Inside the dangerously empty lives of teenage girls

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I'm Facebook friends with a friend's teenage daughter, and I cringe when I see updates throughout what should be the school day. Sure they all could be from between classes, but I doubt it.

Oh well. She's a great kid.
 
I'm Facebook friends with a friend's teenage daughter, and I cringe when I see updates throughout what should be the school day. Sure they all could be from between classes, but I doubt it.

Oh well. She's a great kid.

My brother is a high school teacher. He says 90% of the kids have an iPhone or Blackberry. They're on it all day, and there is really no point in fighting with them over it anymore unless you, as a teacher, wish to spend the bulk of your teaching time doing so.

I don't understand why these parents are paying some $80/month for this. I mean, as an adult with a job I find my cell phone(s) to be a significant expense. There isn't a question in my mind that it would have been a cold day in hell before my parents did any such thing.
 
i get the phone addiction, though. a significant portion of my working life is conducted through my Crackberry b/c i am on the road so much, and because many people are working around the clock, i like being able to respond to issues when they arise rather than walking in to the office in the morning and checking my email and seeing 1001 issues/problems/questions that need to be dealt with. at first it totally stressed me out, but i'm much more Zen about it.

it does make it harder to unplug, and when i go on vacation, i make it a point to be in a blackout -- no phone, no internet, no TV. it's critical to unplug.
 
I don't understand why these parents are paying some $80/month for this. I mean, as an adult with a job I find my cell phone(s) to be a significant expense. There isn't a question in my mind that it would have been a cold day in hell before my parents did any such thing.

I remember a 'kids and cellphones' thread a while back. For me, as a parent, it's a matter of being able to stay in touch at all times. It's also a matter of safety. If my child was in some sort of trouble, being followed, or in any situation they needed to get out of immediately, I want to be at their fingertips. I can't put a price on that.
 
I remember a 'kids and cellphones' thread a while back. For me, as a parent, it's a matter of being able to stay in touch at all times. It's also a matter of safety. If my child was in some sort of trouble, being followed, or in any situation they needed to get out of immediately, I want to be at their fingertips. I can't put a price on that.



i understand this 100%. for all the negative, a cell phone is a godsend when it comes to safety.
 
After reading my sons Facebook (which he knows I do) and when I found out about Formspring.me, I felt like I was reading soft porn. It was mostly coming from the girls. Whether they were really doing the things they said or just making up stuff for the popularity of it I don't know.

I banned my son from Formspring.me because the content he was reading (and he was only reading not posting). I thought it would warp his perception of what girls are really like and what they would want from a boy. I told him I could give him a Playboy magazine if he wanted to continue reading Formspring at least it was adults with experienced talking about sexual behavior and not 12,13 and 14 year old girls that may not know what they are talking about even means. I didn't want him to think that all girls had these behaviors. (BTW my son is 14).
 
If we wanted a cell phone (or any gadget beyond the family TV and family computer), we were more than welcome to add a few blocks to our paper route or take on a few more babysitting gigs and get one ourselves. I had few rules as a teenager. I never once had a cell phone (still don't) and only one of my friends ever did and yet, I somehow always managed to let my mother know where I was and who I was with so I could be trusted to come and go as I pleased. It's really just a matter of who can afford it and who can't. Those parents that can't are not any less concerned with safety. It's a wonder we all survived I guess... :rolleyes:

Like Irvine I get the phone addiction for work. I simply cannot do my work with just a phone, even the smartest PDA/smartphone out there. But I challenge anyone to pry my little laptop from my grasp! I need it for everything from my 8-5 job to my freelance jobs to my work for the dog clubs. The only time I don't get an e-mail alert on the computer within minutes is because I'm either sleeping or intentionally not near the computer and do not want to be contacted.

it does make it harder to unplug, and when i go on vacation, i make it a point to be in a blackout -- no phone, no internet, no TV. it's critical to unplug.

I always thought it would but lately the vacations I've taken do not have phone coverage or Internet access and I am amazed at how little I care. It's like if it's not there, it's not there and I'm over it in about 5 seconds.

Someone I know who is also a teacher said she tells her students you have to be 21 to be her facebook friend.
 
I remember a 'kids and cellphones' thread a while back. For me, as a parent, it's a matter of being able to stay in touch at all times. It's also a matter of safety. If my child was in some sort of trouble, being followed, or in any situation they needed to get out of immediately, I want to be at their fingertips. I can't put a price on that.

That's true, but it doesn't really require an iPhone or a Blackberry. The problem that my brother says he has with cell phones in the class is that the kids are constantly on the internet or texting each other, or using iPhone apps to play games, etc.

I guess I just find it hard to fathom that my parents would have been paying the $80+ that I pay on a monthly basis for an iPhone voice/data/texting, etc. plan. A cheap pay-as-you-go phone, sure that I can see. Though like Lies said, it's funny that we all managed to survive without them just a few years earlier and without major societal calamities. :shrug:
 
I can only speak for what goes on in my family and what I am comfortable with.

I pay $80 a month for all three phones on my family plan, hardly a staggering expense.

Sidekicks were obtained through free upgrades.
 
7 year olds. Is it just what people might project onto this and it's really just cute harmless imitation or is it about putting on a mask that they can't possibly understand?

My vote is for the latter. It's not just the skimpy costumes, and it's not just the dancing, it's the two of them combined.

I'm not all Won't Somebody Think Of The Childreeeeeeen!!, but my gut reaction to it is discomfort and that it's inappropriate.
 
My vote is for the latter. It's not just the skimpy costumes, and it's not just the dancing, it's the two of them combined.

I'm not all Won't Somebody Think Of The Childreeeeeeen!! but my gut reaction to it is discomfort and that it's inappropriate

Agree.

Didn't someone once say that it takes a village?

In this video, the villagers seem to have lost their minds.
 
My vote is for the latter. It's not just the skimpy costumes, and it's not just the dancing, it's the two of them combined.

I'm not all Won't Somebody Think Of The Childreeeeeeen!!, but my gut reaction to it is discomfort and that it's inappropriate.

x3

They're pretty much burlesque dancing. Theres a direct connection with sex/sexuality. Its pretty gross
 
What's to worry about

I am sure these 7 year olds have cell phones
they can always send a text:

mom - som man in a van is givn me a ride
- LOLS XOXO
 
Fast forward a few years...

294817-virgin-veronica.jpg
 
They couldn't wear a dancing leotard with tights or legging style pants with a top and still show "body lines" and movement and technical skills? Come on.


Little Girl 'Single Ladies' Dance Sparks Controversy on Internet - ABC News

The girls' parents defended their daughters' performance at the World of Dance, billed as the largest U.S. urban dance competition, saying their daughters' moves and outfits were appropriate for competition.

"This is taken completely out of context," Cory Miller, father of one of the girls, told "Good Morning America" today. "The girls weren't meant to be viewed by millions of people."

Melissa Presch, a mother of one of the 8-year-old dancers, said, "We're very proud of our daughters and their accomplishments."

Presch said her daughter has never seen Beyonce's video, only the cartoon performance in the recently released children's movie "Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel."

"It's one of the most popular songs probably of the decade, said Presch . "The costumes are designed for movement, unrestricted movement and to show body lines."

Presch also defended the girl's costumes, saying that judges need to be able to see the girl's movement and technical skills.

Parents of children not involved in the performance, however, questioned why the dancers' parents allowed them to dance suggestively in outfits that can only be described as skimpy.

"As a new father, I definitely would not allow my daughter to be in a situation like that," Rob Lotterman said.

"It probably doesn't matter if they were wearing sweat pants or bikinis," mother Ariane Gold said. "The grinding wasn't appropriate."
 
The dance is impressive, but the outfits and the grinding and the impression that is created... If I had a 7 year old daughter-no way. She could dance and work hard and still be age appropriate.

I read recently about bikinis being sold for girls that age with PADDED tops. I thought it had to be a joke but it wasn't.
 
Bikinis, G-strings, stripper outifts and routines? I dunno. I'm just saying that what they do in the video, if I was at that recital, I would more impressed than anything else. Probably wouldn't even think twice about the outfits or the "grinding".
 
They may as well be bikinis, they don't cover up much more than a bikini does. They're certainly midriff baring. Burlesque has already been mentioned-that's what they look like to me. A little like Pussycat Dolls for kids and like all that's missing is a whip :shrug:
 
A. the little girls put a lot of hard work and talent into doing that dance, and that is AWESOME.

B. Beyonce and her dancers were move covered up than these little girls.

C. It still skeeves me out.
 
It doesn't necessarily bother me that they're wearing skimpy things, and it doesn't necessarily bother me that they're doing "sexy" dance moves. The two of them together bothers me.

I mean, some adult or adults picked out lingerie-looking costumes and taught them to dance sexy while wearing them, and thought that was a good idea.

Little girls want to dance in fun, sparkly outfits. Great! But why does it have to look like lingerie?

Arrrrrrgh.

Or, rather:

fuuuu.jpg
 
Yes it's the overall impression and the combination and the adult branding of it

They may have only seen Alvin and the Chipmunks, but that don't look like no chipmunk dance
 
Isn't it ironic that parents are so aware of pedophiles these days and say they would do anything to stop sex offenders from going anywhere near their children, but more and more parents allow their children, particularly their daughters, to be more sexualized?
 
What makes it inappropriate? The dancing? The fact that it's a Beyonce song? The outfits? What about little kids in leotards? YouTube - Nica Hults TOPs Testing 11 year old

Just curious b/c the same issues come up with gymnastics, where you have to wear leotards for safety and mobility but some kids and parents do go over the top with the make-up and getting little girls all dolled up.
 
For me, it's the combination of outfits and the dancing. The combo reads to me like a concerted effort is being made to be sexy.

No, I don't think tight outfits or leotards alone read the same way to me.
 
Back
Top Bottom