first names? When we focus all conversations on our children's lives, are we denying them the insights found when adults talk about adult things?
...
Signs of narcissism among college students have been rising for 25 years, according to a recent study led by a San Diego State University psychologist. Obviously, Mr. Rogers alone can't be blamed for this. But as Prof. Chance sees it, "he's representative of a culture of excessive doting."
Prof. Chance teaches many Asian-born students, and says they accept whatever grade they're given; they see B's and C's as an indication that they must work harder, and that their elders assessed them accurately. They didn't grow up with Mr. Rogers or anyone else telling them they were born special.
By contrast, American students often view lower grades as a reason to "hit you up for an A because they came to class and feel they worked hard," says Prof. Chance. He wishes more parents would offer kids this perspective: "The world owes you nothing. You have to work and compete. If you want to be special, you'll have to prove it."
Who should pick up on this but Fox News? They spent a good amount of time discussing what a horrible influence Mr. Rogers was.
As for my opinion, I thought the Fox News report was disgusting and hateful, to be honest. Instead of just reporting on it (even with an incredibly biased opinion), the commentators basically poked fun at him, one of them even calling him evil (jokingly, of course). But then, I've come to expect this kind of behavior from Fox News, and I'm willing to admit that I might be being a little oversensitive about it (the reason for which will become apparent later).
The Fox News report mentions a study by this LSU professor, but I wasn't able to find any actual study he did besides drawing conclusions based on his observations of his students. So clearly, using the study as "proof" of his conjecture is ludicrous. I'm not sure about the validity of the San Diego State study referenced in the article, I was unable to find it (my google-fu is weak).
However, aside from the hyperbole and idiocy, it's possible that these people have a point. Did Mr. Rogers really contribute to a feeling of entitlement among his viewers? Is he solely or partially responsible for this apparent trend, or is he not responsible at all?
My thoughts:
I'll go ahead and come out and say that Mr. Rogers is one of my heroes. I honestly believe that he was one of the kindest, most good-hearted, generous people to live since Jesus Christ (assuming he existed). This is why I couldn't finish the youtube video the first time I saw it, because I had literally gone temporarily blind with rage (seriously, I couldn't see for, like, five seconds). The thought of how anybody could treat so poorly the memory of this man makes me want to do things the mere mention of which on an internet forum would cause the FBI agents monitoring my computer to raid my house and take me to an underground detention facility where I would be denied a lawyer and basic rights and tried by a military tribunal. So it's entirely possible, even likely, that my opinion is heavily biased.
That being said, I don't believe that Mr. Rogers is the cause of this much-touted "feeling of entitlement" among students today. I think that not only was Mr. Rogers not a bad influence, he was in fact a very good influence on child development. Mr. Rogers came at a time when children in general were treated with a "seen and not heard" mentality. My mother and father both have told me about their childhood, and while they certainly weren't mistreated (my grandparents are very nice people), there was little to no outlet for talking out their feelings and frustrations. Mr. Rogers changed all that. In contrast to the attitude that children were little more than glorified pets, Mr. Rogers let children know that they were unique and, yes, special. He gave them an outlet for their emotions, letting them know, in essence, that not only is it okay to have feelings, it's normal.
It's entirely possible that a child growing up with only Mr. Rogers for guidance might end up with a feeling of entitlement. Fortunately, that's a situation that the majority of children do not have to endure. See, we have these things called "parents", two adults that are supposed to provide support, direction, and context. Children don't grow up in a vacuum. Parents should be telling their children that, yes, they are special, but work ethic and a good attitude are integral to their existence in our society. Mr. Rogers fills a niche; he's not a parent. He accomplished his goal, which was to give children self-esteem, a critical aspect of any child's development. In my opinion, this whole idea is just one more way to remove responsibility from the parents.
I hate to use anecdotal evidence, but I think it's relevant here. I watched Mr. Rogers all the time when I was growing up. He made me feel good about myself, even though I was constantly picked on in kindergarten and elementary school. My parents encouraged this feeling in me, leading to the intensely self-confident individual I am today. But have no doubt, self-indulgent, spoiled behavior was not tolerated in my parents' household. Any petulance was quickly met with punishment, whether it was taking away something I enjoyed, confining me to my room or the chair in the living room, or even just dealing with frosty glares and the silent treatment from my mother. Even now, I don't feel entitled to anything; I know that if I don't get something, it's usually because I didn't try hard enough. I'm not saying that the techniques my parents used with me should be applied universally (although I could argue that they should). What I am saying is that it is certainly possible for a child to have a good self-esteem without feeling entitled.
tldr: A professor from LSU blames Mr. Rogers for a feeling of entitlement among college students. Fox News picks it up and says horrible things about him.
Topics for discussion (pick any or all):
1. Does this "feeling of entitlement" actually exist? Can someone find that study so we can scrutinize it?
2. Assuming it does exist, how much of an effect did Mr. Rogers have on it? Is he solely responsible, partially responsible, or not responsible at all? Why?
3. Do you feel that more and more, parents are finding other influences to blame for behavior in children when truly the responsibility lies with the parents? Is Mr. Rogers just the next Doom or GTA?
4. What the fuck, Fox News? You had to pick on Mr. Rogers?
Hi I'm Vee! on
0
Posts
I don't really think this is an earth-shattering revelation.
Is Mr. Rogers to blame for it? No, he's just a tool. While he was one of the first to adopt this principle of everyone is special, he wasn't the only one, and I honestly believe he had the best of intentions at heart. But as they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
And fuck yes parents are looking for anything to blame their kid's shitty attitude on. God forbid they ever accept it's just them being shitty parents - after all, they're part of the generation that started brainwashing this one into believing we're all special unique snowflakes. Would you expect anything else?
From what I've seen it's pretty much been accepted that telling children they're special is a very bad thing. I remember the major wake up call was around '01 when the school shootings started to spike. Since then, I've noticed that my nephews' books don't try to tell them how special everyone is. They stick to basic facts like bananas are yellow, cars are fast, and purple octopusses can't be fucking trusted.
I keep thinking of Fight Club right now. I forget the exact scene, or the exact lines, but I believe Brad Pitt is standing outside the house yelling into a mega-phone "You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake, you are all part of the same rotting compost heap." I don't really have a point here, it just felt appropriate to bring it up.
Sorry. I really wanted to add more to the debate. I had this long, well thought out, grammatically-correct post typed up but it just made me sound like a self-loathing prick. The only part of it that I feel is truly necessary at this point is the following: 'Fuck hippies.'
whaaaat
No. I've spent most of college feeling like the all-singing, all-dancing crap of the world. I feel like if I've ever developed a sense of narcissism, it was as a short-lived escapist fantasy borne of self loathing and shitty sci-fi novels, not the consequence of a coddling parental figure; that I don't hold my teachers' assessments of me as paramount is an act of rebellion, not entitlement.
edit: beat'd to the Fight Club reference
No idea if this is a new occurrence, but it's pretty embarrassing. Oh, and does [x] in the media lead to [y] in the classroom? Likely, no.
Maybe it's arrogance.
If he thought, "Hey my students are fuckwads ", he's much more likely to determine " Yes, my students are douchebags and heres what made them that way ".
I think it's more a problem of immediate gratification and the me me me now now now impulses that are fulfilled on a daily basis.
What was underneath that sweater?
the world may never know.
Tattoos.
Not joking.
Maybe this is just a scheme. Maybe this is just another ploy to make us think we're special by blaming our sense of entitlement on someone else.
It's a revolving cycle, man.
god I want some funyons.
edit: stupid double post the first one timed out and wasn't here hwen I got back and goddamnit this isn't my fault.
Grandstanding cynicism, as conceited as the belief it vilifies. Like most great quotes, it's wonderful writing, but shitty philosophy.
The beautiful-and-unique-snowflake is often used as a sort of overzealous and naive preschool teacher strawman, but honestly I think it's an apt metaphor. We all start out in the same place, and when the shouting's over we'll all wind up in the same place too. In between, though?
It's pretty windy up there. You probably won't wind up where you thought you'd be. But never let anyone tell you what you are.
This is my snowflake. There are many like it, but this one is mine. And that makes it special.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062588/episodes#season-1
33 years. And according to imdb, they're still broadcasting episodes on PBS. Pretty amazing.
Oh wait, that's just Narcissism and self absorption to the extreme.
Marty nailed this one shut.
No college kid watched Mr. Rogers, that's so 80's
Many college kids today were born in the 80's...
2007 - 18 = 1989
Almost ALL college students these days were born in the 80s.
(Take that!)
But seriously, if you've ever worked a service sector job you'll quickly realize just how many people do have an entitlement mentality. It's not confined to college kids, or high school kids. It's everyhwere. People deserve the extra mile, all the time. Well guess what? If everyone gets the extra mile, it's not EXTRA anymore. It's just the same distance as everyone else. Suddenly, you're no longer special. Again. Once that settles in, you want a little bit more. And then everyone does, and gets it, and...
It's a cycle of stupid that has led to people having unreasonable expectations of everyone around them. Register jockeys at any given store are treated like they are directly responsible for high-level failings of their employer. Retail employees get treated like sub-humans, because they haven't bent over and dropped their pants for every customer that walks in the door. Instructors get branded as "unfair" and "mean" because they refuse to curve grades (and interestingly it's the students with the 69s and 78s that complain, rarely the 89s, never the 80s and the 91s. Those who suffer from themselves, bitch the loudest about it).
Hell, have you talked to a high school age kid about cops lately? My brother, intelligent and mild-mannered as he is, starts making oinking noises and saying "I smell bacon" when we see a cop car. A friend's girlfriend graduated from high school in May, and I listened to one of the most surreal and disturbing discussions about what they think cops really like to do with kids.
Anyone in any position of authority or responsibility has been gradually getting the bar raised right up their asshole for the last couple decades. It is not a problem you can blame on any single or collective media, rather a symptom of... something else that I don't think I can put into words. But yeah, people feel entitled to treatment well above and beyond what's reasonable.
Being raised by parents who insist that you're special, and bend to your every whim, probably engenders a lot of this. What with it being relatively easy for parents to be child-pleasers much of the time (compared to being a disciplinarian and putting up with the crying), I'm not shocked. Those pampered children grow up to be parents in the same style, and it continues until every human being on the planet doesn't understand the word "no."
Oh I think it does get worse with each successive generation, because if I'm right about [pampered kids -> pampering parents -> pampered kids] it's just a positive feedback cycle.
Doesn't mean every generation born since the 50s hasn't been doing it to some degree, though. And if we recognize that the problem is becoming more widespread with each generation, then we can find the factors leading to it, and if we can't fix it we can at least raise awareness about it, leading to slower growth of the problem.
But Mr. Rogers? Give me a fucking break. The only bad thing he ever taught kids was that wearing sweaters is acceptable.
And yes, I grew up watching Mr. Rogers on PBS, and I'm 17.
There's so much more to it than that, though. You've got plenty of cases where pampered kids make terrible parents because they were pampered, or pampered kids that made pampering parents because they were pampered.
I think it has something to do with modern parenting styles, but I think it has more to do with the fact that, in this society, we've created this concept of childhood and child-like behavior that is worry-free and almost completely unbound to any other person. I blame that because that seems to be the ideal in this country. Mr. Rogers has nothing to do with it, and his message was more amicable that culpable.
Seriously, think about the last time somebody talked about how things are "destroying our youth." One of the more frequent arguments is that something, be it drugs, video games, etc. removes these kids from their child world and thrusts them into the adult world. People say it's not natural, and that kids need to be allowed to be kids. I call bullshit on that whenever I hear it, because up until the late 40's, there wasn't really a concept of childhood to speak of, other than working as soon as you were physically able. I don't think we should revert to that, but children weren't ever given this near-absolute freedom and wish fulfillment that is the ideal in our culture.
I guess that means it's a relic of the baby boomers. That's the first time in American history, probably in the history of the world, where children and teenagers appeared as a powerful consumer market. Their disposable income brought a pretty significant boost to the economy, so I wouldn't doubt that this trend has something to do with that, and the relative freedom children receive in this regard.
I don't know, maybe so, maybe no, I'm not really tied to those theories, but that's what you all are here for, right? Tear it up.
Clearly you eat too much pudding.
Know what else is to blame? America. Rugged individualism, unalienable rights, etc. Unemployed? Collect some money. Have kids? A tax break. Broke your legs? Sue. College? Scholarships.
And being born in the 80s is not enough to just make you an 80s kid. Anyone born after 1985 would have been too much of an infant to really be affected by the 80s.
MWO: Adamski
Especially the poor people. Some people think they deserve all the same benefits as the rich. Everytime a rich guy has an advantage over a poor guy because of money I often hear people say something like "O well we should have something equivalent for the poor guy to balance things out". No you don't.
Thats either pretty funny, or REALLY funny - depending on how you meant it.
Are you completely insane? Who in this world could pay cash on their own without parental help for higher education? Or are you suggesting that all college students ought to live with huge debt from loans?
Funny; the US possibly has the least upward mobility and generalized services of any first-world nation. Going along with your premise, US kids would feel less entitled than those of the rest of the developed world.
Also, your philosophy that "things like college and social insurance and incentive tax breaks are only for the rich" is perverse.