Gen Z has been warped by social media and victimhood culture: Jonathan haidt

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tik Tok is extraordinarily toxic. All it is doing is training peoples' (especially kids') brains to basically become ADD. Kids these days are absolutely incapable of holding an attention span for more than 3 minutes, because they've grown up their entire lives being completely addicted to 5 second video clips. If you don't get to the punchline for instant gratification in a matter of seconds, kids are incapable of listening for longer. I don't even want to think about the nightmare this is going to turn into 20 years from now when you are trying to teach young students complex topics are university like quantum mechanics or virtually any STEM based materials they require intense listening and deductive reasoning. Kids will absolutely be unable to handle such materials after having their brains turned to mush by social media like TikTok.

I agree. I can see it in my own brain. If the clip isn't interesting in the first twelve seconds, I move on. It is damaging.
But....it is our jobs as parents to keep our kids away from this as long as possible. I saw this very early on in video games, many kid shows and of course tik tok. The three second bite where the video or game has to change in three second increments to keep the child's attention. I tried to keep it from my child as long as possible. He still doesn't have an attention span and can't entertain himself, but I tried.

Fwiw, this is fixable, at least for us adults who know what it is like (what it used to be like) to have an attention span. A two week screen detox will slow your brain so that reading books again becomes possible and enjoyable. Those two weeks will be a bit painful, while you relearn how to be unoccupied and unbusy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tik Tok is extraordinarily toxic. All it is doing is training peoples' (especially kids') brains to basically become ADD. Kids these days are absolutely incapable of holding an attention span for more than 3 minutes, because they've grown up their entire lives being completely addicted to 5 second video clips. If you don't get to the punchline for instant gratification in a matter of seconds, kids are incapable of listening for longer. I don't even want to think about the nightmare this is going to turn into 20 years from now when you are trying to teach young students complex topics are university like quantum mechanics or virtually any STEM based materials they require intense listening and deductive reasoning. Kids will absolutely be unable to handle such materials after having their brains turned to mush by social media like TikTok.

I agree. I can see it in my own brain. If the clip isn't interesting in the first twelve seconds, I move on. It is damaging.
But....it is our jobs as parents to keep our kids away from this as long as possible. I saw this very early on in video games, many kid shows and of course tik tok. The three second bite where the video or game has to change in three second increments to keep the child's attention. I tried to keep it from my child as long as possible. He still doesn't have an attention span and can't entertain himself, but I tried.

I don't use Tik Tok, and I know this is happening to me from other online browsing. And I'm old so my brain is fully formed yet it's still a problem so imagine the impact on a brain that is still developing.

[Anonymous]

I’m a 21 y/o woman that reads his books and I find a lot of what he writes to be reflective of my personal experiences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am sorry but the older/conservative generation is all into the victimhood drama— ahhh censored! Ahh Deep state!! Ahh… FBI persecution!!! Ahh, no history if it makes white children uncomfortable!

If there’s is an epidemic of “victimhood” is not limited to Gen Z

Ding ding ding.

[Anonymous]

A new paper talks about the danger of social media for the young. It appears to cause an increase in the sensitivity to peer feedback. No one is sure if that is good or bad.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/03/health/social-media-brain-adolescents.html

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2799812?guestAccessKey=7fedb432-3c46-496d-be6b-e9b7394a71f2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So basically, Haidt’s cohort did a shitty job raising their kids but he wants to blame it on the children instead ofntakignnreaponsibilitybfienti. Classic boomer.

Boomers are grandparents. You are looking to blame Gen x and millennials.

Haidt turns 60 this year

So born in 1963...cusp boomer but definitely a boomer.

That was my point.

Did you actually read his article?

It was not anti youth but citing the obvious …

Mother of 15 yo who has been poisoned by social media victim culture and gender identity confusion …

NP. I agree with the author and with you, PP.

I feel people are resisting the article’s main points because they do not want to accept them; they wish it were not so.

But it is.

I wonder whether they are reading it at all … They are taking the author’s comment that internet age of adulthood should start at 16 literally and twisting obvious concerns about the negative impact of social media on our youth into a inter-generational blame game.

The stats speak for themselves - our youth are suffering intense mental illness problems/ eating disorders/ self harm and substance abuse. The wait list for teen psychiatrists is very long. Mental health facilities for teens are a booming business. They are insanely expensive and insurance routinely refuses to cover residential treatment comprised of evidence based approaches even when the need is clearly there. Ask me how I know.

+1 It doesn't seem like many people commenting have read the article. I don't see Haidt's analysis as an indictment of Gen Z; it's more of an indictment of parents (me included) and society for not offering Gen Z the real-life experiences they need to gain resilience and standing
by while performative social media replace those developmentally necessary experiences. You aren't paying attention if you can't see some merit to this insight.

No need to waste time reading his drivel when we have real-life experience with Gen Z. Why would I listen to an old man who clearly doesn't interact with younger people?

PP here. Did you miss the part where he has two teenagers? I'm a mother of multiple Gen Zs who sees truth in his words. Have you not noticed how many young people are struggling?

Of course they’re struggling, they’re young people. Young people struggle. It’s what every coming of age book and movie from forever is about. This group is struggling more loudly because finally someone has given them a voice to say what every young person wishes they could have said - that the world that is laid out for them isn’t what they want for themselves. It’s a culture clash, period, but these kids are actually shaking things up in a way the older generations really didn’t or couldn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A new paper talks about the danger of social media for the young. It appears to cause an increase in the sensitivity to peer feedback. No one is sure if that is good or bad.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/03/health/social-media-brain-adolescents.html

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2799812?guestAccessKey=7fedb432-3c46-496d-be6b-e9b7394a71f2

Gen Z I think is going to have more negative outcomes for women than previous generations. Didn't social media cause high school girls to become more depressed than boys for the first time ever?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So basically, Haidt’s cohort did a shitty job raising their kids but he wants to blame it on the children instead ofntakignnreaponsibilitybfienti. Classic boomer.

Boomers are grandparents. You are looking to blame Gen x and millennials.

Haidt turns 60 this year

So born in 1963...cusp boomer but definitely a boomer.

That was my point.

Did you actually read his article?

It was not anti youth but citing the obvious …

Mother of 15 yo who has been poisoned by social media victim culture and gender identity confusion …

NP. I agree with the author and with you, PP.

I feel people are resisting the article’s main points because they do not want to accept them; they wish it were not so.

But it is.

I wonder whether they are reading it at all … They are taking the author’s comment that internet age of adulthood should start at 16 literally and twisting obvious concerns about the negative impact of social media on our youth into a inter-generational blame game.

The stats speak for themselves - our youth are suffering intense mental illness problems/ eating disorders/ self harm and substance abuse. The wait list for teen psychiatrists is very long. Mental health facilities for teens are a booming business. They are insanely expensive and insurance routinely refuses to cover residential treatment comprised of evidence based approaches even when the need is clearly there. Ask me how I know.

+1 It doesn't seem like many people commenting have read the article. I don't see Haidt's analysis as an indictment of Gen Z; it's more of an indictment of parents (me included) and society for not offering Gen Z the real-life experiences they need to gain resilience and standing
by while performative social media replace those developmentally necessary experiences. You aren't paying attention if you can't see some merit to this insight.

No need to waste time reading his drivel when we have real-life experience with Gen Z. Why would I listen to an old man who clearly doesn't interact with younger people?

PP here. Did you miss the part where he has two teenagers? I'm a mother of multiple Gen Zs who sees truth in his words. Have you not noticed how many young people are struggling?

Of course they’re struggling, they’re young people. Young people struggle. It’s what every coming of age book and movie from forever is about. This group is struggling more loudly because finally someone has given them a voice to say what every young person wishes they could have said - that the world that is laid out for them isn’t what they want for themselves. It’s a culture clash, period, but these kids are actually shaking things up in a way the older generations really didn’t or couldn’t.

That's what you hope. But you don't have any way to back this up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A new paper talks about the danger of social media for the young. It appears to cause an increase in the sensitivity to peer feedback. No one is sure if that is good or bad.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/03/health/social-media-brain-adolescents.html

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2799812?guestAccessKey=7fedb432-3c46-496d-be6b-e9b7394a71f2

Gen Z I think is going to have more negative outcomes for women than previous generations. Didn't social media cause high school girls to become more depressed than boys for the first time ever?

That concern is mentioned in the article.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m a 21 y/o woman that reads his books and I find a lot of what he writes to be reflective of my personal experiences.

I would love to hear more from your perspective as a Gen Z.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A new paper talks about the danger of social media for the young. It appears to cause an increase in the sensitivity to peer feedback. No one is sure if that is good or bad.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/03/health/social-media-brain-adolescents.html

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2799812?guestAccessKey=7fedb432-3c46-496d-be6b-e9b7394a71f2

Which explains the increase in social anxiety. It’s so common now, it’s a Gen Z personality trait.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So basically, Haidt’s cohort did a shitty job raising their kids but he wants to blame it on the children instead ofntakignnreaponsibilitybfienti. Classic boomer.

Boomers are grandparents. You are looking to blame Gen x and millennials.

Haidt turns 60 this year

So born in 1963...cusp boomer but definitely a boomer.

That was my point.

Did you actually read his article?

It was not anti youth but citing the obvious …

Mother of 15 yo who has been poisoned by social media victim culture and gender identity confusion …

NP. I agree with the author and with you, PP.

I feel people are resisting the article’s main points because they do not want to accept them; they wish it were not so.

But it is.

I wonder whether they are reading it at all … They are taking the author’s comment that internet age of adulthood should start at 16 literally and twisting obvious concerns about the negative impact of social media on our youth into a inter-generational blame game.

The stats speak for themselves - our youth are suffering intense mental illness problems/ eating disorders/ self harm and substance abuse. The wait list for teen psychiatrists is very long. Mental health facilities for teens are a booming business. They are insanely expensive and insurance routinely refuses to cover residential treatment comprised of evidence based approaches even when the need is clearly there. Ask me how I know.

+1 It doesn't seem like many people commenting have read the article. I don't see Haidt's analysis as an indictment of Gen Z; it's more of an indictment of parents (me included) and society for not offering Gen Z the real-life experiences they need to gain resilience and standing
by while performative social media replace those developmentally necessary experiences. You aren't paying attention if you can't see some merit to this insight.

No need to waste time reading his drivel when we have real-life experience with Gen Z. Why would I listen to an old man who clearly doesn't interact with younger people?

PP here. Did you miss the part where he has two teenagers? I'm a mother of multiple Gen Zs who sees truth in his words. Have you not noticed how many young people are struggling?

Of course they’re struggling, they’re young people. Young people struggle. It’s what every coming of age book and movie from forever is about. This group is struggling more loudly because finally someone has given them a voice to say what every young person wishes they could have said - that the world that is laid out for them isn’t what they want for themselves. It’s a culture clash, period, but these kids are actually shaking things up in a way the older generations really didn’t or couldn’t.

No really not the same.

I have much older children who graduated from university already and younger child who went through MS during pandemic.
Younger DC’s peers have many many more mental health issues. Older children and their friends report they are glad to have just missed out on ubiquitous social Media in their teen years. It is especially damaging for girls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So basically, Haidt’s cohort did a shitty job raising their kids but he wants to blame it on the children instead ofntakignnreaponsibilitybfienti. Classic boomer.

Boomers are grandparents. You are looking to blame Gen x and millennials.

Haidt turns 60 this year

So born in 1963...cusp boomer but definitely a boomer.

That was my point.

Did you actually read his article?

It was not anti youth but citing the obvious …

Mother of 15 yo who has been poisoned by social media victim culture and gender identity confusion …

NP. I agree with the author and with you, PP.

I feel people are resisting the article’s main points because they do not want to accept them; they wish it were not so.

But it is.

I wonder whether they are reading it at all … They are taking the author’s comment that internet age of adulthood should start at 16 literally and twisting obvious concerns about the negative impact of social media on our youth into a inter-generational blame game.

The stats speak for themselves - our youth are suffering intense mental illness problems/ eating disorders/ self harm and substance abuse. The wait list for teen psychiatrists is very long. Mental health facilities for teens are a booming business. They are insanely expensive and insurance routinely refuses to cover residential treatment comprised of evidence based approaches even when the need is clearly there. Ask me how I know.

+1 It doesn't seem like many people commenting have read the article. I don't see Haidt's analysis as an indictment of Gen Z; it's more of an indictment of parents (me included) and society for not offering Gen Z the real-life experiences they need to gain resilience and standing
by while performative social media replace those developmentally necessary experiences. You aren't paying attention if you can't see some merit to this insight.

No need to waste time reading his drivel when we have real-life experience with Gen Z. Why would I listen to an old man who clearly doesn't interact with younger people?

You need to actually read his article before making nonsense arguments discrediting valid points. There are many truths about the devastating impact ubiquitous social media is having on mental health of our young people and he is not slamming youth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t read it but DH did and Haidt apparently said that haidt thinks that it should be illegal for kids under 16 to have social media.

I cannot take Haidt seriously since he said that college students are babies because a few college students wanted an absurd level of trigger warnings, but I’d love it if we could somehow stop kids under 16 from having social media. A broken clock is right twice a day.

Politically and socially left kid of a professor and I agree with Haidt.

Cell phones and social media for under 16 will be like cigarettes . And the trigger warnings are out of control. Some are good. But like therapy animals, it’s becoming absurd.

Gen Z had some great ideas then went totally overboard with them.

Yes, ultimately if they can’t hack life because they’re so convinced they need a safe space for their anxiety they’ll be open to just giving up, giving in, capitulating to communism or whatever else is just easiest for them. I mean how do we even expand our domestic hard and soft power of kids are just too woke to defend our nation and sort of flop over in a lather of discombobulated internal strife?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is such a boring, played out generational trope. You can find dozens of this article written about millennials ten years ago. Not surprised the boomers are eating it up.

“I didn’t really read it, not am I aware of how toxic social media is, from evidence based on peer reviewed studies, but I can speak confidently out of my rear end. This entire topic is just old people bthcing about young people as has been done for centuries. There is no rise in anxiety among the young because I said said so and like I just want to chill and eat some fast food and like stop writing stuff.”