32nd and Chestnut

Pico De Gallo

2008-12-05T15:23:00.000-08:00

It seems trivial now that i worried so much about getting along with my room mates as we sit and bond with chatty girl talk. But upon first arriving i was greeted by two wacky suitemates that only exhaserbated my nervous jitters of the first day of college. I worried night and day about how i was going to deal with the apparent "triscuit monster" (my room mate that decided to cover our floor in broken triscuits ) and the other room mate that wouldn't stop apologizing for everything. But all it took was one night out and some extra sour cream on our burritos at a small hole in the wall restaurant on south street to start the understanding and stop the judging. Now there isn't a time we don't joke around and accept each other quirks as just that, part of their personality that goes unchanged and influences me to be myself. i sat down to write this blog on my bed while my sick room mate sneezed and coughed beside me, but before i even started the first sentence my room was suddenly filled with laughter.The apologizing room mate just got back from professing her love to a boy she has known all her life and found out it was not unrequited. We now share stories of our past and hopes for our future. I hope the sour cream and burritos never run out.

University 101 is not pointless

2008-12-05T15:22:00.000-08:00

Traditional homework to me usually consists of reading or comprehension exercises and rarely requires me to venture away from my desk. But upon arriving as a student at Drexel, and attending my Univ101 class, I was forced out my conventional shell and shoved into a brand new city as part of my homework assignment. I was encouraged to go see new things and experience them for the first time as a student of the world instead of just an eighteen year old girl from New York. So as per my homework i set out with a subway map, fifteen dollars, my cultural passport, and a mission to see and learn something new.

As a girl from New York, I was skeptical at first to see what I could possibly experience in a City much smaller than mine that I hadn't already been accustomed to. But of course, I spoke too soon. I sat down with the subway map ashamed of myself. I knew where I was, but I had no idea as to how to get where I was going. The stubborn New Yorker in me refused to take out the subway map at first, but the scarred teenager in me over ruled and I reluctantly gave into my defeat of having a great sense of direction. And within the next few moments something would occur to me. Philadelphia was making me street dumb. I already had a good sense of how to navigate through a city. But that was when I knew where I was going and where to avoid. But in this new city I was certainly clueless. Until a man I named Chuckles stepped into my life. My first instinct was to walk away and walk away fast. but something told me to just give him a chance. Well it turns out that he used to work for septa and knew every route by heart. I had chosen the right homeless man to not ignore.

My cultural passport forced me into a new city to discover new things and in the process made me discover new things about myself and the people that populate Philadelphia. I learned that while my first instinct is usually the smartest one, it won't always get me where I need to go. I have learned to take the New Yorker in me and tone her down a bit and not be so bitter. It turns out being street dumb in the city of brotherly love will actually make you smarter.

Overprotective Parents.

2008-11-23T19:09:00.000-08:00

As the child of Indian, Christian parents, I can say that in some respects my parents were very similar to the parents described in the article. Because they are not used to the customs and traditions in this country, they often feel the need to shelter my siblings and myself under the umbrella of their own. It is not easy to raised as an Indian while living in America. Especially since even my Indian cousins who live in India have parents who allow them to be more Western than my own. It's understandable - they, like most people, are frightened by what they do not know and understand and have tried their hardest to keep my siblings and me the way they understand children to be from their outdated ideas from their childhood.

This method may have worked if I had lived in India for a bit or if I didn't have to go to school with people who with their parents epitomized the American culture. Since I was forced to go to school just like everyone I envied, it leads to a lot of questions that can't be answered by my parents or friends, they had to be answered by me. I don't know half of us first generation kids made it past elementary school - our parents have made us so conflicted between the way they want us to be and the people they wanted us to grow up with.

The article mentions a lot of people whose parents pay for extra services to get them into Ivy league schools. Personally, I don't know anyone who's parents would pay so much money for that. It's a ridiculous amount of money. To be honest, when cell phones first came out, it was the one gift that I wanted. Once I got one, I hated it because my parents wanted me to call every minute of everyday. I understand that parents worry about their kids, but it's rather annoying to be tabbed all the time. When I first read about it in the article - I didn't think of my parents, I thought of the mother in the movie Daddy Day Care who gives her daughter a cell phone and tells her to call 911 in an emergency. A boy at the day care takes the girls dolls and rips the head off causing the girl to call 911 and tell the operator, "He's killing my baby!"

Another thought I had while reading this article came from another article I read. It claimed that children whose parents are not overly watchful, who maybe let their kids play outside unsupervised for a bit, end up having far superior communications skills and are much better at making friends. If that's true than these over parenting parent are probably hurting their children's chances of getting into a goods school. In which case this over parenting or super parenting or whatever its called is completely ridiculous.

Response to "Parents and Grades"

2008-11-23T17:32:00.000-08:00

I know so many kids whose parents are exactly like this, and although they also graduated top in their class. While this is a very highly regarded accomplishment, if it means you had to suffer for four years of your life I don't think its worth it at all. Some were rewarded with money. All I ever got was a pat on the back. Parents need to stop living vicariously through their children and just be satisfied with their happiness.

2008-11-23T16:54:00.000-08:00

The Child Trap

2008-11-23T16:37:00.000-08:00

For the most part, I would say this article is spot-on. Even from an average citizen's viewpoint, it is very evident that parents are completely over bearing. Television ads are also a reflection of this. All types of toys and games claiming to increase brain function at an early age. As stated in the article, studies have shown these really do no good. Although I would not consider my parents "over-bearing" I am an only child and they have devoted a lot, possibly too much, attention towards me. Before I was born my mother read every single parenting book she could get her hands on. As a child they were very protective over germs and made me have a small container of hand sanitizer at school. Besides the fact that during my childhood they watched my every move, as I got older they lightened up and let me do things on my own more. Now, after being in college, they have realized they have virtually no control over me anymore and accept the fact that I'm a little wilder than they would like.

Parenting: Can There be too Much?

2008-11-23T16:11:00.000-08:00

I apologize for the lateness.

The article, "The Child Trap," describes a new emergency that exists in today's world. This emergency is that of Over-Parenting. This article claims that the parents who show their children too much attention are actually hurting their kids. The article claims that if a parent was to do too much for their kids that their kids wouldn't preform well in the real world. I have seen many examples of this right here at Drexel. I know of one student that was so homesick that she decided that she wanted to move out and head back home. She would rather commute to school. The problem occurs after she graduates and lands a job. Will she still live at home? There comes a time when you need to be independent and experience life on your own terms. The post entitled, "Over-parenting an Emergency," explains a different effect. He explains that his parents tried to shelter him too, and filled his schedule, so that he would have little time to experiment with cigarettes, drugs and parties. He believes that as he got older he was more curious than a child who experienced less parenting and lived somewhat of an average life. For the most part, I agree with what he had to say, but he said that reverse-psychology plays a role from excessive parenting. I disagree, I think a parent should explain why partying and drugs are bad, and explain the consequences so that the child wouldn’t be tempted to even try.

Viva la Resistance

2008-11-23T10:07:00.000-08:00

Sorry to be late. Again.

The portrait of the modern, upper-middle class American family described in The New Yorker's article, "The Child Trap," has never been seen by my eyes. The idea that a parent has enough time in a day to monitor every aspect of a child's time is farce in my experience. That being said, I can find at least three of the traits described as "helicopter parenting" in so many of the people I know from high school. One prime example is a good friend of mine. Ever since he and I were in middle school, his breaks from school were all booked by his mother. The two of them went just about anywhere you could think. He spent summers in Greece, went to a french camp in Quebec, and when he was not globe trotting, every day at home had hours devoted to piano practice. The upside, from my point of view, and the perspective of the rest of our friends, was that he could play just about any song on the piano, including all of Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody, perfectly. The downside is that, even over his first winter break in college, he will be in Taiwan, and unable to share in experiences that the rest of us will.

The downside to all the pressure his mother places on him is that when there are bursts from the pressure, it is considerable. The article's assertion that it's impossible to smoke pot at lacrosse practice is probably true, but that does not mean that sending your kid to french camp won't introduce him, inadvertently, to cigarettes.

Hanoud4 makes a similar argument in her post, focusing on a friend of hers, who's friends are scrutinized for their worthiness to be associated with their precious. The mark of an ideal parent, according to Hanoud4 is engaging with other people on a social basis and, for all intents and purposes, relaxing. I've heard of a number of students who are pushed and pressured by their parents much in the same way as Hanoud4's friend, and once being accepted to a university that their parents wanted them at, in a major also chosen by their parents, it's like a bullet hitting a brick wall. The prodigies from high school all seem to fall prey to the sheer explosion of options available to them in college. For the first time, these teenagers have the option of choosing for themselves, and without the brackets of their parents, it's usually the wrong ones.

Children hand-reared by their parents are going to be in the hole when the get to college, unless they subvert their parent's grasp on their lives. Hanoud4's friend seems to be doing just that, and it's one thing to lie to your parents, but under the circumstances I find no fault with her, only the parents. In fact, I'm happy for this young girl, because she recognized that what her parents wanted for her and what she wanted were different, and acted on it. If she hadn't, things would have most certainly been different, and her parent's careful manipulation of her life may have ended only when they died.

Over-parenting an Emergency

2008-11-22T20:40:00.000-08:00

Overall, I must say I do agree with "The Child Trap" It supports facts about the negative effects of overprotection from parents. I, myself, had experience the overprotectiveness and the excessive care of my parents. As I was younger and even still today, education was valued as number one priority. Next, would be my tennis. My schedule was filled up due to school and tennis all the time. It did keep my off the streets, keeping me innocent. However, as I grew older, my curiosity for other events continued to grow as well. I would soon rebel and have to sneak off. I wanted to know what things were like to be with other people doing things they do. It made me try cigarettes just to see what it's like, and even going to parties and such. All I'm saying is, reverse psychology seems to play a role from excessive protection. Sometimes, kids are in for a rude awakening when they hit college from it. They're minds are exposed to new and different things, and they may not know how to act either.

Response to Crazy Kids

2008-11-22T12:42:00.000-08:00

The situtation could have played out differently if the parent backed off the child and let he or she do what they enjoyed rather than doing what the parents wanted. From my experience when you are being forced to do something by parents, you usually will not enjoy it. Obviously as parents you should make sure you montior and help your child suceed in school because education should be the number one priority. Getting your child involved in sports is a good thing, but don't force them to play things they dont want to participate in. Let your kids do what they will enjoy and if you want them to suceed in the athletic department pick one sport and let them concentrate on it.

Overbearing parents do not benefit children.

2008-11-22T12:23:00.000-08:00

The idea of overbearing parents is actually one that I can relate to. In general, however, overbearing parents tend to unintentionally "harm" their children. They do this by preventing them from real world experiences that result in personality, expression, and identity of onse self. When parents do everything for their children hoping for it all to pay off in the end, usually never works. The more parents hover over their children, the more disobedient they tend to be. When my parents went through a phase where they were always on my case and always pushing me to do things that did not appeal to me, I felt that it was more necessay to disobey them and disrespect them. I lost a sense of respect and appreciation for them due to the amount of hovering they took part in. I felt that I was less able to experince things my own way and I felt that I was experiening less opportunities where I needed to deal with issues myself. Parents are not going to always be there for their children, past highschool. Yet these days, it seems that college and now the borderline where parents begin to slow down with the amount of aid they provide for their children in school. According to Marano, she too thinks that too much parenting is more harmful then good. Too much parenting does have the power to turn children into what she calls "wimps." Growing up with a nanny or a mother always in your face, tends to leave an impression on a child. Whether they mean to or not, they begin to feel the sense of security of having someone always there to help and fix all problems. This sense of security morphs into comfort, where the child knows no other way to live their life other than having a parent live it for them.

overparenting overburden

2008-11-22T11:33:00.000-08:00

Reading “The child Trap”, I completely agree with what it has to say about issues pertaining to the modern child’s upbringing and parenting. The child today is over parented and forced into social and familial obligations. Every parent thinks and, I agree has a right to think that their child s the best. He is, but in his/ her own way. Their child might not be as bright as the other one or the neighbor’s child or his best friend. But parents today believe that their child has to be better than any other child. This leads to a syndrome mentioned “overparenting”. Parent’s spoil their kids, worry and fret unnecessarily and overprotect him. They overburden the child with tuition's and extra ‘extra’ curricular activities and other social camps and summer jobs just so that their child who get an A gets an A+ and gets into the best league universities et al. I have a friend who is in a similar situation. She has an elder sister who is doing extremely well and is in a brilliant university. She herself is also very smart, but in other fields. She is extremely athletic, talks well, cooks well and is smart. But she is not academically smart. She manages to get a B+ but her parents are very pushy. They keep taunting her. They put her up with four tuition teacher’s and put her into more extra classes and after school classes. I think this is unfair. The child does not need to get an A all through his life to be a successful person. Being successful is about being smart, laterally intelligent and the mind should work at the right place and time, which in her case, happens. I agree parents do this to help us make a successful future, but they should also understand that overburdening the child can lead to mental and emotional problems that are difficult to treat. They should encourage rather than force and leave the decision on the child after a point of time.

Will this get you into MIT?

2008-11-22T09:04:00.000-08:00

While reading the article, “The Child Trap: The rise of overparenting”, one person came to mind: one of friends. I have a friend whose has very educated parents, both in the science fields. She’s the type of friend who never seems to have any time to do anything because she’s either at piano practice, tennis practice, or studying for her SATS which are not until three years later. It’s almost as if her parents have devised a perfect life plan that would get her into MIT or Harvard. They’ve chosen her electives for senior year, her extracurricular activities, and they even involve themselves in deciding who she can associate with and call “friend”. When she told me about this, I thought they had reached the extreme. Their “intelligent” and “well-rounded” daughter should be able to make her own friends. She has spent 2 years of high school so far hiding some of her friendships that her parents would deem as “not good enough”. Her parents have bought cell phones that can detect when she is talking to someone else on the other line. Several occasions have occurred where she had been caught on the phone instead of practicing her piano notes. The next face-to-face talk with her parents was surely to discuss how spending time chit-chatting on the phone will not get her into MIT. Where is the developmental of her teenage years? Teenagers are known for talking on the phone and exchanging certain things that will help them formulate stronger friendships. Does this mean that my friend will not have those strong friendships since her free time is filled with other activities? Sure, she can make friends at tennis practice; but, how can one get to know another during a game of tennis? Where is the exchange of ideas? Where is the realization that the person has similar values and trustworthy characteristics? I’m sure these substances cannot be quickly discovered through a game of tennis. They are rather discovered through close communication.
My friend never seems happy or relaxed, rather always stressing over things and complaining about making her practices. This reveals that she has no love or passion for the extracurricular activities she’s involved in. This surely fools the college admissions officers, who are swayed to believe this individual is well-rounded and has many interests with addition to excelling in academics. Overparenting seems to create artificial robots that religiously follow their parent’s selfish wishes and orders. The parents are not thinking on how to improve of the world, but concentrate on how to make their children “the best” and “top of the line.” How is the future going to be when the managers and top leaders in companies are led by selfish, unmotivated men and women?

In Response to: Face it, My mom...

2008-11-21T22:48:00.000-08:00

This is crazy! I've never had to deal with anything like this. If one of my peers had a parent write their paper for them, and then asked me about them, I would probably call them insane and be really quite ticked off about the matter. I would feel this way because I probably spent hours of my time slaving away over the same paper that they maybe had to staple together.

Response to Helicopter Parents Can't Really Fly

2008-11-21T21:20:00.000-08:00

I disagree with this article to an extent. I went to a highly competative college prep school so everything was a competition,rank, extracurricular activities, gpa, and sat scores. We never stopped hearing the word college in high school. It was always about getting into the best possible college with a scholarship. People would venture out in our school to find the weirdest and strange extracurricular activities to make themselves stand out. Often times, students did not get these extracurricular's by their own hardwork, but through their parent's connections. It was a way for them to get into the best college. My high school never offered regular high school courses everything was a rapid course and it was unacceptable and it was below average to take one AP Class. Our counselors, parents and teachers forced us to sign up for AP Classes that we would have to compete with other kids to get into because of a preliminary examination. Some kids had to get their parents to call because they did not get into the course based on the exam; however our school would not let them into the course. All of us were required to do 50 hours of community service each year to ensure that community service would be on our college applications, without completing the 50 hours of community service you could not pass a grade. Many of us were forced into community service positions we did not want to be in, and learning subjects that were of no interest to us only because we wanted the 1.2 credit in our gpa. Besides this most of us had parents who were very ambitious and made sure we enrolled in various courses and extracurriculars despite how much we hated them. In some cases, their parental helicopter worked and we got into amazing colleges but for others it backfired. Some people were burned out completely by Junior Year by taking so much stress, and they actually did worse junior year. Also by senior year, after college applications were in,, students slacked off so much because we worked so hard three years before to ensure we got into the colleges of our choice.

The Child Trap

2008-11-21T21:00:00.000-08:00

I completely agree with the article, "The Child Trap." In today's society, many parents hover over their children. One of my closest friends in high school had to deal with this hovering constantly and eventually he had to rebel from it. He took SAT Classes beginning freshman year and got tutoring in every subject in order to get a 2400 on the SATS to ensure him a spot at UPenn or any other ivy leagues. His parents made him volunteer in various organizations around the city,join the volleyball team and run for leadership positions in school. He did well in school, but was lazy when it came to handing in assignments. After three years of dealing with his parents nagging him about SAT prep and his classes with homework. He rebelled senior year and began slacking after college applications,of course. He got the 2400 on the SATS, was a national merit scholarship finalist and got the grades to get into UPenn with a 4.0 with being number 30 in our class. He did not get in to UPenn or the other Ivy League Colleges, and his parents were disappointed. They tried talking with admission officers and finally when they said no. He ended up going to a college really far away just to get rid of the stress and anxiety his parents caused him. Honestly, the whole parental helicopter thing does apply to my generation. Parents want us to suceed and are willing to do anything to ensure this happens. They let us live lives of luxury to ensure our success and make sure we are not burdened by anything.

The Child Trap

2008-11-21T20:30:00.000-08:00

In The Child Trap, I thought most of the things that were mentioned were pretty true. I think it's interesting how the authors of all the books claim that over-parenting has become an emergency. When you think about it, it doesn't seem like it would be that big of a deal, but when you listen to the arguments, you realize how important is has become. But then you also hear how the USA isn't as bad as some other countries, which made me really think about how the other countries must be doing.

I had very different experiences then most of the people in the article. When I was younger, my mom was basically perfect. She was never not around, but she didn't hover like some parents do. She made sure I had everything I needed, nothing I didn't, and never butted in unless she thought I really needed it or if I asked for help.

The Child Trap

2008-11-21T20:29:00.000-08:00

The article 'The Child Trap' has provided the reader with insights in to over-parenting behavior. Most of the readers might be able to empathize with the article and would agree with most arguments in the article, as in some or the other way many have been through over-parenting in their childhood or even now. I agree with the author on his views about over-parenting. As mentioned in the article, over-parenting has not only been noticed in young children but also in adults, who stay with their family upon graduating, and are still dependent on their parents in some or the other way. At the early childhood of their children, parents tend to have education as a priority, constantly worrying about whether their children will be able to get in to a good college or not, and they enroll their children in various activities. Children are controlled by their parents, and are not given the liberty to think and decide for themselves in cases where over-parenting is dominant. I personally believe that parents should, provide some sort of freedom to their children in prioritizing their activities and only provide suggestions to their children.

The Child Trap

2008-11-21T20:12:00.000-08:00

Judging by my own life experiences, I see strong validity behind the argument made in "The Child Trap". Friends of my parents have a daughter who is a senior in high school. They are very overprotective parents with a plethora of rules. They are the type who would read their daughters text messages and ims, and snoop through her backpack. These parents put an immense amount of effort into making sure their daughter stays out of trouble. Unfortunately for them, she rebelled. Overprotected children want to do anything to go against their parents. She is a frequent smoker, and there's nothing they can do to stop her. Their daughter sneaks out and gets involved with the wrong crowd. Their over parenting led to her downfall. On the other hand, my parents have other friends who give their daughter space. They trust and respect her, and give her the freedom she's earned. Their daughter enjoys spending time at home and stays out of trouble. She would rather spend time at Starbucks with her best friend than go out and get wasted. This is a clear example of how over parenting can lead to less than desirable results. The parents who give their children enough freedom end up with responsible children with good judgment. Parents who attempt to control their children's lives end up with children who rebel and make poor decisions.

Children to Robots

2008-11-21T20:02:00.000-08:00

The reading, "The Child Trap: The Rise of Overparenting" by Joan Acocella, brought into perspective a rift in the educational playing field. There is a clear advantage of having parents that play a big role in a child’s life, but the disadvantages of a child being guided its entire life can be detrimental. Many children are not fortunate enough to have the parents that guide them and provide the tools to succeed and this is where the rift lies—between apathetic and over nurturing parents. The reading points out that 7% to 9% of students in Washington D.C. were given extra time on their SATs and their scores were correspondingly higher on average which demonstrates an uneven educational playing field. The reading also points out how some parents would shelter their children from germs on shopping carts. Sadly but surely this is true and it is clear that parents just want to protect their children, but what they are essentially doing is hurting the child’s immune system.

As indicated in the reading, from preschool forward, children are forced to begin learning about math and reading and I have seen the truth in this with my younger cousins who are in elementary school. The amount of work they receive as elementary school students is completely unreasonable because children should be given a chance to live and enjoy their lives. Children have turned into robots that parents and schools train to attain the goal of getting into college. The true meaning of obtaining an education has diminished to a simple phrase, “making a lot of money.” The disturbing truth that, “… fifty-five per cent of American men between the ages of eighteen and twenty-four, and fourteen per cent between the ages of twenty-five and thirty-four, live with their parents,” shows how dependent children are on their parents. This trend toward dependent adults is creating a population of “wimps” that do not have the leadership to make it on their own. Another important effect of over-parenting is that it prevents children from developing courage, outside-the-box thinking, and independence which are all important in developing into an adult.

I have seen with my own eyes this sheltering of children with in my own family and it is difficult to judge where to draw the line between fawning over your child and just caring very dearly. My aunt and uncle recently had a baby boy that they are extremely protective over. They never let him wander around the house without someone behind him to make sure he doesn’t fall. Their older child was never allowed to go out to hang out with friends or watch rated R movies. When college applications came around, my aunt and uncle basically decided where my cousin was going to go to college and they even completed the application for him. They sheltered their kids so much that they are deficient in their social skills and their ability to be independent.

Response to "The Effect of Cell Phones on Overparenting"

2008-11-21T20:01:00.000-08:00

Though I never really thought about it before, it is true, cell phones provide a way for parents to check up on their kids whenever they choose. For the longest time I had wanted a cell phone, and I had bugged my parents to get me one. Finally, when I got my drivers license, they gave in. At the time I didn't read too much into it. I figured it was probably a reward for passing my test, or supposed to used in an emergency, something like that. As I ventured out on my own, though, I started getting calls from my mom, asking me how I was and where I was. Giving me a cell phone had just been a ploy to keep track of me.

Response To Helicopter Mom

2008-11-21T19:48:00.000-08:00

I totally agree with your insight. So many of us have 'over-protective' mothers and fathers, but in the long run it's for our own good. We are usually not forced into anything, except various music lessons or sports, but again it's for our own development, not because our parents want us to be stars. When we say we want to move on from these various extra-curricular activities, our parents usually understand. Some parents are not as understanding, but on average your situation and my 'helicopter parents' are common. Especially amongst the middle class parents have a huge involvement in their children's life, because they are able to concentrate on family rather than hiring a nanny to do the 'nitty gritty.' We are in fact lucky and I agree with you that I don't think our whole demographic is changing. Everyone is different, but on average the article seemed a bit extreme.

Overparenting: A Trend Among Parents

2008-11-21T19:45:00.000-08:00

I could not agree more to the claim that overparenting is spreading all over America. I have seen many cases of parents living their children's lives for them, not just in America but in other countries too. This article points out many reasons for this particular trend of parenting, but I believe there is only one major reason that contributes to this, and it is simply because "all the other parents are doing it".
I spent a part of my childhood in East Asia as mentioned in the article and I must say overparenting is pretty serious there. The sole purpose of childhood is education and parents do everything in their power to make their children study every single moment. This results in academic days that begins at 7 a.m. and ends at 11 p.m. Private tutoring institutions grew so big that the government tried to regulate them by prohibiting them to work after 10 p.m., but the institutions are so large that they just pay the fee and work pretty much around the clock. While I was walking around the city around midnight I saw a big bus bringing students from the school to the institution. Since I was going to school in America I could see how serious the problem was. However, the irony is that the parents do not really believe in the system. The parents are just scared that their kids will fall behind in school. I believe the parents are not even aware of some of the scientific reasons described in the article, and the one reason they follow the trend of overparenting is just because it's a "trend".

Parents and Grades

2008-11-21T19:12:00.000-08:00

While reading "The Child Trap", I found myself agreeing with the author on almost every point, and thinking, "I know people like that." Several of my friends in high school graduated at the very top of the class, the top five to be specific. If you ask any one of them why they did it, the unanimous response would be something like, "My parents would kill me if I didn't." They did not push themselves to the top because they genuinely wanted to be the best. They were pushed to achieve. Their over-controlling parents regimented their lives, by forcing them to take AP level classes in every subject and drowning them in extracurriculars. Two of our top five were not allowed to leave the house, watch TV, or play video games on weekdays. A friend of mine (a member of this group) once told me that she hated school more than anything, yet she gave a speech at graduation. This kind of parenting doesn't foster curiosity, or a love of learning. Sure, it may make them look better on paper; however, it doesn't make them happier, and that is what's truly important.

In response to "Send Me All Your Grades by E-Mail

2008-11-21T18:22:00.001-08:00

I see what the author here is talking about. I see plenty of kids throughout Drexel who kill themselves for grades and will push aside any extracurricular activities, parties, ANYTHING that may distract them from their oh so precious grades. I honestly think it is a shame, after making a visit with my pre-med counselor I even heard it from him, he said something along the lines of "A balance is key in a student's life, medical schools aren't looking for lab rats, they're looking for people who can interact and be social with patients yet treat their needs.". The kids who lock themselves up in their room to pump out their perfect essays and lab reports are bound for lab ratdom and they need to realize a balance in their life will help them more than any 'A grade' could in the long run.

SAT Scores Not High Enough? See a Doctor!

2008-11-21T18:17:00.000-08:00

After reading "The Child Trap: The Rise of Overparenting" by Joan Acocella I was shocked to see how accurate the author, Joan Acocella, and the authors mentioned in the piece depicted life as a teenager. The issues they addressed are ones I have experienced personally making this a very interesting article to read. It was one I could really relate to.

One of the topics that I experienced firsthand in highschool was the fad of going to the pediatrician and having him or her diagnose you with ADD just because you were having trouble concentrating in school(but really because you had a lack of motivation and knew that if you were diagnosed with ADD you would get extra time on tests, including the SAT). I could say one of my best friends in highschool did that exact thing.

In the uber competetive private school I spent my highschool years in, where students went to college meant everything. Everyone knew where you were going to college and who could blame them? We were paying extra money to go to a select highschool in order to of course go to big name colleges where we could continue at a high level of education and in turn make more money when we graduate. SATs and GPAs ,in turn, meant a lot to students and when my friend who was always gifted in the class room couldn't break into the top scores of the SAT grading rubric, his parents attributed it to their underlying thought that he was 'distracted'.

Their solution: See their doctor.

My friend told me the play by play, he went to the doctor, she asked him a series of basic questions which he answered yes or no to and with passing this mere test he was immediately granted his 30mg of Adderol. Not only was he granted a prescription but he was granted 1.5x the amount of time regular students got on any in-school tests/quizzes. On top of all this, the most importat benefit of all this was extra time on the SATs.

Now whether my friend actually has ADD or not is besides the point because with the way they hand out medicines of that type these days, it is safe to say that some of the people who are getting these prescriptions don't actually have any issues. It shows how desperate some of these families are to get their children into these top tier schools, and I can understand the pressure. For a middle-class family to send their child to college it takes a scholarship most of the time, and who wouldn't do anything for one these days...

The article mention that on average the scores of the 7-9% who get extra time on the SATs do better than the national average. One would think this extra time should give them a fair-advantage not unfair-advantage to the rest of us issue-free students. The problem starts at the top, the doctors who administer these medicines need to create a better and more rigorous testing procedure for determining who actually needs medicine to help them concentrate. Not some test which asks "do you get distracted easily?" and a simple yes answer gets you pills in your hands.

Reply to "The effect of cell phones on over parenting"

2008-11-21T17:56:00.001-08:00

I agree with the way the author was talkng about cell phones, as it is almost hte same thing that happened to me. My mom increased my brother's and my own texting plans to unlimited, and since then, she has been non-stop texting us, making sure we're doing ok, asking if we need anything, and constantly reminding us to stay on top of our work and prioritize. I think this, in fact, causes kids to study less, simply because students feel like rebelling against their parents occassionally, and this is one way to do so. Even in their mind they should study, but just hte fact that their parents are telling htem to makes them not want to do it. It is very similar to my own situation, but since i can talk to my parents normally, and tell them to stop talking to me so much so i can concentrate on what i need to do, instead of being told what to do, it has worked out very well of late.

Helicopter Mom

2008-11-21T17:54:00.000-08:00

It was the middle of the winter and the snow was falling. I stepped outside to play but found myself unable to move. My jacket was so puffy and warm I couldn’t move my head. This of course was an immediate disadvantage in a snowball fight. I complained to my overbearing mother about my lack of peripheral vision. She didn’t care. Her only worry was that I didn’t come down with a bad case of pneumonia. My lack of fun was of no concern.

My mother is a baby boomer. Many would believe that this fact makes her a helicopter parent and therefore I, her only child, a victim of over parenting.

To some degree I can agree with that. But I certainly do not feel as though I am at a disadvantage because of the way I was raised. I believe that the bigger influence in the way my mother raised me was the fact that I was her only child. As so, she felt a responsibility to do it right.

As a child I was never denied anything I wanted as long as it would be beneficial to me in the eyes of my mother. From ballet, to tutors, to soccer, to a failed college advisor, my mother pulled out all the stops for me. I agree with the idea of helicopter parents but I do not believe that they are rampantly ruining a generation of hard workers.

OBVIOUSLY Kids Don't Know How to Make Their Own Decisions...

2008-11-21T17:38:00.000-08:00

There are so many instances where parents seem to have total control over their childrens' lives, and sometimes it can lead to the bad side. I agree with the author's comment about cell phones being a necessity for parents, just to check up on their children when they are in college. One of my closest friends was raised with "Helicopter Parents," and thankfully he turned out alright, but there are some that I have grown distant with because they have decided to choose their own path and stray away from the norm, therefore causing a crevice to split us apart. My friend that turned out for the good however, was raised in a very strict environment from a young age. His parents taught him to speak four different languages, which he can speak fluently, and sent him through strenuous hockey schools and teams since the age of four. He has been to about four different countries to play hockey, and somehow or another, ended up not continuing because of a lapse in his father's health. Twelve years of hockey down the drain... Aside from that, his parents would always stress the importance of good grades and doing work all the time. He ended up having a high GPA, but his social skills have remained stagnant when it comes to the opposite sex. As he went to an all boys, catholic school, there were no girls, and when his other friends wanted to go out, his parents would tell him that he needed to do work. This has caused him to become more intelligible when it comes to vocabulary and book knowledge, but the most important thing, social smarts, is lacking. Parents need to let go at a certain age, when their children deem it necessary, and let their children become more independent.

In response to If you’re not cheating than you're not trying hard enough

2008-11-21T17:36:00.001-08:00

I have seen so many cases of students cheating in high school. Obviously, when someone got caught cheating, we would ask why or how they had cheated. My classmates would explain their extensive list of extra-curricular activities that simply didn’t give them enough time to properly study to receive the ever pressured grade of an A. Parents place such an importance on receiving good grades that instead of taking the time to truly learn the material and maybe getting a grade of a B, students find creative ways to cheat just to receive the A. This problem is very common now because students simply can’t receive a poor grade, a philosophy of perfection has been instilled by most parents, since the child’s genesis. It seems there is no longer room for fun and free time in a adolescents life, rather it must be filled with activities that promote future success.

The effect of Cell Phones on Overparenting

2008-11-21T17:28:00.000-08:00

I agree with the author’s statement that cell phones are an essential tool for “overparenting.” A few weeks before my sister went off to college, nearly a month before me, I realized my mom was buying an unlimited text messaging and minutes plan. I inquired as to her justifications for spending the extra money, “Mom you don’t even know how to text,” I said in frustration. But once my sister was all moved into college, I realized why my mom had purchased the more extensive plan: she was texting my twin sister while we in the car even before we left the school parking lot. I realized that my mom was worried about my sister and used her cell phone to constantly check up on her. I told my mom that the only way for my sister to develop a sense of independence was to turn off the cell phone. Parents simply can’t make all life’s little problems go away with one touch dialing. Without such large access and the decreasing cost of cell phone plans, overparenting would cease as soon as the kid left the confines of their home. Overparenting can occur so easily now with cell phones because parents can call or text their kids and get updates every hour of the day. “I’m in class,” is no longer an excuse for not responding to a parent’s question. It seems a bit ridiculous and I think we will see more and more students willingly turn off their cell phones during class.

SAT Scores Not High Enough? See a Doctor!

2008-11-21T17:25:00.000-08:00

If You're not cheating than you're not trying hard enough

2008-11-21T17:05:00.000-08:00

While reading this article, it became clear to me that the parent aspect in high school education and even middle school and elementary school is huge. It seemed as though if you are not spending money on tutors, application centers, and day care's, then you will never have a shot at succeeding. Parents are placing so much pressure on their children and due to this are giving them these expensive advantages to exceed, that it seems like it is a steroid in the academic uneven playing field.

In particular I had a friend in high school whose parents only cared about his grades. the kid had over 5 run-ins with the law and his parents would do anything to pay for a lawyer and get him out of trouble. He was tutored in three of his five subjects ever since middle school, took a class over the summer to catch up his Spanish, and had a hired agency fill out his college applications: just to succeed in school. The problem that I saw in this was that the child will not be able to survive in the next level in his life without his expensive help. Kids should get by by themselves.

Undergrad the new High School?

2008-11-21T17:04:00.000-08:00

The Child Trap discusses the idea of "hovering parents" who take the responsibility of guiding their children to the extreme. The vast presence of these type of parents is undoubtedly alarming. They give the impression to their children that the world is going to end if they don't have an 'x' number of extracurriculars and AP courses to list on their high school transcript. Looking back on hindsight, I have come to realize that the years of being reckless and carefree are over. I did not have to work as hard as I did in order to get into a decent college. I spent so much time being paranoid about how my one less than perfect test grade was going to affect my grade in the class which would ultimately alter my GPA etc. I could have prevented a huge portion of that stress if I just knew what I know now about the grand scheme of college admissions.

When I was in the process of finalizing which college to attend, a good family said to me, "the undergraduate education of your generation is like the high school graduation of your parents generation, and your graduate education is like their undergraduate education." This idea made me really ponder the pressure parents put on their children during high school. In reality, a student can get mediocre grades, go to a state school, then really buckle down there and come out with a killer GPA that will make for stellar marketability to employers and/or graduate admissions. This was the exact case of my neighbor. He LIVED IT UP during his high school career. He went to every sporting event, hung out with friends, and partied all the time while maintaining a B- average. His parents worried all the time that he wasn't going to succeed or get into college. They would take his car away or threaten his privileges, yet he still managed to block out their nagging and alleviate the pressure. He got into Rutgers (NJ state school) and worked hard there to eventually earn access to med school right out of undergrad. He survived through med school, and is now serving his residency at Jefferson Hospital. His success proved the different importance high school plays in the lives of students today in comparison to students of our parents' generation. The effort many parents push their children to put into high school can be explained by the fact that they have this misconception that if their child doesn't get into an Ivy League school for undergrad, their path to success is severely hindered. My neighbor is living proof that that idea is nonsense.

Reply To The Rise Of Over Parenting

2008-11-21T16:38:00.000-08:00

The personal parenting experience I read about was shocking. It was about someone whose parents had nine children and they were all kept on a short leash. They had their schedules planned out for them and all their activities too. This sounded like the perfect example to use in this article. I was surprised at hearing this because I thought situations like that, truly only occurred on shows like Wife Swap. This parenting technique resulted in all the children rebelling against their parents. This person's friend ended up dropping out of school. This leads me to ponder why the parents did this.

This situation could have played out completely different. For example, if the parents had been a little more lenient with their children, they may have not rebelled. Their parents could have had successful children that did not drop out of school. I think that they could have made their children's lives much easier and then their children may no have rebelled. When I read this I was extremely surprised.

I cannot relate to this experience at all. My mother always gave me the option to do whatever I wanted to do. I got to choose what sports I wanted to do and she never forced me to do anything I did not feel comfortable doing. My mother's leniency actually made me more responsible. I never felt the need to rebel and because of this I decided for myself to work hard at school. Therefore, I do not think it is commonplace for my own experience.

Send Me all Your Grades through Email !

2008-11-21T16:35:00.000-08:00

I have to say that this article was not only entertaining, but also hit home. I agree with most of the arguments made as well. Numerous times I see parents push their kids, whether it be through school, sports, or possibly work. Parents much to often are involved of every facet in their child's life.

An example that could not be better is a girl I met right here at Drexel. She is highly intelligent naturally, and really never knew how to let loose. She believed in studying and studying and then just sleeping. Its actually something I admire sometimes, but it's almost un-human. Her parents will call her making sure she is studying. She lives over 9 hours away but her parents send her plane tickets just to come back on the weekends to make sure she stays out of trouble. This deeply troubles me and I wish I could fix it. Her personality is to always work, but she is an amazing person inside and out. If she could just let loose, she would make the world herself a much better place.

In response to “It’s all about locking yourself in your room and doing work because my MOM and DAD said so !!”

2008-11-21T16:23:00.001-08:00

After reading this post, I actually laughed because this is exactly what I predicted would happen to the kid whose parents were too over-protective. I’m curious if the kid ever talked to his parents about how he is never allowed out—not to mention to his own senior prom—if he does well in school and takes above average classes? Maybe the situation would have played out differently and they would have slowly but surely let him do more things. Or maybe he could have just not listened to them for once and gone out on his own. Forgiveness is much easier to ask for than permission (as I recently just learned in my business class!).

Now, the kid has started college and with all this freedom he went a little crazy and his grades slipped. I was afraid that this was going to be my problem. My dad is really strict and he always gets pushy with taking AP courses and joining a lot of extracurricular activities. Fortunately, my parents are divorced and I have more lenient mother who I can talk to. She usually persuades him in the direction of letting me make my own decisions because I get treated like an adult in every other aspect—paying for my car, bills, doing my own chores, etc. I came to Drexel and I was surprised that students go out on Wednesday and Thursday nights. Occasionally, I’ll go out on a weekday and think nothing of it...but then sometime it'll hit me that it's a Tuesday or a Thursday and I'll stay in.

What I think is important for the kid mentioned in the post is that he should live by the expression “Work hard, play harder.” This is college and you don’t have too many restrictions but if you buckle down for a few hours a day and study and do your school work, you can still go out whenever you want. Limit yourself, however, to a few drinks (if that’s the case of his grades slipping) so you’re not regretting that night the next day at your 9am class. This isn’t an uncommon case and I think with time, once priorities get straightened out, everything will balance out.

The Child Trap

2008-11-21T16:21:00.000-08:00

I really enjoyed reading the article, “The Child Trap.” Personally, I do see many truths in various claims summarized in the article because I have experienced some of this in my own real life. For instance, in the article the author, Joan Acocella, talks about how after-school activities impress college admission officers because “you can’t smoke pot or lose your virginity at lacrosse practice.” I laughed after I read that quote because it’s silly but so true at the same time. My first few years in high school were brutal; my dad is really strict and was obsessed with college applications and making sure that I had the best so I could potentially end up in a great school. I understand that he did this with good intentions but it just drove me crazy and I didn’t want to do anything because I felt forced.

Having a strict parent like my dad was beneficial for me, in my opinion, because I had balance and discipline in my life. He isn’t as controlling as some people I know. I have a friend who has really religious parents. Her parents did not let her do anything to the point where she and some of her other friends made up a code language (like symbols) and would write in a notebook so if she left her notebook laying around and her parents snooped—which they did—she would not get in trouble for things she wrote. Unfortunately, her parents weren’t as dumb as she thought and ended up decoding the language and she was grounded for weeks. I feel really bad for kids who have extremely strict parents because their child just wants to enjoy their young teenage years doing normal things with their friends. My friend snuck out of her house and would go to parties and eventually her parents moved the family to Ohio where she now lives. I think that they are still super strict but she’s as college and probably enjoying all the freedom.

"Grab the dumb ones—they don’t know what the hell to do."

2008-11-21T15:39:00.000-08:00

I have seen some of the examples given in the article "The Child Trap" played out in real life. A girl in my high school class - we'll call her "Kelly" - had never been the brightest girl in the class. I believe it was in our junior year when one day, after having not studied at all for a big AP History test, Kelly leans over to get a better look at the test of the girl sitting next to her so that she can cheat. Not being able to get a good enough look, she starts whispering to the girl, "Hey! What's the answer to questions 3 through 17?" Kelly, completely misses the most important aspect of cheating - trying to not get caught. She does nothing to hide her attempts at cheating from the teacher, who quickly catches her and takes her test, giving Kelly an automatic zero percent. The teacher also reports her to the vice-principal who gives her an in-school-suspension.

This is where the story starts paralleling the examples in the article. You see, Kelly's parents are both lawyers. Furthermore, there is no way they're going to let this teacher and this vice-principal get away with punishing their precious child with such unspeakable horrors. They've gotten Kelly out of messes like this before (no, this is not the first time Kelly has done this) and they're not afraid to do it again. Kelly's parents threaten the school with a lawsuit, and whaddaya know! The school backs down. Kelly doesn't get an in-school-suspension; she doesn't even get a detention. In fact, the only thing she gets is the opportunity to take a make up exam to replace the one she cheated on! Thanks to Kelly's lawyer parents, she can get away scot free with all kinds of untold academic mischief. It's ridiculous, but that's life, I suppose.

DISCLAIMER: Names have been changed to protect the guilty.

The Rise of Overparenting

2008-11-21T15:29:00.000-08:00

I am in almost total agreement with this article. As far of a stretch as parts of it are, the objective of the article was to get a point across which it did very well. America in general is based on competitiveness so it's no shock to me that this has carried over into the way parents are raising their children. I was very lucky in the aspect that my parents didn't ever push me to do anything new or to become more involved in something I was already currently a part of. They would always support whatever I wanted to do, no matter how intense I was about it.

One of my high school friends on the other hand suffered a much worse childhood filled with over parenting. She is the second oldest of 9 children. I don't know what it is that causes the parents to be the way they are but they keep all of their kids on a ridiculously tight leash. Socially, academically, extracurricularly; it's all planned out for each kid. This of course causes the common reaction from the children of rebellion. So much so that one of them had a child, married a different man, and moved to Alaska, while my old friend dropped out of high school, also got pregnant, and moves around staying in different homes other than her own.

The Child Trap Article

2008-11-21T14:59:00.000-08:00

I see some truth in the article, but I also think that there were a lot of nonsense claims. I do agree with Marano that DVDs like Little Einstein are a scam. I think that your brain continues to grow and sculpt after infancy and toddler age because you cannot learn everything that early in life. I believe that much may be formed during that time, but it is not complete until much later in life. I also agree that over parenting spoils a child, but I think it can also be good as well. Over parenting goes to far when a child can run around screaming while the parents ignore it. On the other hand I do not think over parenting always includes anxiety and the need to achieve. I think if the child is being spoiled then it does not matter how the child does in school, but according to Marano over parenting puts extra stress on the child.

I think Honoré ‘s claim about over sanitation developing more allergies in children is true. I do not think Honoré’s claim about high self-esteem in children is not making them get better grades is true. It may be true for many children, but I think there is half who have the opposite occur, and do succeed. I think that Cross makes a great point about boys not wanting to grow up. He said boys do not want to grow up because they do not dominate the world anymore. I agree with this because power is shifting and I think males feel inferior because they are not used to it. I think there is a lot of truth to this article, but I also think there are parts that do not sound as legitimate.

I know someone who can be related to this article. This person had parents who forced them to do sports. They were forced to play sports that they hated and this was not fair. Their parents just pushed things on them, just like the article talked about. Their parents pushed them to be a specific profession, but they are not pursuing it. This person fits into the description of this over parenting article perfectly.

Helicopter Parents Can't Really Fly

2008-11-21T14:56:00.001-08:00

The article "The Child Trap" was an interesting reflection on a phenomenon I'd heard about before, but never closely examined. While the article's points are definitely true ($400 for one hour of tutoring? No way!), I don't think some of the concepts discussed should be dismissed outright. My point of view may be a little skewed as I never had to worry the way the children mentioned in the article did. Certainly my mom encouraged intellectual growth, but never pushed or forced me into classes I didn't want. Along the same lines, even though I did take several AP classes throughout high school, I was never pressured to study for their exams or for the SAT exams. Whenever my friends called, I was often encouraged to visit them, which seems to be a marked difference from a majority of posters.

However, there are certain aspects of these "helicopter parents" that I would not have minded had they been in my own life. For example, special clubs and activities, perhaps camps, or even tutors for subjects not offered in school. While I would obviously dislike being forced into studying a subject which I had no interest in, I would have gladly jumped at the chance for tutoring or extra courses in subjects such as languages and perhaps some science. With this in mind, I would say that particular cases of this kind of parenting wouldn't necessarily be harmful, as long as it is done in a moderate manner.

Basically, while the cases presented in the article are undeniably extreme and negatively influencing the children, this should not discourage ALL such behavior. For example, if your child has an interest in a subject, then it may be beneficial to allow them to explore it. This is not to say that they should be immediately enrolled in rigorous classes on it, but that options should be presented to them. On the other side of this, if a child is performing exceptionally poorly on a core or important subject, such as math, then a tutor may be a wise investment. The key here, which is something I think the article understates, is moderation rather than extremity. While the examples the author presents represent one extreme, this should not mean balancing by rushing to the opposite end of the spectrum.

Overprotected and Can't Think for his Own

2008-11-21T14:21:00.000-08:00

“The Child Trap,” is a very fascinating article about extremely overprotective parents. In reading this article, I noticed many truths that I probably would not have realized if I haven’t read the article. For example, many parents are willing to do whatever it takes to protect their child, like buying another home close to their child’s college, which I believe is completely ridiculous. The reason why many kids go to college across the country from their home town is to escape parents and start a new life on their own. The article also describes that the reason why parents enroll their children in extracurricular activities is to keep them off the streets. I especially love the quote “You can’t smoke pot or lose your virginity at lacrosse practice.” I guess I never have really noticed that reason because I always thought of extracurricular activities as something fun to do and a great way of learning new things and growing socially.

I know a kid in college who still, to this day, does not make any decisions without consulting his mother, and he is perfectly content with it. His mother is extremely overprotective that everywhere he goes and everything he does, she has to know, and he doesn’t mind at all! He sends her all of his papers so that she can read them and edit them, and he lets her decide what hairstyle to sport and what type of clothes he should buy. Recently, he lost all of his friends due to his mother’s decisions. She believed that his friends were a bad influence on him (which is far from the truth, seeing that I know them all and they are really nice people), so he ended up dropping all of his friends to concentrate on school and make his mother happy. My cousin, who was one of his best friends, was really hurt by this all. It is sad to just think that the boy doesn’t have a mind of his own due to his overprotective, crazy mother.

Response to "Who's Calling Me?"

2008-11-21T13:48:00.000-08:00

I find this post humorous because my parents used to be like this when I was in high school but since I have gone to college they have backed off a lot. They don't call without first texting because they know I have a busy life at Drexel with classes, friends, meetings, and everything else. It has let me mature a lot while being at college and I have probably called them a lot more than most kids call their parents because I don't feel suffocated by them anymore. It has been a great change.

I can relate to "The Child Trap"

2008-11-21T13:36:00.000-08:00

This was one of the articles that I enjoyed reading the most. This is probably due to the fact that my parents weren't like this at all. I was lucky enough to have parents that rarely forced any kind of activity or academic subject on to me. This in return made me want to learn and try new things because I had control over what I did. My parents text me a lot but never call without asking if they can first knowing that I'm constantly in or out of class, doing homework, meeting people, at clubs, or doing other kinds of work. This gives me the freedom that I need to be able to grow up while at college and move on with my life.

In "The Child Trap", Joan Acocella talks about overbearing parents and what they do to their children and the repercussions it has on the child. I could relate a lot to this article. I have an Aunt who over-parented her baby girl. It started by having very few rules and this resulted in her being rowdy in school just as she was at home. My aunt then continued to pressure her about school and college when she was merely in middle school. My Aunt was not being a supportive parent, she was forcing her child to do numerous extra activities which ruined her social life. Now she, my cousin, only plays high school tennis and only takes College Prep classes, no more honors or Advance Placement. This isn't because she isn't smart but she's tired and doesn't want the extra work anymore. To be quite frank, I don't blame her.

Response to: "Lucky to Have Normal Parents"

2008-11-21T13:21:00.001-08:00

While my parents' parenting styles were not perfect, I do believe that they did a pretty good job. Growing up, my parents allowed me to be independent and make my own decisions. When I was younger, I used to get mad if I have to be in "early" on school nights or had to do my homework before I could go out and play but as I matured, I realized that my parents were still pretty flexible. Compared to many people I know, my parents let me choose how and where I spent my time. For example, when it came time to decide where I wanted to attend high school/college, my parents let me make my own decision, offering input only when consulted. For reasons like this, I feel their parenting techniques are the reason I am the person I am today and, for this, I am extremely grateful.

Response to "Who's Calling Me?"

2008-11-21T13:05:00.000-08:00

I can definitely relate to this scenario. Whenever I'm out, I always get a call from my mom wondering where I am, who I'm with, what I'm doing, and when I'll be home. I remember one time I was out and I had forgotten to tell my mom where I was going. She tried calling me literally 30 times and my phone actually was on silent. I hadn't realized she was trying to reach me until I got back home to an enraged mother. She was furious and told me she was gonna call the police. I thought that was taking it a little too far. Now I try to give my mom all the details before I leave to go out.

Lucky to Have Normal Parents

2008-11-21T12:43:00.000-08:00

"The Child Trap" is an article that should make some parents worry. Parents think they are only doing what is best for their child by getting them into the very best schools, making them do a load of extra-curricular activities, and by being by them every step of the way. This, called overparenting, is more harmful in the end than it is beneficial. Kids grow up never having been able to experience things on their own and do the things they want to do. Many of these kids grow up to be adults that move back in with their parents and have a hard time being independent.
Personally, I don't think I had parents that could be considered as the type that overparented me. There were times when they would get overprotective with giving me an early curfew and always calling me to find out what I was doing, who I was with, and when I would be home. I don't think it was so bad, although I felt differently back then. And I can't say that I know anyone that had parents like the ones described in the article. Everyone I knew had a pretty normal life growing up.

Response to Futile Football Strategy

2008-11-21T10:29:00.000-08:00

This is very common from my own experience. I have had situations with my parents hovering over me. They would not let me do certain things because they felt I would get hurt or it might affect my academics. There are many parents that overprotective and will watch over their kids at any cost. From my experience, I have a cousin that is in the same situation. He doesn't go out or have fun. He hangs out with his family 24/7. His brother is basically his best friend. By the way, his brother is roughly five years younger than him. I feel like his parents, my uncle and aunt, have a leash on him. This makes me appreciate my parents because I feel that all parents are this way to start off. In my opinion, you have to earn their respect and trust. The situation could have played out differently if the kid acted differently. Maybe standing up for himself more often that just sayin "OK" and "Alright" to everything.

Who's calling me?

2008-11-21T10:02:00.000-08:00

The Child Trap from the New Yorker is a very interesting article and it takes a different appoach. It is about how parents are over protective and such. They use terms such as "helicopter-parenting and death-grip-parenting." Since the article was different than most related to this issue, it brought up many truths I would have never noticed. It brought up points of how parents try to involve their students in extra-curricular activities to keep them out of trouble. They talk about how parents try to use additional services for helping them apply to college (ex: Application boot camp and Essay writing workshop). They pay enormous amounts to get a step on the competition. There even was an example of a student going to college away from home and parents moving fifteen minutes away from their daughter.

The last example I can actually relate to. It was the second day of college, and a group of friends and I went out. We knew we would be back late so I should have called her. By the end of the night, it was close to two or three in the morning. For some reason, my phone kept ringing. I decided to check it after someone was calling me numerous times. And there it was, it was like I was home again. She was calling at two on a Saturday night. Even when I go away to college she still checks up on me. The next morning I called and said my phone was on silient. She was angry but my elaborate excuses were too good. She is very gullable so it was easy to convince her that was the reason. As weeks went on, I call her once in a while just to check up. She realizes I am busy and have things to do.

We are spoiled, over privaled and over-parented. HAH.

2008-11-21T09:44:00.000-08:00

To be honest, I thought this article was pretty ridiculous. So many of the points brought up by the various authors seemed extreme and skewed. Some of the points had truths and are true in some situations, but middle class American high school students and their parents aren't spending $5,000 for an SAT tutor. This is just one of many examples, since there were so many I cringed at when I read. The whole thing about our generation being spoiled is a good point but the reasons for it are one-sided. Yeah, our parents care about us, make sure we're on task, help us out when we're in need. There is much more parental influence today then earlier days; kids can talk to parents about touchy issues these days. It is true that instead of going out into the work place and starting a career high school and college graduates are uncertain about their futures and sometimes linger at home for several months, sometimes years. The article didn't really take in to account that society develops over time. To compare America in the 1940's and in 2008 is amazing change wise. The article didn't really take into account that there was a war in the 1940's and a majority of men weren't in universities studying, but being shipped across the seas. These are just some examples of my discrepancies with the article. Another one that bothered me was the argument that parents spoil or over-parent their kids by 'being there' for them and encouraging extracurricular activities. Society is changing; a little kid can't walk the streets of a town or city neighborhood and be completely safe; people are sick and parents must protect their young. Also, the competition to get into college has increased because the babyboomers' kids are now trying to get into colleges in record amounts. Personally my mother stayed at home and raised my sister and I while my dad worked. As we grew older my mother went back into the work place on and off. Being a 'over-parented' kid I turned out 'against-the-odds.' I live off campus and am responsible for rent, bills, dishes, laundry, cleaning, my studies and having fun. Amazing that I can function without having a mental breakdown because my mommy isn't there.

Response to "Fuckin' Piglet"

2008-11-21T07:57:00.000-08:00

I knew a very similar child to the Disney obsessed child; however, the kid I knew was obsessed with collecting star wars products. At about the age of 10, he had almost every toy there was to collect. But he did not call them toys, he called them collectibles. I remember one time playing with the "collectibles" one day, and I scratched it. He then had a crying temper tantrum, and I was always scared to have fun with him after that. In the piglet story, I wonder what would have happened if the kid was allowed to just be a kid. Being a kid means dirtying your hands and not always doing what your parents say. If this does not happen then the child grows a dependency on his mom and dad.

Futile Football Strategy

2008-11-21T07:40:00.000-08:00

In my experiences growing up, I know one person who was completely hovered by his parents. With his father as a therapist and his mother a librarian, everything thing he said would be written down and thought as insightful. We were friends in elementary school before he was was ultimately put into a different school due to the ridicule he received. All of his childhood life, he would try and use "big" words to describe how he was feeling to us. We were about 8 years old and the kid was using the word "futile" to describe our football team's strategy. If only I had known what the word mean at 8, it would be obvious the kid had no idea what he was talking about. His parents would not let him play football, because it was too physical. This then turned into him thinking he was hurt anyone touched him. While jumping on a trampoline, he fell and bounced back up and complained that his arm was broking. It finally became the point where no wanted to play with him, because he would start crying every time.
When parents start valuing everything a five year old says, it is a clear indicator of his future unless he can use friends to balance him. But if he is not allowed to be with other kids, his future does not look socially and academically bright. He had a trouble learning new information on a topic that he had learned earlier due to his stubborn behavior. He always thought he had the right to stand up to teachers, because his parents would let him. The "big" words he thought he knew what they meant proved to hurt his vocabulary, because again he thought he knew the real meaning. Overall, he was unable to hold friendships and was put into a small, private school after elementary school.

Fuckin' Piglet, man

2008-11-21T04:33:00.000-08:00

The author of the article raises some very valid arguments. The one issue that really struck a chord with me is that of over stimulation of children through the likes of DVDs such as "Baby Einstein." I had the displeasure of witnessing one of these videos firsthand when a friend of mine's sister had a baby. The baby's grandparents, while meaning well, spoiled rotten the little shitting/farting/puking machine, which included forcing it to watch these videos. Seriously, toddler TV? Haven't we realized that TV is not the greatest thing in the world? To me, it seems these videos are conditioning babies to become TV-aholics, prepping them for a lifetime of tube staring, getting them ready to buy into all of the ads, corporate and media biases, social norms, and every other kind of bullshit you can think of that's on TV....I'm thinking MTV's "Laguna Beach" and every other reality show. Real quick, I'd like to insert a "shout out" of my hate towards MTVU (University), the train wreck of music programming that is the Handschumacher's pride and joy. I loathe you MTV...loathe you.

Getting back to the point, the author also brought up the role that mothers play in child whimp-making. I feel fortunate that my parents raised me in what I believe to be a semi normal, healthy fashion, as opposed to an overbearing, whimp-factory of a household. Growing up, I had neighbors who embodied the the spirit of over-parenting. This mom literally wore a fanny pack (bad enough) with antibacterial hand gel inside (even worse). Her son, who is my age, grew up playing interactive educational computer games and was completely coddled since day one...He could do absolutely nothing without his mother's permission and guidance. Even worse, still, was the god like status his parents gave to EVERYTHING Disney. I can't name one thing in their house that didn't have a god-damned picture of Winnie the Pooh on it. A flag, a friggin' flag, hung outside their door with that retard Piglet on it. And of course, their son is ultimately devoid of a personality. So, let my story be a warning to ye all. Stear clear of the Piglet.

Response to "The Price of Success"

2008-11-20T20:55:00.001-08:00

I knew lots and lots of kids who had this same experience. Little league hockey was a really big deal where I grew up, even more than professional hockey, for both boys and girls. A lot of parents would push their children to play more aggressively, to join more than one league, and occasionally even to cheat during games. A lot of kids stopped liking the game, or else treated it purely as a way to gain their parents' approval, which turned out even worse. By the time they were in high school, it was pretty crazy. I heard stories about kids trying to break each others' shins and stuff, getting into fights about games outside of the rink, and one about this girl who tried to hurt her team mate so she could take her place.

Child Captivity...really?

2008-11-20T20:42:00.000-08:00

I think many people could look at this article and automatically cast it off as something that they see everywhere but couldn't possibly apply to them personally. However as I read through the article I could definitely identify certain aspects that pertained to not only me, but most of my friends. In my opinion, a certain amount of parenting needs to be devoted to pushing your children to succeed to the best of their abilities; whether that can be considered as overparenting is all up to an individual’s perception. I know a fair amount of parents who have succeeded intellectually, financially, and as a result, emotionally. Therefore it seems reasonable to want their children to continue to live under the high standards that the parents have set. Clearly buying an education through excessive tutors and services does not constitute learning, but rather a way of weaseling around “The System.” Of course I know an abundance of parents who are excessively involved in their children’s lives. However I think it’s a little too easy to blame this generation’s ambition and increasing stress and workload on parents. For every parent that has pushed their child into trying something the child resented, I know just as many children who find their drive and need to overwork themselves from within.
One of my friends, in particular, did not come from a family where the parents could afford tutors for their children or extra help on the college application process. Nevertheless, ever since the seventh grade she continually took the most difficult courses that were offered and through an innumerable amount of hours devoted to study and her own drive and intelligence, she graduated as valedictorian of my graduating class. When children are young, I can see how many parents may pressure them into trying many different things and giving the child more than they can handle. However when a child reaches a certain age, that drive to succeed turns from a need to please the parents into their own drive to succeed. I definitely agree with the author of the article when he states that as far as familial problems go, there are worse things than a pushy parent.

It's all about locking yourself in your room and doing work because my DAD and MOM said so !!

2008-11-20T19:09:00.000-08:00

The article “The Child Trap” has many various truths in what they are talking about. I agree with them that over parenting can corrupt a kid when they grow up. Over parenting keeps the kid away from growing up and keeps them away from making their own decision. If their parent makes all the decision throughout their life, than what does the kid learn? The kid learns absolutely nothing. Over parenting can lead to so many things especially when the kid hits college, the over parenting can ruin their academics and also their right to make a decision. I have a friend whose parents can relate to this article.

One of my friend is in college right now, but throughout his life he was pushed to do much stuff that a regular age guy in his grade wouldn’t do. His parents always pushed him to take all honors and AP classes. By the end of senior year when he counted up his honors and AP classes they were about 18 or so, he has never taken a regular class. Also, his parents were very strict about him going out. It was always about doing work and reading ahead in all his subjects. So, when all us friends decide to go out we call and ask him, his answer would always be “No, I’m sorry my parents said I can’t.” After a while we just gave up because we knew what the answer was going to me. His parents were also strict about letting him to his SENIOR PROM! Its like are you serious? He had to work around his parents and make sure he got good grades in order to go to the prom. Also, if he wanted to go to prom he wasn’t allowed to go out for 2 months or so. I believe that over parenting was a bad idea because now when he came to college it kicked him in his butt.

What I mean about that is that, once he got into college he had all the freedom to whatever he wants. Also, his parents pushed him to take honor classes. Do you know where that got him? It’s only first semester and he was doing bad because he had all the freedom to do what he wants. So, he took advantage of that freedom and screwed his grades over. This is why I believe that over parenting can corrupt a child. My parents were like that somewhat, but made them understand that if I do extra stuff I can ruin my GPA in high school and also in college. That made my parents realize that I should be able to make decisions and do what is best for me.

2008-11-20T17:07:00.000-08:00

When I was much younger, I was best friends with a girl who fit the description of overparented kids to a T. She was in a million activities, everything from soccer to ventriloquism lessons (no joke), and whenever she showed the slightest interest in anything else, her parents started looking into getting her into some class for it. They adored her; she could do no wrong in their eyes, and so they indulged her every whim.
She wasn't a bad kid. She was very sweet and a good friend, but she could be grating. Any setback in school--a bad score on a test, someone else's poster being prettier than hers-- was a disaster. Being 'it' for too long in tag inevitably resulted in her quitting the game. At the tender age of eight, she taught me the reason so many adults let children win at board games. The day was not complete until this girl had cried at least once.
I wouldn't say she was unhappy, exactly, but most of her friends were kids she'd met through playdates her mother had set up with other mothers, and she often said to me that she wished she had as much free time as I did. It was really too bad, because there were a fair number of other kids our own age in our neighborhood, and those of us who weren't constantly being shuffled from one organized activity to another hung out a lot together and got to be good friends.

Big Sissy Kid

2008-11-20T15:49:00.000-08:00

I grew up in a hick area with no danger or anything really dangerous around me. Sure there were a lot of drugs like coke and heroin, and a lot of people were busted for it at my school, but it was never anything more serious than that. I used to have a friend, whom was at one point my best friend, but not anymore. We used to be best buds, but we started drifting apart after freshmen year of high school, but we were getting along and hanging out more junior and senior year. This kid grew up listening to his parents, trying to be the perfect child. He got all good grades, and was a decent baseball player, but nothing spectacular. My family knew his, and his knew mine, and they were friends with each other. This kid had a problem that made people not like him because he was a cocky sissy. One time in gym class he had a dodge ball hit him in the face. After being hit in the face with the ball, he waited until the kid who threw the ball to turn around, and he punched the other student in the back of the head. The gym teacher had to tackle the other student so he would not beat the living shit out of the kid. Once they were both in the principal's office, the kid starting bawling with tears rolling down his face. The principal suspended the other kid for 3 days for provoking the kid who punched the other got just one measly internal suspension. He cried his way out of a suspension and got another kid in trouble for being such a little baby. That was only one of the many things that made kids hate him. He was the know it all kid that thought he was the best at everything and wasn't. The reason he acted like this is because his parents raised him to think like that, and he needs to learn to deal with stuff like that. His parents would complain to the school if he got in trouble for anything. He has to learn how to not rely on mommy and daddy to get you out of trouble for stupid stuff that he blows out of proportion. He blew that situation out of proportion, and he blew the situation which made him hate one of my close friends and I. He needs to learn to figure out what is an actual big problem, and what not to worry about, and he should not worry about every little thing and hate people for decisions they make like my friend and I did.

The Price of Success

2008-11-19T20:07:00.000-08:00

Coming from a single-sex college preparatory school, the article “Child Trap” rings many truths. Everyday I interacted with girls whose parents hovered, writing their papers, finishing their projects, and sideline-coaching their sports, just to name a few. While all our parents wanted us to succeed, whether in the classroom or in the field, a few parents went the extra step to make this possible. One victim of over parenting is an extremely good friend of mine. We met each other our freshman year during volleyball preseason and instantly clicked. As time passed I began to notice something peculiar; her parents were overly involved in her volleyball career. Her father attended every volleyball practice and game, befriending the coach and constantly offering input. As she became a more experienced player, her parents starting pushing the recruitment process for college. They filled out her profile, videotaped her performance, and hired a personal trainer. Volleyball became the topic of every conversation and consumed every minute of every day. Whenever I would try to hang out or talk, her response would be same, “my parents won’t let me, I have to work out (or do my SAT work or edit my video)”. My friend lost her freedom and her passion at the hands of her parents and their desire to have her succeed on the volleyball court. Ultimately, the girl I met freshman year had lost her love for the game. Slowly our friendship diminished. She went on to earn a full scholarship to Division I school but at what expense? The love her parents’ had for her is undeniable, but their constant pushing and pressure took the joy of growing up right out from under her. My friend exemplifies what the article discusses briefly; while the percentage of over parented children age, they quite possibly will succeed in life, but what good is success when the love for the game is gone.

Princeton, NYU, GW, Harvard..

2008-11-19T19:03:00.000-08:00

These days, kids are under a lot of pressure to be the best at everything. Parents are making their kids participate in activities and sports that the son/daughter may not even want to take part in. I personally know a few people who have parents that are described in the article “The Child Trap”. My parents were always strict about mostly everything that I did, but when I see the pressures that my cousins go through, I feel like my parents take it easy on me. My three cousins are completely overparented by their mom and dad. School is the main subject that the parents are strict about. All three of my cousins have to take AP classes and do well in them. If they come home with a bad grade, the parents will make sure that the kids do not go out that weekend or do anything but study and do work. They have to participate in a few activities afterschool along with take SAT classes, take practice tests, come to family events etc. To top it off, they have the mind set that they have to go to an Ivy league school like NYU or Princeton, and the parents will not accept anything less then that. Every time I asked my cousin to come out with me to the mall or out for lunch her response would be, ”hold on let me ask my mom”

…2 minutes later…

“no sorry I cant my mom wont let me, I have to do my SAT work and I have a test that I have to study for”. After a while, I stopped asking because I knew exactly what her answer would be. I guess being strict about school is a good thing but only to a certain extent. My cousin would get so fed up about her parents that she would want to go against what they wanted just to prove a point. When this happens, you know the parents have gone way past their limit.

Overparented Children can have Rebellious Actions

2008-11-19T18:08:00.000-08:00

One claim that the author makes about overparented children is that they face heavy academic schedules as well as a strenuous list of extracurricular activities. One of my friends from home, in my opinion, is overparented. Her parents force her to go to summer school and tell her she must take the hardest classes available to her. For extracurricular activities, she has a long and varied list. She participates in sports such as tennis and winter track. Also, she is on student council, advisory board and is a member of the Asian Student Association. On weekends, my friend has an early curfew. Her parents believe she should stay in and study rather than hang out with friends. However, she usually ends up sneaking out or going places without telling her parents where she is going because she does not agree with their rules and feels the need to be rebellious. I am not surprised that she does this, and I believe a lot of children who are overparented do the same thing because they feel like they are being suffocated and have no time to do activities that they want to do.

Another example of overparenting is when the child participates in an activity because his or her parents want them to. My father was overparented in this aspect. When he was young, my dad was a member of the marching band and played the saxophone. He only did this because his parents wanted him to. What my dad really wanted to do was play the guitar, but could not do this because his parents would not let him.

"Everywhere i saw him, he had a basketball in his hand"

2008-11-19T16:57:00.000-08:00

I can't say much for this article. i know the type of people that are out there, but my parents have been some of the best around. No joke, like i'm not writing this to get out of writing a lot, my mom especially has been very good at giving me my space yet still encouraging me just the right amount. I tested her too. There were many different things that i started that i also dropped quickly, but she backed (and paid for) every one of them. Some of these activities included violin, karate, soccer, baseball, etc. I did it all and my mom wished i stuck with something but was happy i had so many interests.

However, i did have a friend in elementary school that was seriously pushed by his father to play basketball. Ever since i could remember, this could was always on the A team and his dad was always at every game cheering him on; which seems ok until i asked him if he truly loved it. To my shock he said no, i hate basketball, but if i ever told my dad, he would be crushed. He used to play and he put so much time, money, and effort into me. He even makes me carry around a ball to practice dribbling wherever I go. Then i thought to myself, yeah everywhere i saw him, he had a basketball in his hand. It is so odd.

Anyways, he wound up coming to my high school midway through the year. I found this kind of odd because i always thought he loved his high school, that's what he always told me. Then i asked one of my friends why he transfered, and he said that his dad made him because he wasn't starting on the basketball team from his old school. I don't know if that's true, i never really asked him about it. But i did ask him again if he felt the same way about basketball as he did in grammar school and he said no, he grew into it, and he is known for it and he said that it is really good to be good at something, and he is an amazing player, so i'm happy he found his own place to call home.

For the Love of the Game? Or Mommy's?

2008-11-19T14:42:00.000-08:00

Something I found to be very true in the article is that overparenting is preventing children from completely growing up and being independent. I notice this quite often in my little cousins. My two younger cousins, who are brothers, are constantly busy. They are both on three different competitive, traveling, soccer teams. Besides being in school and different clubs, they constantly have to rush around to make sure all their work is done and that they're ready for practice (for which ever team it is that night) by the time their parents get home from work. In the summer they go to a soccer camp during the day while their parents are at work, and then off to practices when they're done. My cousins used to love soccer but now everytime I see them they are moaning about having to go to soccer and would rather just play their videogames. Another thing I noticed about my cousins is that not only is my aunt just all over them all the time to get their work done, but she has too. It's like they can't do anything unless being told by their mother. I've always thought of them as my much younger cousins and was kind of shocked to be reminded that they are only two years younger. This is one case where I can see the truth from the article. All the over-parenting they have recieved has damaged their independence and ability to grow up. I can forsee in the future they will probably quit soccer and my aunt and uncle won't know what to do, and it will be the best thing they ever did.

Hey mom and dad - I can't breath with you so close!

2008-11-19T10:59:00.000-08:00

The article "The Child Trap" discusses the ways in which parents choke their children with love, forces them to do too much too fast, and taking their childhood away too quickly. Children these days aren't just spoiled, they are spoiled and pressured, and the two sometimes go hand in hand. I went to elementary school with kids who would get money or a toy if they did well on a test or played well for their sports team. I was always told my reward is the education I was receiving, and that I didn't get a present because I was expected to do my best no matter what. Parents are biased and wrongly focused on what they think is best for their child. The article asks "How do you explain to the other mother that while her child spent the summer examining mollusks at marine-biology camp, yours was at regular old camp, stringing beads and eating s'mores?" I think there is a very simply answer to this question - my child was learning social skills and how to play and be a kid. There is so much pressure from such a young age that some important parts of childhood are lost in th chaos. Another good point which is made is about the children in East Asia. While they are scoring highest on their math and science tests, no one is actually enjoying math or science. When something you enjoy is forced upon you in mass quantities of which you must perfect all of them, the enjoyment is ripped out of the activity. You can often see this with kids sports teams. If someone loves playing soccer, they sign up for intramural soccer. A certain skill level is developed so the child moves on to travel soccer and worked his or her way up to play for the top team, at which point his or her life consists solely of soccer. Parents strangle their children with "love" and overly focus them onto one thing, rather than let them experience everything and then choose their favorite. All children need a chance to just enjoy life, to make friends from all different walks of life, and to just be playful. I'm not sure how truthful the facts about men these days are. Or rather, how much I support these facts. Just because women and men of color have the opportunity to hold high end positions doesn't validate white men slacking off. If there is more competition in the work force, one would assume people would just become more skilled and aggressive. It seems an easy out for people to just move back in with their parents because "life's too hard." It is ironic that parents push their children to succeed in everything, and it just turns around to leave the children overly dependent.

One of my best friends growing up was obsessed with dancing. Everywhere she was she would dance, any time we were waiting in line, or watching t.v. or anything, she just had to be dancing. Her parents wanted to be supportive, so they increased the number of dance classes she took. Then she joined the dance team. She ended up moving and changing high schools because there was an amazing dance school near her new house, and since she spent so much time there it was more convenient to live closer. Soon enough she was spending more time dancing then doing school work, sleeping, or being with her old friends. Everything was dance. By her sophomore year she was looking into dancing universities rather than going to a mainstream college. Half way through her junior year she hurt her ankle and was unable to perform in the midyear show. She realized how one permanent injury could ruin her life, because her life was dancing. She immediately looked into colleges which offered mainstream degrees, but she could dance for fun as well. She dropped some of her ballet classes and realized she had thrown away her old, functioning life for a stressful alternative. When she first made all these changes her parents flipped. She continuously had to remind them it was her life, and while she loved dancing, she wanted to be a successful wedding planner instead. It took some time, but eventually her parents realized the more they pushed her to do something and suffocate her with their own goals, the less she wanted to do it.

Crazy Parents

2008-11-19T07:44:00.000-08:00

The article "The Child Trap" reveals truths that I have seen in my everyday life. It is amazing how much pressure certain parents place on their children. I strongly disagree with forcing your kid to belong to several clubs, while taking on an extra academic load. Successful children are those who pick two to three activities that they enjoy an stick with. An old neighbor used to treat their son this way. He was my brother's age so I saw him a lot and always heard the stories of how great he was. My brother's friend was an "all star" soccer, football, baseball, and basketball player, as well as a member of the gifted and talented at school. He spent every minute of his life either studying or practicing. The poor kid never had time to play with his friends and unfortunately really wasn't that great and any of his activities. It would make much more sense if his parents allowed him to concentrate on a few sports that he could practice and eventually excel in. Hopefully now that he is older he is breaking away from his parents strings and beginning to walk on his own, to make his own decisions.

Overparenting among children

2008-11-18T15:38:00.000-08:00

There was a person who was over parented a lot in my community. I knew him from the day he was born and I have never seen anyone over parented like him. By the age of 4, he was put in these math and reading classes where he would learn his alphabet and numbers. He got homework on it every single night apart from the homework he would get from school. He is still taking these classes. When he turned 8, his mother put him in soccer and swimming lessons so that he has some extra-curricular activities. He had homework from school and homework to do from his learning classes every single day. He spent four hours doing homework at the age of 8. To top it off, four days of the week he was put in sports for 2 hours each. He would come home from school and be active from 4-10 almost every single day. When I was his age, I was in bed by 9 p.m. This boy is pressured to be active until 10 pm every day. I think he is extremely over parented. When I asked my parents they told me that it was a good thing. However, I knew that for a child it is very difficult to balance out such a busy life. A part of growing up is socializing with others and learning things from interactions. However, this kid was so caught up with work that he didn’t even have time for that.

Over Pro tech she onn

2008-11-17T18:56:00.000-08:00

A truth I do see in these methods is encouraging your children to become interested in something young, and if they are good at it they should be suggesting into continuing to explore this area. If a child is taught to read at a young age and you can convince them to read what they enjoy and therefore ultimately learn to like to read, there have been studies proving that a child who reads are more likely to expand their imaginations and vocabulary and essentially make that child more intelligent. This would be a build off of the classical music theory, that I was told in my districts gifted program does have a positive impact on its listeners.

In an "outside the box" sort of thinking, of a girl I know who really wanted to go out of state to the University of Delaware, did not receive acceptance as she had hoped. However, a male I know with worse credentials (lower GPA lower SAT and worse class rigor) was accepted because I assume they university needed more males. But maybe the University only needed more males because of the theory proposed in the article that because women are taking the place of men, boys do not go to college as much as girls because "why grow up?" The rewards for male whites are now increasingly going down, and I also know a man who graduated from art school with exceptional talent but because he didn't have the money to attend a better university or receive tutoring all his life he is still jobless two years out of college. An effect of what this article was saying with the new womens and minority rights laws.

Face it, my mom can write better essays than your mom.

2008-11-17T17:58:00.000-08:00

It's hard to find truth in this essay in my life because my parents always gave me the opportunity to be independent. I was not overstimulated as a baby, my parents never bought me a tutor, and they never pressured me to do more than I could handle. As for my friends, their parents were just like mine. I do remember two specific times where someone told me their parents wrote their papers for them, though. The first time this happened I went over to my friend's house to play. We were both in seventh grade and had science papers to write about the latest chapter. While Steffie and I were in the middle of Jenga her mom walked in with a printed paper in her hand and said, "I wrote it and printed it out. I don't want to see it tomorrow on the kitchen table. Don't forget to hand it in." I was at a loss for words. I really didn't think it was normal for my friend's mom to write her paper. Of course, since i was younger i wanted my mom to do the same thing but i never brought it up in my house because as far as i was concerned that was cheating. The second time I experienced this was my second week of college. Again, I was with a friend when she pulled out her paper and asked me whether or not it was okay that her mom added in a section to her paper. Her mom had written everything on the rough draft copy which was to be peer edited and returned to the teacher. Again, I was at a loss for words. I didn't understand why her mom would even do that to her own daughter. If i were my friend i would feel like my work isn't good enough. God only know how long her mom has been adding to her daughter's writing. How is my friend going to feel when her paper is full of only her words? And what about if she gets a job which requires her to write long things on her own?

Overparenting..."Were you fortunate or not?"

2008-11-16T17:20:00.000-08:00

I do see some truth in the arguments from, "The Child Trap," article. However the article caters to the parenting of upper class and high middle class people. This does not completely pertain to my household therefor my insight into the topic is based on views of my friend's families. For example I had one good friend of mine whom fits into this category extremely well. He was part of a more upper middle class family. My friend was in the top 5% of our high school class and also the captain of our soccer team. Since he was able to grasp a sport his family was traveling hours away for different sports practices. At many points he has been overwhelmed with the expectations and activities placed on him by his parents. The over parenting aspect is especially prevalent in high school sports scene. The, "Soccer Mom," term is now a household name. My friend's mom took this to the next level. In fact she ran our whole high school soccer organization besides the coaching of the players! The soccer mom term correlates with the over parenting topic. I do partially disagree with one of the stories points though. According to the article some of the supporters of the theory think that this over parenting may be hurting the success of the child. I do not find this true because my friend has been able to stay level headed and keep a balance life. I would not be surprised to see him doing well in any job position in the future. Another example of over parenting is with my brother. My mother and father have a completely opposite approach to handling my brother. My mom takes the over parenting approach. Unfortunately for him my mom keeps tabs on everything he does. She constantly wants to know where he is, when he will be places, and who he is with. She goes to the extreme to find these things out. However my brother may also deserve this treatment.

Record label mergers

2008-11-16T14:20:00.000-08:00

Property in the “Global” Music Market by Jack Bishop
The merger of the recorded music divisions of Sony and BMG, finalized on August 5, 2004, created the world’s largest music company while reducing the “Big Five” labels to the “Big Four.” The new goliath Sony BMG Music Entertainment will now control over 30% of the global music market. As power and resources were being consolidated in the music industry, regular amendments to the length of copyright terms were extending private ownership of creative works, delaying their passage into the public domain. This study analyzes how the world’s media giants use their power and property to influence national and international laws in order to lock down culture and control creativity. Since 1980, the rate at which record labels merge has increased dramatically due in part to horizontal integration. Horizontal integration allows record labels to control a larger market share by acquiring publishing companies, manufacturing facilities, distribution companies, and retailers. When it comes to the music business, the model is integration, control as many things as you possibly can. This is the reason why every label today is fighting for the largest possible share in the market. Through buyouts and mergers, labels are ruthlessly taking what they need to in order to secure their own future in this turbulent industry. Merger after merger has resulted in four major labels that together control over 85 percent of the market. Universal, Sony/BMG, Warner, and EMI sit with a heavy responsibility on their shoulders. The responsibility to pull an industry from its declining trend and set it in a path that is favorable first and foremost for the artist and the consumer. Whether or not this solution means further mergers or possible separations is unknown. Either way, I can guarantee that in 50 years from now the labels that hold the titles now will no longer be there. This is an industry where labels come and go, mediums come and go, and artists come and go, but the passion for making and listening to music will always survive.

Works Cited:
Bishop, Jack. “What Does ‘World Music’ Sound Like? Identity and Authenticity in ‘World Beat’.” Pop sounds: Klangtexturen in der Pop- und Rockmusik. Ed. Thomas Phelps and Ralf von Appen. Bielefeld: Transcriipt Verlag, 2003. 78-161

DO YOU WANT FRIES WITH THAT? AN EXPLORATION OF SERVING SIZE, SOCIAL WELFARE, AND OUR WAISTLINES

2008-11-15T00:58:00.000-08:00

Thomas D Jeitschko, Rowena A Pecchenino. Economic Inquiry. Huntington Beach: Jul 2006. Vol. 44, Iss. 3; pg. 442, 9 pgs

Fast food is the cheap and convenient way to fill your self up. This article is about how the American fast food industry has had a really huge effect on American’s waistlines. Every form of media has informed people about the increasing amount of people being diagnosed for diabetes and for overall obesity. Many fast food companies have been sued for having food that has increased diseases and obesity in the population. Many big food companies have recognized this huge problem and have tried to help by becoming more health- conscious such as Kraft, reducing it’s serving sizes for packaged foods, and places such as McDonalds and Wendy’s offering salads and fruits on the menu. Even schools have started to change the way the dining services work. Instead of bad carbs, there are more fruits and vegetables available and instead of soda machines, there is milk, water and juice. In the fast food industry, the portion sizes have increased since 1970’s. Eating outside in fast food restaurants is obviously worse then eating a home cooked meal with less trans/saturated fats and actually knowing the ingredients, the portion sizes are bigger also. People over eat many times and with so many choices, people have the option to not order the supersized items or anything that is unhealthy in that case. The one big question left to ask is, “Should government restrict fast food companies from making such unhealthy foods because they are unhealthy or should government stay out of it and let Americans have what they want?”

What are the risk factors of the rise obesity among children and adolescents?

2008-11-14T18:17:00.000-08:00

Evaluating Obesity and Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Children and Adolescents
Roseann T Spiotta, Gregory B Luma. American Family Physician. Leawood: Nov 1, 2008. Vol. 78, Iss. 9; pg. 1052, 7 pgs

This article discusses the increase in obesity of children and adolescents. Obesity has been a growing health problem in the United States for years. “According to the 2003-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 17 percent of persons two to 19 years of age are overweight” (Spiotta and Luma). In the past twenty years, the number of obese children tripled. Children who are obese at a young age tend to continue their obesity as adults. Obesity is dangerous because it is linked to many cardiovascular problems like hypertension, diabetes, and hyperlipidemia. These cardiovascular diseases have been usually linked with adults. However, since there is such a rapid increase in obesity of children, they are encountering these diseases before adulthood. Hypertension in children ranged from 1-3% of the population. However, now 5% of the children have it. Childhood hypertension may lead to adult hypertension which is a major risk factor for coronary artery disease and stroke (Spiotta and Luma). There has been a great increase in the number of children with type 2 diabetes, which is parallel to the rise in obesity. “The 2003-2004 NHANES found that 10 percent of persons two to 19 years of age have serum total cholesterol levels greater than 200 mg per dL” (Spiotta and Luma). Studies showed that children who had higher BMI’s had higher cholesterol levels.
This means that along with a rise in obesity among children, there is also a rise in adult cardiovascular diseases among them. Diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia are diseases that were once linked with just adults. Now, however, children as young as two years old are being diagnosed. Obesity is linked to all of these diseases. As there is an increase in obesity, there is also an increase in these diseases.

Mitigating Climate Change: Who Pays? Who Benefits?

2008-11-14T17:57:00.000-08:00

The article I read was Mitigating Climate Change: Who Pays? Who Benefits? The article states that the international climate change affects the west and the United States. This is because these two regions have shown to be the primary responsibility for the carbon dioxide emissions. Because we cause most of these problems and the increase in the gases these areas should be the ones to control the emissions. The article states that the world would benefit as a whole if the gases were cleaned up, but the cost would be across the entire world. The different nations would be differently affected because each nation would have to pay a certain amount to reduce the gases.

In defense of *$\#\#@&$%#

2008-11-13T08:33:00.001-08:00

In the article "In defense of *$\#\#@&$%#"

In the scholarly article "In defense of *$\#\#@&$%#" by Anna Quindlen, the author talks about verbal abuse and swearing. She contemplates as to what exactly swearing is about and why people would be swearing,and whether is it actually bad to swear in public. She gives instaces of people like George W. Bush and Hillary Clinton who have been caught swaring in public which was later supressed by people as having no bad meaning in it. She also mentions that swearing may also be used just to assert a particular statement and may not necessarily have an inclination to sexual behaviour. Infact according to studies adults are more likely(13%) to swear among their friends as opposed to an 8 % by college children. We can thus relate the article with the article"Freedom's Curse", as that also ponders upon the point that actually abusing is done by one and all, and it is just a way to emphasize a particular point without having any sexual inclination or double meaning in it. Both the articles also try and bring up a point that words like jerk, shit and fart which were offensive words, have become a normal language for people from all age groups.This shows us that swearing actually is not bad if not said in an offensive way. So much offense from te government against swearing is actually a non sensical thing which can be put off to solve bigger problems than this tiny little one.

Link:http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=0&did=60722144&SrchMode=1&sid=3&Fmt=3&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1226507666&clientId=18133

Step the f@ck up!!!

2008-11-12T17:12:00.000-08:00

The Article I read was "Four Letter Foul" by Alexis Burling. This article gave an overview about the use of cursing in everyday America. Parents all over the country are concerned if not obsessed with censoring their children. They censor their children from violence, sex, and foul language. In an attempt to accomplish such censorship, parents have reached out to the government to impliment bans on cursing and allusive language. In response the FCC has limited the broadcasting of cursing to times when children are not most commonly watching television. I think this is unnecessary and unfair, especially to those who watch daytime and evening television programs that aren't targeted at children. If parents are so concerned with what their children are "consuming" then they should actively prevent it. This can be done by taking your children away from the television or controlling what they see. There are far too many parents that entertain their children by simply plopping them down in front of the television with the remote and a snack. So may parents complain about the effects the media has on children when the simple solution is to control what they are exposed to. After all, it would be incredibly detrimental if they heard a fart.

Television Indecency

2008-11-12T16:58:00.000-08:00

The article I read is titled Nonsense of Indecency by Jacob Sullum. Both the articles , Nonsense of Indecency and Freedom's curse have highlighted the use of curse words and offensive language on television. The articles mention that the use of indecent language on television does not imply the literal meaning of the word, sometimes it is just used to describe one's emotion. For example, both the articles mention the use of the 'F' word by Bono at an award function, which was regarded as an expression of his emotions at that time, and not was not meant to be offensive. The meanings of swear words which may have been offensive earlier are not anymore, they have become a medium to express one's emotion.

The year was 1984.....

2008-11-12T10:31:00.000-08:00

The article I read in correlation to the Atlantic article "Freedom's Curse" was called "Media Censorship Helps Build Police States" published by the Federal Debt Relief System. The article argues that the government's surveillance of what Americans say and regulating what they are allowed to say creates a police state. The author of the article compares this police state to one similar of Big Brother in the George Orwell novel, 1984. The author argues that by allowing the government to regulate what we are allowed to say in the media, we are having our right to freedom of speech taken away from us.

Cursed Genders

2008-11-12T10:16:00.000-08:00

The article that i chose, "The Use of Offensive Language by Men and Women in Prime Time Television Entertainment, written by Barry S. Sapolsky of Florida State University and Barbara K. Kaye of the University of Tennessee, talks about the gender differences on television, and the roles in which they play becoming more universal. Women have been known to take on a more manly role and curse like men have in the past, and men vice versa. This is related to "Freedom's Curse" because they both talk about banning certain words, but it relates to women as well.
The gender related words have been banned in all television or music. Words such as gay and cunt and twat are no longer used because of their explicitive nature. Gay used to be meant as a non-offensive descriptive word, and now people use it in a completely different context. Cunt and twat are both words that relate to the female gentalia, and people have started using them as insults, to maybe call someone a coward or weak. There should be no words in the English language that are not permitted, and people need to learn to use words in the right context, so as to allow this to happen. It is amazing how many words have been banned from television and even speech. If a man or woman would use even piss in a formal conversation, it would strike the onlookers and other person as out of the ordinary, although many would let it slide, due to its clement nature. There are too many words nowadays that have been banned, and people have to go out of their way and shock others to color their language a little more than usual.

Research is Good

2008-11-12T10:11:00.000-08:00

A Washington Post article from roughly a year ago highlights the hypocrisy in the FCC that the Atlantic article was attempting to get across. The writer of the Atlantic piece attempted to highlight the silliness of the FCC's rules because words are arbitrary. According to him, they are merely representations of an idea society has of something. He lambastes the FCC and uses court reversals of policy to exemplify the alleged stupidity in the organization. Atlantic writer Steven Pinker perhaps would have had a stronger article had he incorporated some of the facts from the Post article. The Post article is not an op-ed nor does it have a political tilt. It is a report on a set of facts about the FCC. Pinker's writing would be significantly improved with the use of this information because the Post presents a contradiction in FCC policy. It states that while voting information is not supposed to be leaked to the public, "Nine stakeholders...told us that they hear this information from both FCC bureau staff and commissioner staff." Pinker's theories about the poor job that the FCC is doing would be more validated if he were to include these hard facts about the establishment. Maybe a little research would have helped out Mr. Pinker.

That's Gay!

2008-11-12T09:41:00.000-08:00

One of the main points made in The Atlantic’s article, “Freedom’s Choice” (http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200811/swear-words) was about questioning the government’s roll in censorship of broadcast TV but it also made an interesting point about how the usage and context of words in the English language can change their meaning. The FCC has banned the word fuck due to its sexual connotation but in many cases it is used more as a simple exclamation to give emphasis to what is being said. This can be hard to codify into policy because subtle changes, such as the difference between “fucking awesome” and “awesome fucking” can drastically change the intended meaning.
Another word like this with drastic meaning changes with subtle context changes is the word gay. It can be easily misinterpreted, like in a case in CA where a student was disciplined for saying “that’s so gay” and the school was sued by her parents for violation of her rights. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17388702/) The student claimed that she was not intentionally trying to offend the gay community or insult anyone, she was just saying that something was “That's so stupid, that's so silly, that's so dumb.”
Whether the homosexual community or the overly politically correct would like to admit it or not, the word gay has at two common meanings. Depending on the context, it can mean “stupid, silly or dumb” or “homosexual.” I’m sure there are some people use it as “stupid” in attempt to insult homosexuals but from my experiences the two meanings are separate. I even know many gay people (the homosexual type, not stupid) that use it in both meanings but some are very offended by it. Gay originally meant happy and then had the homosexual meaning added to it. I do not understand why people can not accept that its meaning has changed again.

What the BLEEP?!

2008-11-12T08:46:00.000-08:00

The scholarly article “What the [Bleep]?!” from New York Magazine is tangential to “Freedom’s Curse” from The Atlantic because it describes how the Federal Communications City (FCC) is trying to control what words should be ‘bleeped’ on the air and what is okay. The author, Kurt Anderson, explains a lot of the same things that Mike Byers does in the article such as the fact that the FCC did not punish NBC network for foul language and indecency in Bono’s acceptance speech: “This is really, really fucking brilliant.” Like Byers, Anderson also explained that it depends how the dirty word is used in a sentence (according to the government, not himself). Going on to explain other things besides bad language, the article talks about Janet Jackson’s nipple flash at the Super Bowl. Anderson talks about both sides and wonders himself if the FCC is becoming too involved in TV regulation.

The two articles explain a lot of the same things. Both articles mentioned that the FCC claimed that any use or variation of the word “fuck” will always refer back to sexual images. “What the [Bleep]?!” focuses more on how the FCC wants to fine television shows, such as South Park but it still being debated. I think that the main concern is young children watching daytime programs that have profanity; will it really negatively affect how the child will behave? Ultimately, kids will someway kind a way to explore the internet and see/hear profanity or talk to other children who may have learned profanity just by being in their home. This idea was brought up in both articles as well; it’s inevitable and I think that even though it’s the FCC’s job to watch what gets thrown out in the public’s eye, there are much more important things to worry about.

Article URL: http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=1062701771&sid=5&Fmt=3&clientId=18133&RQT=309&VName=PQD

Profanity

2008-11-12T08:09:00.001-08:00

The article I found is called "The Psychology of Profanity" and it's by Professor G. T. W. Patrick from the University of Iowa. It appears in the March, 1991 Vol.VIII. No. 2. of The Psychological Review. In it he attempts to answer two questions,; Why do we swear? and When we swear, why do we use the words we use? This is directly related to "Freedom's Curse" from The Atlantic.
In "The Psychology of Profanity" the author states the different ways profanity comes about, and how it roots are that of our human history. He also says profanity is a direct result of a persons anger. He then goes into the pyschology behind this. In saying why we use the words we do, he states it is becasue they are shocking. They produce a shock to the one in which they are directed. The Professor concludes "profanity is a primative and instinctive form of reaction to a situation which threatens in some way the well-being of the individual, standing next to that of actual combat."
This article is connected to "Freedom's Curse" whereas they both discuss the nature of the swear word. In "Freedom's Curse" the author describes how swearing has led to some of the biggest freedom of speech cases in America. So, in saying swearing is wrong for children to hear, the courts are saying, that we can't shock our children according to Professor Patrick's article. However, this is against human nature, as shocking someone is by far the best way to get a reaction or a result. Banning words no matter how shocking they are is something I see as wrong. Just like the Professor said it is the closest thing to actual combat there is, so you could agrue the courts rulings in these cases has created more violence. More violence for our young to see all around them.

2008-11-12T08:09:00.000-08:00

The article of THE NEWS MEDIA AS POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS is located at: http://arjournals.annualreviews.org.ezproxy.library.drexel.edu/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.polisci.5.111201.115816?prevSearch=freedom+of+speech

Government's Fourth Branch of Government

2008-11-12T07:54:00.000-08:00

The article THE NEWS MEDIA AS POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS explains how the media has become a way to shape our government. When the radio and television emerged, the public was opened up to a way of consistently keeping a check on the government. We were never exposed to 24/7 information on the government before this. Since the media has gained our trust as viewers, we are ultimately subject to whatever the media wants to say. It then goes on keeps the other branches of government in check.
How this relates to Freedom's Curse is that FCC is creating such a thin line between what is acceptable to be said and what is offensive. The FCC, which is a federal commission, is able to limit what the media can say to the public. The FCC is able to "regulate indecency." Since there is supposed to be freedom of speech and press, when will the FCC restrict curses but also restrict information that is seem "indecent."
The line between appropriate and indecent is very thin. In my opinion, it is all debatable. Some find an artificial word offensive, and others find it simply as letters. I do not think that the Founding Fathers were worried about what words are allowed and what words are forbidden. As a culture, we have limited these words so much that hey have become center for evil language. It was never the intent of the words; however, we are responsible for how great or little the significance is.

Freedom's Curse

2008-11-12T07:32:00.000-08:00

An article that I found which had a relationship to the “Freedom’s Curse” article is called “Rebellion in the Top Music Charts: Defiant Messages in Rap/Hip-hop and Rock Music 1993 and 2003”. This article is about how rap and and rock songs with rebellious messages are now the majority of songs on the top charts. These types of songs, which have messages about impulsiveness, are more common now-a-days than before.

The article “Freedom’s Curse” discusses swearing on television and radio. They discuss whether or not it is right to expose young children to this kind of language. The author brings up the point that it depends how a curse word is used in the sentence. If a curse word is used as an adjective, and not in an offensive context, then it is not as bad. Parents have the control over their kids to decide whether or not they want their child listening to certain things.

These two articles are related because they both have to do with inappropriate language, and messages in the media. It seems as though there is a trend developing where bad language and messages are becoming more popular to be said on television, radio and in songs. The question is, do people find inappropriate songs, television shows and radio talk shows more entertaining than others? This is not a good trend because kids will be influenced in bad ways if this trend keeps occurring.

http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=main.doiLanding&uid=2008-03514-003

Freedom's Curse

2008-11-12T06:13:00.000-08:00

In the article "Language evolution and the spread of ideas on the Web: A procedure for identifying emergent hybrid word family members" talks about some of the same things as "Freedom's Curse". It talks about how words have come to mean different things and the historical evolution of words. This article is connected to "Freedom's Curse" because both articles talk about what words have come to mean and the impact that they have on the people around them when used. Words have come to mean many different things to different people and sometimes the meanings are offensive, but people don't always understand the way others mean the word.

What Makes a Word Bad?

2008-11-12T05:16:00.000-08:00

The very first amendment in The Constitution of the United States is freedom of speech, so how can the government use censorship? Freedom's Curse discusses words which can "corrupt the moral order." What is it that makes a word or phrase immoral? What does it mean to be a "bad word"? If no one thought of "fuck" as an offensive word, would it still be? Any word could be used offensively, just in a matter of context. So why does America feel the need to protect children from such naughty words? On the National Coalition Against Censorship website it states how television and media are treated differently because of the mass audience it reaches and that "the most-cited rationale to justify restrictions on indecency and attempts to restrict violence i the interest in protecting children from potentially harmful material" The reality of it is people are going to hear these banned words at one point or another. Kids are going to learn about guns and sex, so why not educate them instead of pretending it doesn't exist. In the article Not in Front of the Children: A Reply to the Critics Marjorie Heins rebuttals the criticisms of her book which argues society today is overly sensitive to speech and media. She brilliantly compares todays television and movies to Roman and Medieval times when people watch other people battle to the death as entertainment. She compares Shakespeare to video games, which, when you think about it, Shakespeare can be much more 'offensive' in these terms. The greatest writer of all times explores stories of love and hate, sex and violence, the disturbing truth of human nature. So why are love affairs and suicide acceptable when written in old english terms, but porn and gunning unacceptable in todays entertainment? By parents trying to protect their children they are just making matters seem worse. If a parent just sits a child down and explains a video game is not reality, and that in reality violence it not okay or that sex is a natural part of adult life but one must wait to participate in it, children will understand the truth about the issues. Saying no to a child about something teaches it is bad in all circumstances. America is at war, violence is the world's reality, and sheltering children is unhealthy. Heins emphasizes that parents and the government are making the error of "assuming that there is a necessary conflict between free expression and the welfare of kids" and this wrong assumption is the cause for most censorship. If this country would focus more on the education of truth about the issues freedom of speech wouldn't need to be questioned, because children would learn their values at a young enough age to know the reality of violence, sex, and the world.

http://www.ncac.org/action_issues/Radio_&_Television.cfm

http://www.ncac.org/literature/20011001~USA~Marjorie_Heins_Responds_to_Critics_of_Book-Not_in_Front_of_the_Children.cfm

Should We Dispose the Garbage?

2008-11-12T01:19:00.000-08:00

“Freedom’s Curse” was a provocative article about the expletive language found in modern day culture. “Taboo words” were said to activate humans emotionally creating controversy over its use on television shows and movies. Expletive language has now become an innate feature of our modern day culture and people have adapted to its explicit nature to the point where people just expect it. The scholarly article, “Broadcast Indecency” from the CQ Researcher, argues about whether or not indecency is demoralizing American society and whether the FCC should regulate. According to the article, television “showed 6.7 scenes featuring topics related to sexuality every hour, and the average teenager watches three to four hours of television a day.” This demonstrates that children are habitually influenced by sexual content in their everyday lives. This constant influence is said to cause children to believe that “… ‘having sex is beneficial.’” Children are getting the false impression that everyone is having sex because they hear provocative words that were discussed in the article “Freedom’s Curse”. Although the effects of this exposure seem to be self evident, the statistics demonstrate that it’s not affecting our society as much as predicted. Statistics show that “…pregnancy rates among U.S. teenagers have dropped to the lowest level ever recorded, and fewer teenagers are having sex.” Maybe this new culture is informing children at a young age what is right and what is wrong causing them to prevent making the same mistakes as past generations.

The garbage and indecent activity shown in television and other media has caused great debate over whether or not it should be regulated and if it can. Over the past 10 years “… the FCC has received more than 308,000 complaints of indecent broadcasts…” People will always complain if their child has witnessed a provocative show, but the majority of people have begun to adapt to the culture. If the public really has a problem with it, then the “…public [is] free to turn off the TV or radio. They are not forced to own a television and watch shows with curse words. In the “Freedom’s Curse” article, the Supreme Court ruled Carlin’s words too filthy and decided to regulate. The question of whether the FCC is allowed to regulate remains an issue because the first amendment grants freedom of speech and the Supreme Court will most likely consider regulation unconstitutional. People, who are pro-regulation, make the argument that it will protect the youth from being exposed at an early age. According to the “Freedom’s Curse” article, “…over-the-air broadcasts are uninvited intruders into the home and can expose children to indecent language, harming their psychological and moral development.” Both articles make and argument that regulation is needed and the Family Research Council's Trueman said that we should regulate “‘Because (the first amendment’s) a freedom that turns into a slavery if we are no longer allowed to protect our children and instead enslave them in this culture we're developing.’” This statement is ironically true if you truly believe that modern media is playing “games” with our youth.

The article used was from the CQ Researcher and the link is http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre2004041600&type=hitlist&num=0.

Fleeting Expletives

2008-11-11T21:30:00.000-08:00

The article, "Freedom's Curse" discusses the issue of censorship in relation to public television and radio. It also dips into the pyschological realm by taking a moment to reflect upon the theoretical taboo. In looking for a tangent to this, I immediately located everyones favorite crackpot hippy liberals, the ACLU. On their site, they have a page dedicated to the reasons why S. 1780 (the censorship bill) is "Unwise, Unnecessary, and Unconstitutional". Unfortunately, the article stems in a fashion congruent with the typical tirades of the ACLU members and goes on to denounce the FCC as a whole. It begins with the issue of indecency and senorship by asserting that "The FCC primarily relies upon FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726 (1978) as its authority to regulate indecency. Much has changed since 1978 that makes that reliance constitutionally questionable". The article then continues into various other abstracts of the decency before moving into the unconstitutionality of government interference upon several other facets of personal life. Among these are 'illegal substances' and marital legality. Although the article tangents within itself, it makes some valid points and is, alarmingly enough, splendidly documented and cited.

Freedom To Curse--

2008-11-11T20:37:00.000-08:00

The article I found to research was "TV Profanity Violates My Civil Rights" which reflected the opinion and position of Dr. Hugh Pyle. He is a rather religiously lead man who seeks the day in which no profanity is allowed on television. Although he is just one person, he brings in the concern of how children are subjected to inappropriate and unnecessary swearing. Too many parents are too lenient about what their children are allowed to watch, resulting in children being exposed to much more then they ever should be exposed to. The exposure of children to cursing has started problems within schools. He complains about how too much TV contains cursing and how he is left short of certain records due to the filthy language. According to him, TV has become a monster. The belief that profanity can contribute to a plot is sad and should be erased since it only causes thousands of people to shut the TV off anyway. These are all his beliefs that pertain to profanity and swearing on TV.

While the "Freedom's Curse" article states the current situation at hand along with several instances to support, this credible article is connected by presenting a certain position of the issue. Religious followers at the least, agree with the FCC in the sense that no swearing is good swearing. The use of profanity has no positive effects or results so why should it be allowed, accepted, or ignored? The "Freedom's Curse" article takes the position of how some cursing is acceptable sometimes, just as long as the context of it is not geared towards the sexual meaning of the word. While the Supreme Court is trying to turn away the FCC's laws, this man and his thousands of members want to completely demolish the idea that some profanity will be accepted. Although the issue is within the government's control, the government is leaving out those who have religious views against this type of lifestyle. If celebrities continue to "slip", if broadcasting companies continue to disregard swearing, and if the Supreme Court denies the FCC to declare all swearing indecent, then the most frequently viewed tool of society could be seen as unconstitutional. Freedom of speech never says anything about allowing swearing in cases where religion is being forgotten and abandoned. The "Freedom's Curse" article seems to leave out the major factor of religion which when included, will cause massive controversy. Before the government and Supreme Court make a final decision, they need to take into account the safety and innocence of children as well as personal and religious expectations; all of which are issues that were not touched upon and fully considered within the Atlantic article.

Freedom To Curse...

2008-11-11T20:06:00.000-08:00

The scholarly article, "Newsletter on Intellectual Freedom," connects with the “Freedom’s Curse" article thoroughly. The article that I chose to read was about a brief with the Supreme Court filed by CBS and ABC joined Fox about the FCC on the very issues that the article "Freedom's Curse" was written about. The article was explaining why CBS, ABC, and FOX were complaining about how the reversal of the FCC policies allowing profanity in Bono's speech on the 2004 NBC's Golden Globes broadcast. The FCC said that the context in which it was used was not indecent. Well the article further describes how the FCC later argues that the profanity used by Nicole Richie and Cher in 2002 and 2003 during Fox broadcasts of the Billboard Music Awards were indecent. The similarities in these articles is in that the scholarly article that I chose further explains the incidents described in the "Freedom's Curse" article. From just reading the "Freedom's Curse" article one may not be able to understand exactly what happened to the fullest extent, but after researching the incident in which the article is describing one can get a better idea of the issue.

Freedom's Curse

2008-11-11T19:31:00.001-08:00

I chose the article, “Freedom’s curse,” from the Atlantic. The article was about swearing and how some people think it is inappropriate and they censor TV. However, the writer argues that it depends on the way and context the word is used in. She also believes that “taboo words relinquish their literal meanings and retain only a coloring of emotion ,and then just an ability to arouse attention.” The article from the Atlantic states that words and phrases like close the fucking door, what the fuck?, holy fuck!, and fuck you violate rules in English, but they were just created to replace the phrases, closed the damned door, what in hell?, holy Mary and damn you. “Freedom’s curse” explains that they were replaced because religious profanity lost its appeal and those new words were created to replace it to express emotion.
The other article, “Shifty Talk” is about how frequently used words change and obscure words become popular. Researchers found 200 vocabulary word meanings and in 87 Indo-European languages then used statistics to compare how many of them had corresponding words in English, Russian, Greek and Spanish. They determined how many times the word changed in a given amount of time. In the article, they also determined how many times a word would change and predicted this. If words are constantly changing, like this article states that words such as dirty and turn change nine times in 10,000 years it makes sense. For example, they changed the phrases holy mary and damn you to holy fuck and fuck you. The words change as the languages get older, and “Shifty Talk” says that this data is useful in the sense that you could retrace the history of major language families, reconstruct ancient tongues and predict what words will undergo future alterations. Those phrases that were mentioned in “Freedom’s Curse,” went through alterations because the writer thought they no longer expressed emotion. This article, “Shifty Talk,” supports that languages and words undergo a change as time goes by and language and linguistics change.
Shifty TalkBruce Bower. Science News. Washington: Oct 13, 2007. Vol. 172, Iss. 15; p. 227 (2 pages)

Freedom's Curse

2008-11-11T19:29:00.000-08:00

In the article "Freedom's Curse" the author talks about a federal courts ruling of explicit words being used in broadcast television. The ruling was that since the words were not used to describe indecent acts, therefore there was no punishment handed out to the people who used these explicit words. After reading this article I was curious how often you can hear an indecent word on broadcast television. I found an article entitled, "TALKING A "BLUE" STREAK: CONTEXT AND OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE IN PRIME TIME NETWORK TELEVISION PROGRAMS." This article was published in "Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly ." In this article the author discussed that during the hours of 9pm-10pm (primetime) on 7 monitored broadcasting networks there were more offensive words used in shows than any other programming time slot. This study also showed that the majority of offensive words were used in a non-comedic setting also most of the offensive material was presented by a main character in important plot points in the show.

WHEN WOMEN RULE THE WORLD

2008-11-11T19:18:00.000-08:00

I read two articles dealing with the leadership abilities of women. The first being Should Women Rule? by Sandra Tsing Loh and Men or Women: Who's the Better Leader? Both articles deal with an interesting topic, women leaders. Both articles make different arguments in favor of women leaders. The Men or Women article was based on a research study. According to the poll results, women are much more likely to have the qualities of a good leader (such as honesty or intelligence). Even though these were the qualities the majority were looking for in a leader, only 6% of those polled agreed women would make better leaders. About 20% seemed to think men would make better leaders despite their lack of good leadership qualities. The majority seemed to think that women and men made equally good leaders. The public polled for this study mostly agreed that women were more likely than men to have the qualities they looked for in a leader. So why do we think that women do not make good leaders? Myers' book Why Women Should Rule the World seems to think so. It goes as far as to say that with women in charge, "Politics would be more collegial. Businesses would be more productive. And communities would be healthier." It interesting to think that the glass ceiling separating women from the top is a cultural thing in the United States. This country is all about the freedom. People came here to seek freedom from oppression. It's weird to think that here in America we have a problem with women leaders. After all, other countries have had women in power for years. So what's holding us down? I have absolutely no idea. The television channel FOX may just change that when they introduce their new reality series When Women Rule the World featuring eight women and ten men with only one rule(women rule). Men who don't obey get "sacrificed." And no, this is not some sarcastic joke I'm using to end this paragraph.

Men Or Women

WTF?!

2008-11-11T17:58:00.000-08:00

I read an article called "Wonder Land: F***, S*** and Other Typos." The article touched on many of the same subjects as "Freedom's Curse." The Wall Street Journal article mentions Cher and Nicole Ritchie cursing on public national television. The article spoke of the FCC losing a court hearing about swearing, and how the judges had one of their more amusing reads in a long time. This article is similar to "Freedom's Curse" in many ways. First, both articles spoke of the same situation which happened on television. Both articles also mentioned how the FCC tried to butt into what happened during those incidents on television. The articles both touched on the subject of how the FCC was angry with what had happened, and went to court. The article also talked about things which "Freedom's Curse" did not mention, such as what happened in court. The article brought more light to the situation stated by "Freedom's Curse." The link to the article is here.

The Freedom of Speech of Reporters

2008-11-11T17:32:00.000-08:00

The article Freedom's Curse talks about how cursing has become a norm in society. Stronger words are still considered to be inappropriate; however words like "crap" are no longer considered "bad words." This entire article goes back to the first ammendment of the United States' Constitution--freedom of speech, which is a theme in this article. The scholarly credible article that I found using Drexel's online database is called Fight For the First Ammendment by The Quill. It is about how reporters are biased about what they present to the public. However, on the contrary, the article also states that they have freedom of speech. Also, the article criticizes reporters because "the real heroes of American journalism don't wear capes" but are the ones who risk their lives and freedom to report the truth." The article in general states that people like the journalists should work harder to fight for their rights. When people accuse the journalists of being biased, they should fight back and say that they have freedomn of speech to say whatever they want to say. However, then the issue of honesty comes into the picture. Journalists should be as honest as they can be. This article states a two-sided arguement for the journalists.

What's the Big Freakin' Deal?

2008-11-11T17:06:00.000-08:00

The article “Offensive Language in Prime-Time Television: Four Years after Television Age and Content Ratings”, found on BNET, is relative to the article required to read for class, which was “Freedom’s Curse” written in The Atlantic. In “Freedom’s Curse”, Psychologist Steven Pinker discusses how some curse words are taken by some to be “better” than other curse words and the extent to which the government has gone to make sure that foul language has been edited out of television shows at times when children are watching it. Pinker goes on to say in this article that most people will take fucking as a word that has a heavier and deeper meaning than freakin’ by taking fucking to have sexual connotation. George Carlin did a show that talked about the seven bad words that should not be said on television not to excite people by cursing almost every other word, but to show that the government should not be able to regulate what is said on TV. In “Offensive Language in Primetime Television”, it is discussed how the usage of curse words has increased a significant amount over the years and how much different the government thinks about profanity on television nowadays. For those that were younger when cursing on television was a terrible act, they now watch our TV shows and see what people can get away with and how little editing is taking place to cover up foul words. The article also goes on to agree that there are some curse words that are accepted more than other curse words are.
The two articles support one another in the sense that they both discuss the same subject and have the same views on foul language on television. Both articles pretty much state that curse words should not be taken as negative unless they are truly meant to be negative, such as the fucking example mentioned before. Personally, I think that the government should regulate what is said during the times when children are most likely to be watching television. I think that is reasonable and understandable and I can see where parents are coming from when they complain about this. I sure wouldn’t want my children to walk around saying words like that around my house or anywhere.

Cursing

2008-11-11T16:54:00.000-08:00

The article "Freedom's Curse" discusses cursing and profanity and the things the FCC is trying to do to censor it. The FCC has deemed some words acceptable, but may not be used in a sexual manner.

The article I read is titled "Talking a 'Blue' Streak: Context and Offensive Language in Prime Time Television". This article discusses the places where cursing is used, their frequency, and the effect it has both psychologically and socially. While "Freedom's Curse" is in a way shedding like on the idea of curse words and deeming them to be acceptable, "Talking a 'Blue Streak'" solely discusses the negative effects these words have, and labels them as verbally aggressive. One similarity is the case of the FCC, particularly with Bono.

Based on the research in the second article, they found that out of seven television networks, over the course of prime time, a curse word was used approximately every eight minutes.

The article can be viewed at here.

Freedom's Curse

2008-11-11T15:38:00.002-08:00

One of the issues about cursing in the media touched on in "Freedom's Curse" was the intended meaning of the word in question. The author seemed to be of the opinion that if someone said "fuck" but didn't mean it in a sexual sense, it isn't obscene, while the FCC held that it has certain connotations that are impossible to separate.
I found an article called "Must It Always Be About Sex?" published in the Washington Post about this same topic. The author, Adam Liptak, didn't take either side, but made it pretty clear that he thought the FCC was being arbitrary and inconsistent in its decisions. He pointed out, for example, that while the commission said it was acceptable for a contestant on "Survivor" to swear in a "bona fide news interview," it took exception to profanity in a Martin Scorsese music documentary. Elsewhere in the article, it was mentioned that while the government continues to censor network TV and print, it does not censor cable or the internet. Any vulgar material accessible through either one of them is available to everyone.