Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Dookie came out when I was in 3rd grade and Basket Case and When I Come Around were the only songs that got radio play in my town. Everyone at my lunch table loved Longview because there were swear words, but it was never played on our radio.

The Edge up here definitely played it. Shoot, I bet I have it recorded off the radio onto a cassette tape somewhere.  :ph34r:

Posted

from friedman, didn't even know that happened :D

 

That's what the Sabres are doing with ROR. :)

 

Quite frankly, you ought to wrap yourself in bubble wrap. That is the way of the world now. Free range children are being paired with an environmental softening to create a world that caters to everyone's precious kids. 

 

Perhaps there's something generational here. I grew up in the 1990's. I experienced the rise of the Helicopter Parent, the ESRB, and the wars the parents of my generation waged on pretty much anything except themselves in order to protect their special little snowflakes. Protect little Johnny at the expense of everyone else. Little Johnny might get his feelings hurt playing tee-ball so now everyone gets participation trophies. Little Johnny might hear a bad word on the radio so lets put the chains on the airwaves. Little Johnny might see a woman breastfeeding in public so lets shame breastfeeding mothers for it. Little Johnny might not get into college because he's not very smart so lets dumb down the education system so everyone can graduate. Little Johnny might get picked on in gym class so lets ban Dodgeball. Little Johnny might think smoking is cool so let's ban candy cigarettes! 

 

I would like to believe that there are parents out there accepting responsibility for their kids. But I grew up in a world that tells me this isn't the case. The rest of us get stuck taking it on the chin instead. 

Maybe I'm attuned to it because I grew up with the fall out from it? I don't know.

 

I just remember all the outrageous things parents of my generation decided to attack when I was a kid. Columbine happened and all of a sudden violent video games were the bogeyman. And cuss words in music on the radio. And pretty much any other thing that parents decided was some kind of threat to their children. Don't let those goth kids wear baggy pants to school! Blech. 

:wub:

 

I'm a good ten years older than you it was the same stuff. To be honest, I remember the radio in the 90s being far more liberal than the 80s. Video games have been the boogey-man since then too, as were movies, music, and everything else you're talking about. I think I even remember being upset about it 10 years ago too. It might be a bit worse than it was, but that could also just be my perspective since it's different than what I grew up with.

 

Truer words were never spoken. My God is it challenging. It's like they are tiny little Kamikazes running face first into everything. Don't get me started on eating, every meal I'm white knuckling the table hoping this tiny human doesn't choke. (Not really but it started that way) Cody usually end ups with some type of cranium abrasian weekly.

 

RosePIe has a pretty bump and abrasion on her head and face right now. She was sitting in the rocking chair and bonked her face when twisting to side down to the floor. Whoops, but it's not like it's the first time.

Posted

I'm walking like FDR over here. 

chz gave me nut bra advice once. You're like two years away from that. Early 30s, oops there goes gravity.

 

Also: pro-cre-a-she-own.

Posted

 

 

I'm a good ten years older than you it was the same stuff. To be honest, I remember the radio in the 90s being far more liberal than the 80s. Video games have been the boogey-man since then too, as were movies, music, and everything else you're talking about. I think I even remember being upset about it 10 years ago too. It might be a bit worse than it was, but that could also just be my perspective since it's different than what I grew up with.

 

d4rk has 2 years on me, but I remember the huge deal with Parental Advisory labels. My sister is 6 years older than me, and she was blasting Rammstein in the house around the same time Columbine happened. Bless my parents, they shrugged. They wondered about the cover of Sehnsucht when they bought it for her, but they didn't mind that their 15 and 9 year old girls were running around the house trying to badly sing along with German metal. 

However, GTA was the devil and we weren't allowed near it, because hookers. Violence was one thing, "smut" or sexual depravity was another. Partly where I grew up, I think. Bible belt mentality, abstinence only sex ed. Very much the "blame everything else in the world because my kid is pregnant at 14" stuff. 

Posted

Dookie came out when I was in 3rd grade and Basket Case and When I Come Around were the only songs that got radio play in my town. Everyone at my lunch table loved Longview because there were swear words, but it was never played on our radio.

Green Day gets a bad reputation, Dookie was such a great album. I'll never forget when my brother came home with that cd

Posted

Green Day gets a bad reputation, Dookie was such a great album. I'll never forget when my brother came home with that cd

There are some Green Day songs that I like, but they earned their bad reputation.  Who the releases a triple album?!?

Posted

There are some Green Day songs that I like, but they earned their bad reputation.  Who the ###### releases a triple album?!?

I feel like they just became the band to hate for no reason other than people didn't like their typical fan base. Same thing with Fall Out Boy, they have some great songs too but get a bad rap because of their fan base

Posted

I feel like they just became the band to hate for no reason other than people didn't like their typical fan base. Same thing with Fall Out Boy, they have some great songs too but get a bad rap because of their fan base

 

They get a bad rap because they named themselves after a minor Simpsons character in a smacks-of-effort attempt to seem hip and clever.

Posted

They get a bad rap because they named themselves after a minor Simpsons character in a smacks-of-effort attempt to seem hip and clever.

That implies they were hated from day one, when I know they were hugely popular and received great reception after their first album

Posted

That implies they were hated from day one, when I know they were hugely popular and received great reception after their first album

That they were popular at all seems to be the criticism.  So-called "True punks" apparently decided that they needed to hate Green Day for being too successful in order to prove that they had punk cred. Which is so laughable to me because trying to attain punk cred is decidedly un-punk. 

Posted

They got absurdly popular and weren't anywhere near talented or interesting enough to survive overexposure. Does anybody want to listen to Time of Your Life, Wake Me Up When September Ends, or Boulevard of Broken Dreams ever again?

 

Ughh his voice is so annoying.

Posted

They got absurdly popular and weren't anywhere near talented or interesting enough to survive overexposure. Does anybody want to listen to Time of Your Life, Wake Me Up When September Ends, or Boulevard of Broken Dreams ever again?

 

Ughh his voice is so annoying.

I liked all of those songs at the time. I saw them in Rochester on the American Idiot tour in 2004. It was an excellent show. 

 

I got sick of the American Idiot album after a while, but if I hear a song from it now I get a little nostalgic for it. 

Posted

I'm arguing that free range isn't really free range. It's a facade. It's not free range if you alter the range. That's just a projection of helicopter parenting onto the general public instead of the kid. 

What I view as free range, and what your parents friends joke about, are the same thing. I have no issue with letting kids bumble and bounce. That's what my parents did for me. Did they feel bad if I got hurt doing something they allowed me to do? Of course. But they didn't go on a rampage to change the thing that hurt me.  

 

I think you should do whatever you want with your kid. You seem comfortable understanding that the world isn't there to cater to you. You wont need a "feel-bad" piece written about your kid if a puck hits him in the head because you knew it could happen and "that's life".

 

Isn't this what you're arguing against?

Posted

In the realm of overreaction to risks and events..

 

They banned the public from the beach after this happened.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/27/us/florida-plane-crash-lands-on-beach/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, not really.  

 

There's currently an outrage over laminate flooring that may present an increased cancer risk for between 6 and 30 people per 100,000.  

Posted

There's currently an outrage over laminate flooring that may present an increased cancer risk for between 6 and 30 people per 100,000.  

That seems statistically significant. I'll look into more after I finish my hot dogs.

Posted

Isn't this what you're arguing against?

Nope. I'm arguing against the inevitable outcomes.  I want parents to subject their kids to whatever risks they want and then not take it out on other people if something goes wrong. Poor PK Subban was just trying to do something nice and the result is that he has to feel bad about it because of an accident?

 

Does PK never throw a puck into the stands again for fear he'll be criticized for it? Or sued for it?

 

Do the Canadiens ban players from tossing pucks to fans? Do they fear the lawsuit? 

 

The team had to issue a friggen statement about the "incident"! Like they needed to perform damage control! 

Posted (edited)
d4rksabre, on 22 Feb 2016 - 9:02 PM, said:

WHO THE ###### BRINGS A BABY TO A HOCKEY GAME?

 

 

d4rksabre, on 22 Feb 2016 - 9:11 PM, said:

Doesn't matter. Who the heck takes their baby anywhere near that?

 

 

d4rksabre, on 22 Feb 2016 - 9:16 PM, said:

Man. I guess I just don't get it. Must be because I'm not a parent. But there are a lot of places I'm not going to take a baby, and a hockey rink is one of them. 

 

 

d4rksabre, on 23 Feb 2016 - 12:05 PM, said:

Or just stay home and watch the game on tv like a responsible adult. Babies don't belong at sporting events. The arena music alone could be damaging.

 

 

d4rksabre, on 23 Feb 2016 - 12:29 PM, said:

I'm certainly doing better than the parent who takes their baby to a hockey game. Common sense would dictate that perhaps putting the child first would be a valuable parenting skill.

 

 

d4rksabre, on 23 Feb 2016 - 3:41 PM, said:

I mean, that's up to you if you want to take the risk right? Would I want to be holding a 9 month old in my arms at the start of an enduro race? Probably not. I don't think my father took my brother and I anywhere near things like the snowmobile races in Marilla or Lancaster Speedway until we were old enough to wear some ear protection as well as get something out of it. I mean, what kid is really even getting anything out of something like an NHL game or Monster Jam until they're at least able to hold their own head up? 

 

I guess I just see a lot of parents who treat their kids as some kind of extra baggage they have to take with them to things they like to do. 

 

 

I guess I don't get why you'd do that. Is "Sorry, I am in possession of a fragile delicate meat sack" not a sufficient excuse to avoid those circumstances? 

 

 

Dude, your argument STARTED firmly against the parents, and now has evolved into some sort of social commentary on how society caters to kids.   I don't find the arguments to be in the same ballpark.

 

Social commentary on over-protection of children = okay, less to no flak for d4rk

Criticizing the parents (especially when you don't have the full story) = lots of flak for d4rk from people who have actually had children

 

So, what is it, exactly, are the parents still idiots for taking a kid to the open practice, or are we supposed to forget you went down that path and just happily philosophize over what may or may not be happening with society relative to protecting kids?

Edited by SiZzlEmeIsTEr
Posted

Dude, your argument STARTED firmly against the parents, and now has evolved into some sort of social commentary on how society caters to kids. I don't find the arguments to be in the same ballpark.

 

Social commentary on over-protection of children = okay, less to no flak for d4rk

Criticizing the parents (especially when you don't have the full story) = lots of flak for d4rk from people who have actually had children

 

So, what is it, exactly, are the parents still idiots for taking a kid to the open practice, or are we supposed to forget you went down that path and just happily philosophize over what may or may not be happening with society relative to protecting kids?

I still think the parent is an idiot and I resent being told I can't hold that opinion.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...