the funny thing is that when your young you do not realise how important it is to do well in school. Yes your parents tell you that till their blue in the face but when your young you feel that all grown ups are just dumb asses to be ignored!! hehehe lol, sad but true

Very true

I remeber when I used to listen to my parents, those were very boring days of studying and reading and bleh.

Hey now, no reason to go and hit me below the belt there Oz... The gray hairs I can deal with (although the ones 'cropping up' in my private areas have me baffled to say the least) but that turning Republican stuff there, that hurts!
Honestly though Oz, my political views aren't relegated to choosing one particular party. All are the same, just different ways of going about it, that's all. I would like to think that I would vote for the 'best candidate', regardless of party affiliation.

Same here Oz, but different in that ANY interview I have been to they have explicitly focused on the '4 pages long' and 'worked everywhere' aspects, never looking at my experience but at my "inability to commit to an employer" as most have said in one way or another. Almost all of my 'career changes' were prompted by better opportunity, or at least the probability of better opportunity available, not for any other reasons. This has seemed to hurt me in my 'career' more than helped. I figured being well rounded in job skills would be a benefit, not an albatross. Maybe it's just my 'region', being in/around Pittsburgh, and not necessarily me.
Regardless, the food service industry is where to be if you can't deal with the health care industry. I myself 'thought' I wanted to be a chef and I devoted four years of high school to the cause in the form of offered electives. Even signed up with the Culinary Institute of Pittsburgh but never followed through as the call of the automotive world sounded. Strange though, seems everyone I've encountered in either field has at one time or another been in the opposite, i.e. most cooks are 'mechanics' and most mechanics are 'cooks'. Weird huh?

That's kind of what I did. It isn't easy.

The hardest thing about being a parent is watching your kids make the same mistakes you made. But your parents have probably already told you that.



Oh, that's just too much information, as well as a scary mental picture!   
But that salt & pepper look will probably match your maid's outfit...



I haven't had that be a problem, but foodservice is a high-turnover industry. Two years in this business is a long time in one position. I know that isn't true everywhere.



The foodservice industry is where to be if you can't deal with the real world. I've described it more than once as "The Island of Misfit Toy". I love my job and I can't imagine being trapped in a cubicle all day (like my wife) but, boy, there are some wacky people in this business. And almost all of them originally wanted to do something else.

So then I assume you have seen the movie "Waiting"? If not, rent it, buy it, do whatever to see it... you will DEFINITELY appreciate it even if they do 'over dramatize' a bit... maybe.
Most assuredly shows what life is like in the food service biz from the workers point of view, comedy style not documentary of course!

And the topic of the post is "The Kidnapping of My Fear" so...

hey hey! i work in higher education! i'm an administrator at UC San Diego, which is also where i received my BA. i came out with about $35k in debt. i worked crap temp jobs for a year, but once i had some work experience built up, i landed a pretty decent job back on campus.

anyway, part of the problem here is how people think of education in this country. they often conflate it with what i'd rather call vocational training. the root philosophy behind education is NOT career advancement; it was englightenment. some European models are much better, having separate intitutions for vocational vs. academic schooling.

the UC was designed from the get-go to be a research university, while the Cal State system was more focused on vocational training. but the UC is "better," which leaves many students and parents with the impression that it'll secure their kids with better jobs. it's simply not the case, even in hard science fields. a friend of mine graduated with a BS in molecular biochemistry and spent over a year working under the table at a cactus farm before landing a lab assistant position.

the sad thing is, i see these 18-year-olds coming in and hating the experience. they only care about sliding through and making some money. they're already pretty spoiled, too. only about 60% of students here get a job during their time, and usually then it's for partying, not bills. and the average family income here was $85k several years ago. these are spoiled, money-hungry kids. which is fine, except it detracts from those students who are here to learn. and it also makes me sad because i think most people would love learning if they weren't so focused on jobs they don't have yet.

for what it's worth, i wasn't one of the spoiled kids. i came from a dysfunctional working class family. i just wanted to get away from them at that age, and i know college would be the easiest way for me to do it. so in high school, besides getting good grades, i was senior class president, captain of the academic decathalon, under secretary general of the model U.N., played sport for two years, and participated in a half dozen clubs. throw in a 3.9 GPA and a 1510 on my SATs, and you've got a fair picture of what the "average" university student needs to go through to get in to a school like this... all for an illusion. (well, my freshman year the average incomming GPA was 4.2, weighted for honors classes, and a 1250 SAT, but you get the picture, and both figures have gone up since then).

but there's more.



well, yes and no. many of our universities are making money for industry. one of my profs called it "the university-industrial complex." a lot of university funding comes from the federal government, but a lot of it also comes from grants (public and private). large private grants usually come from wealthy individuals (often interested in the arts) or corporations (usually interested in profitable sciences - biology, material science, computer and information technology). the discoveries and education of budding young scientists benefits industry, of course. but the problem with this is that many universities that fall into this end up emphasizing these hard sciences and de-emphasizing the social sciences, liberal and fine arts.

but even outside of those fields, there's a game being played. universities gain prestige when their faculty publish new discoveries or works (in all fields), and this results in an emphasis on research over teaching. further more, each discipline develops a kind of insularity - the "quality" of the knowledge matters above all else, even above use-value. so for exaple, sociologists who tend to care deeply about the state of society end up sealing themselves from the public in a rigorous technical jargon; it's where we get all these twenty-five cent words. we try to "reach out" to the public, but no one cares because it sounds like we're talking down. it's the ivory tower effect, and it's damn hard to avoid.

amidst all this, actual education ends up low on the list of priorities for educational institutions. this is despite the fact that many professors care deeply about teaching. it becomes a struggle against the bureaucracy and bullsh*t.

Is this truly 'fine' by you Dystopic? I am not trying to chastise in the least, I just wanted clarification if it was more or less said in a 'conversation' sense or if you truly feel that these kids and the way they are/act is 'okay'. Being an administrator at an educational institution I would think that this kind of attitude and upbringing would be something that upsets you, especially if you are in any kind of a position to help shape their minds to make them functioning, helpful and respectful people vs. money grubbing hogs who want nothing more than to get what is theirs.

I kind of thought you would disagree - no offense.



I think that is exactly right. College is sold to the kids, and to the parents, as a means to an end, as a road to a better job, not as a mind-expanding experience. Frankly I think we would be better off with a year or two of mandatory public service after high school and then have college. I don't mean military service, neccessarily - just some sort of public service work. That might help them figure out what they might like to do with their lives.

I didn't know what I wanted to do with my life when I was 18. I doubt that they do, either.



What? There's more to life than just money?   

If we could find a way to teach the kids this lesson we would have solved one of the problems of the world.



Good point. I hadn't thought of it that way.



And we wonder why popular culture is dumbing down...



You've probably seen this as an administrator - so much of what attracts us to the job often gets lost in the grind of getting things done.

As a parent, it isn't to Dystopic to decide. I should decide if its OK to raise money-hungry kids, and I hope I'm not. But I'm probably not going to be pushing my kids into a high-profile school as a future career move. I can't afford it.

Good point Oz, good point. Sometimes my mind just 'assumes' that maybe it is acceptable for us to help 'guide' people in certain situations, especially when on the path of morality, even if we aren't 'the parents'.
Hell, Lord knows there are enough people out there willing to steer the kids the wrong way so why shouldn't we be willing to steer them 'the right way', regardless of whether or not they listen to us.

Yeah, but that's the thinking that got us into Iraq!   

oh yea! the cycle continues.... hmm well free will is all well and good except when you try to tell your kids somthing!! hehehe

on a personal level i find them about as pleasant as putrid meat.

but as i've said, i'm not willing to object on a public level to the pursuit of wealth as long as it doesn't come at the cost of others' wellbeing, and perferably with a curved tax in place that will support the lowest members of society.



and that'd be the other half of it.



this is another big debate: to what extent is it up to the majority, the constitution, etc., to determine how our kids are raised? the teaching of creationism in public schools; sex ed; video game violence; the new skin culture on MTV; and advertising.

we like to say that deciding these things is up to the parents, but in a society where parents have less and less time to spend with their kids, i think it's a vitally important thing to think about. i was lucky that my mom was able to stay home by starting a home-based childcare business - not just because my mom was always home, but because i was also exposed to a lot of different parents during that time.

...it's funny how we think of children as possessions in some ways. you see what seems to be a man robbing a store, and you might be likely to do something about it. you see what seems like a parent hitting their child past the point of discipline, possible child abuse in progress, and you just sit there feeling awkward. well, that's my sense of things anyway.

We have made sacrifices so one of us would always be home. My wife worked nights for five years so she could be home during the day. We felt that was just part of parenting. It is a problem that our society often doesn't value these sacrifices.



It isn't, and it shouldn't be. But I remember a sense of commenality when I was in grade school, a sense that everybody's parents would have the same rules as mine, that I don't see today. My wife works in our local grade school and is stunned at the different attitudes and expectations that the parents bring to school. I don't remember that 30 years ago.

Ah now this is tricky! Personally i think it should be up to the majority to determine how our kids are raised. This is because it is society who has to recieve children when they grow up. So if you do a crappy job as a parent, who suffers? yes other members of society suffer the consequenses of your bad parenting. In my books that gives society a right to have a say in what you are doing as a parent.

Society isn't going to be raising my daughter and it had better not try. That is mine and my wifes duty, responsibility and privilege. This most definitely includes protecting my daughter from the aspects of society that my wife and I deem inappropriate until such time as we think she is old enough to handle them or old enough to learn why they are damaging/bad. Society doesn't care about my daughter beyond makings sure she isn't trouble for it. It doesn't sacrifice for her, it doesn't love her. I do. I care more than anyone else other than my wife.

Who really suffers if we do a crappy job of parenting? My daughter first and foremost! My wife and myself second. Society is a distant and barely visible third.

I have been right enough times when I was the only one in the room to hold an opinion that I feel very comfortable about it. I have been this way since early grade school (yes I was a pain in the *** even then). I want her to be the same way. I want her to be that way because I have helped her shape her mind in such a way that she is not vulnerable to group-think, poor data or poor reasoning. This runs contrary to all the goals of a society. The goal of a society inevitably becomes to teach conformity to the group. It does this by curtailing thought.

You don't believe me? Take a really good look at what is taught in our schools. How much of it is really reading/writing/arithmetic? How much constitutes political thought or parroting of views? I would guess over half of my education was that way, and it has only gotten worse. Most people even lack a sufficiently detached viewpoint to even see it.

I should trust my child to these people?

If you put society behind the private doors, eventually it will try to rule the thought behind the doors. By eventually, I mean you will start to see this in three to six months! Say "Hi!" to the real police state!

Just look at political parties. I can speak for the U.S. Most Republicans and most Democrats (capital R and D) who are strongly party affiliated do NOT think, but have blind allegiance. You want to test this? Ask them to name three things about which they have significant disagreements with the party and why. Everyone should have at least that many points of contention. Most will not have one. And the "reasoning" for why will make your head hurt.

Once again, I should trust my child to these people? They have jobs...And politically active people desperately want to get a hold of children so they can indoctrinate them. Who do you think would make rules for how society intervenes?

The only interest "society" should take in what happens behind my door is just making sure nothing abusive is happening. I barely trust it to do that (meaning I think it fails to do this properly a significant amount of the time). Anything beyond that is an absolute invasion of privacy and I will fight to prevent it as best I can. This, to me, is a basic freedom. It is one of the problems I have with Socialism and many of the other so called liberal causes in the world....I use the phase so called liberal cause, because any cause that removes/restricts the rights and privileges of the individual is not really a liberal cause...Especially in the classical sense.

The biggest danger we face is the enslavement of the mind to some form of meme that actively suppresses thinking.

Given that most people don't think, it's really not that hard to do. The best antidote is millions of people who don't buy group-think for any side, any political party, any activist group, but millions of people who ask for the data, who want to know how the surveys where conducted, who want the whole line of reasoning and who think slogans are useless.

I believe this kind of thinking can only occur in an individual who has parents who are regularly and personally involved in their child. In people who read and understand history, philosophy, and civics (and other topics). Without these things you can be swayed by the latest modern day "prophet" (in the non-religious sense). All things our schools do a poor job of teaching. All subjects that should be studied for life.

My rant for the night!

Again, wow guys. Sorry I wasn't too clear on what I meant as I was really only thinking about it on a very 'low key' level. If I see a bunch of kids shooting out windows with a BB gun I think that I should say something, not as a parent or 'authority figure' but just as a person. Simple things like the scenario I just mentioned... not what is taught in school and such, as I DO believe those are things that involve the parents and the parents alone, not society. Anymore it seems that people ignore what kids do and that scares me, not to some level where I lock my doors and hide behind the curtains, but to a level where I worry what things are going to be like if and when the younger generations 'take over'.
To comment on the child/spouse abuse... would I step in? My friends and I have done so in the past but that was during the eighties, which was a 'different' time since these issues were just 'coming to light' in a sense. But that was then, when you still weren't sued for trying to do the right thing. Now however, unfortunately, I have too much to lose to involve myself in someone else's affairs, regardless of the situation. Obviously if it was something life threatening and extreme my decisions might be different but for the most part, society and the legal system/law enforcement have pretty much made my mind up for me to stay out of someone's business regardless of right or wrong.

Amen, Purge. The day the parenting police come knocking on my door is the day I head to Ruby Ridge with some automatic weapons. Parenting is the toughest job you'll ever have, but you can't contract it out.



Now, Stormbringer has a good point. When there was a basic shared expectation of behavior any adult would tell a kid to stop throwing rocks or whatever. Now there is a "Hey, that's not my kid" attitude.

Did you see the story about the mom in Florida who got on a school bus to encourage her daughter to get in a fight? What do you do about that?

I actually view this as different. If a kid is shooting a BB gun out the window, or something else that is destructive or annoying to other individuals, it's no longer behind the private door, but in the public space. I would hope that someone brings the behavior to the attention of the parents first, if at all possible. But if not, it's perfectly reasonable interfere and let them know they are behaving in a delinquent fashion...

The threat of a lawsuit hanging over you in this situation is unreasonable (not as in wrong, but as in it shouldn't need to be) and is born out of the "my childern right or wrong attitude"...Which is itself wrong. The goal of a parent shouldn't be to indulge a child, it should be to raise the best adult possible. I'm not sure how to correct the parents attitude in this case. They probably never really finished growing up themselves. I think, in general, the kids behavior will tend to be self correcting the first time life slaps them down...Unless you are Paris Hilton!

Jail time. Creating a Public Disturbance at a minimum.

Well, not really.

If a kid is completely catered to and shielded from injury and made to feel as if he is the center of the universe, as we so often do, when life slaps them down they cry and complain that it isn't fair and sulk and pout. That's OK when you are 9, not at 19.



The bus driver did call the cops, and the mom (suprise!) turned out to have a criminal record. But she thought it was OK to encourage her child to "handle your business" )mom's quote, not mine). When did that become a cultural norm? Try to picture your mom coming to school to help you start a fight. I can't.

I wish you were wrong. But you know what they say about wishes...And I really don't have a good answer to this.



My mom? The Pacifist? Ow, where's the Ibuprofen?