Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all funnels back to phones/computers/social media.

1) they aren’t interacting bc of these things.
They would rather be on phone/computer

2) public parks are empty bc kids are at home on computers

3) parents are forced to be over involved and over parent, because if they didn’t, teens would be on their computer/phone all day long. Parents have to schedule things in order to get them off computer/phone.

Which ultimately boils down to

1) we know these devices and apps are addictive, but we as parents gave them to our kids anyway, and

2) we don’t really trust our kids to make good decisions for themselves and we are terrified of them having to face actual consequences (probably because we fear it will just reflect poorly on us?).

So they have no sense of agency, gobs of entitlement and devices in their hands that are designed to prey on their deepest insecurities.

Most teens are incapable of setting heathy limits with their devices. Same as most adults, to be honest.

Devices and computers are here to stay. Having your kid being the only teenager without one isn’t the solution.

It is the solution. All the CEOs of tech / social media companies agree and they do not allow their kids on social.

But I can also tell you have never tried it, so you have no clue whatsoever about what you asserted.

Anonymous wrote:There is just too much pressure on them, they're overscheduled and all the screens and social media aren't helping.

Anonymous wrote:A lot have stressed, overwrought parents pushing them to an ever changing finish line.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all funnels back to phones/computers/social media.

1) they aren’t interacting bc of these things.
They would rather be on phone/computer

2) public parks are empty bc kids are at home on computers

3) parents are forced to be over involved and over parent, because if they didn’t, teens would be on their computer/phone all day long. Parents have to schedule things in order to get them off computer/phone.

Which ultimately boils down to

1) we know these devices and apps are addictive, but we as parents gave them to our kids anyway, and

2) we don’t really trust our kids to make good decisions for themselves and we are terrified of them having to face actual consequences (probably because we fear it will just reflect poorly on us?).

So they have no sense of agency, gobs of entitlement and devices in their hands that are designed to prey on their deepest insecurities.

Most teens are incapable of setting heathy limits with their devices. Same as most adults, to be honest.

Devices and computers are here to stay. Having your kid being the only teenager without one isn’t the solution.

It is the solution. All the CEOs of tech / social media companies agree and they do not allow their kids on social.

But I can also tell you have never tried it, so you have no clue whatsoever about what you asserted.

which CEOs and how old are their kids? I can see not under 13, and limiting (we do, no tiktok) but no social media seems hard to navigate socially if you mean no what's app, snapchat...

Anonymous wrote:No spirituality

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lack of third spaces for kids to gather. When I was a teen, we all hung out at the park, the arcade, the mall, or the local diner. Now teens get chased out of those places. Kids out in public alone are regarded with suspicion. Cops hassle them for loitering. In our small town, there’s constant tension over MS and HS kids walking into town on early release days and going into the convenience store, the drugstore, and the coffee shop.

Granted, the kids aren’t the best about watching out for traffic, and there have been issues with shoplifting, rude behavior, etc., but it’s so important for them to have those spaces to congregate. At some point, they need to learn how to be out in the community without adult supervision.

Even going to each other’s houses is complicated, at least before they get their driver’s licenses. When we were kids, we could spontaneously hop on the bus with a friend after school and then walk home or get picked up. These days, play dates have to be negotiated days in advance and agreed on by mutual treaty with parents.

Maybe they don’t want teens or kids free roaming because parents don’t care about their behavior. And, no one wants your kids just showing up to have to feed and care for them because you don’t want to. Invite them to your house and supervise.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all funnels back to phones/computers/social media.

1) they aren’t interacting bc of these things.
They would rather be on phone/computer

2) public parks are empty bc kids are at home on computers

3) parents are forced to be over involved and over parent, because if they didn’t, teens would be on their computer/phone all day long. Parents have to schedule things in order to get them off computer/phone.

Which ultimately boils down to

1) we know these devices and apps are addictive, but we as parents gave them to our kids anyway, and

2) we don’t really trust our kids to make good decisions for themselves and we are terrified of them having to face actual consequences (probably because we fear it will just reflect poorly on us?).

So they have no sense of agency, gobs of entitlement and devices in their hands that are designed to prey on their deepest insecurities.

Most teens are incapable of setting heathy limits with their devices. Same as most adults, to be honest.

Devices and computers are here to stay. Having your kid being the only teenager without one isn’t the solution.

It is the solution. All the CEOs of tech / social media companies agree and they do not allow their kids on social.

But I can also tell you have never tried it, so you have no clue whatsoever about what you asserted.

which CEOs and how old are their kids? I can see not under 13, and limiting (we do, no tiktok) but no social media seems hard to navigate socially if you mean no what's app, snapchat...

DP. This is pretty well documented.

https://www.fastcompany.com/90900166/tech-social-media-protection-children

So one 11yo, and they Zuckerberg's tiny kids and someone whose kids does have phones and sometimes takes them away.

Do you genuinely believe that sole article is the only discussion about this? That was a start. Do your own work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all funnels back to phones/computers/social media.

1) they aren’t interacting bc of these things.
They would rather be on phone/computer

2) public parks are empty bc kids are at home on computers

3) parents are forced to be over involved and over parent, because if they didn’t, teens would be on their computer/phone all day long. Parents have to schedule things in order to get them off computer/phone.

Which ultimately boils down to

1) we know these devices and apps are addictive, but we as parents gave them to our kids anyway, and

2) we don’t really trust our kids to make good decisions for themselves and we are terrified of them having to face actual consequences (probably because we fear it will just reflect poorly on us?).

So they have no sense of agency, gobs of entitlement and devices in their hands that are designed to prey on their deepest insecurities.

Most teens are incapable of setting heathy limits with their devices. Same as most adults, to be honest.

Devices and computers are here to stay. Having your kid being the only teenager without one isn’t the solution.

It is the solution. All the CEOs of tech / social media companies agree and they do not allow their kids on social.

But I can also tell you have never tried it, so you have no clue whatsoever about what you asserted.

which CEOs and how old are their kids? I can see not under 13, and limiting (we do, no tiktok) but no social media seems hard to navigate socially if you mean no what's app, snapchat...

DP. This is pretty well documented.

https://www.fastcompany.com/90900166/tech-social-media-protection-children

So one 11yo, and they Zuckerberg's tiny kids and someone whose kids does have phones and sometimes takes them away.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all funnels back to phones/computers/social media.

1) they aren’t interacting bc of these things.
They would rather be on phone/computer

2) public parks are empty bc kids are at home on computers

3) parents are forced to be over involved and over parent, because if they didn’t, teens would be on their computer/phone all day long. Parents have to schedule things in order to get them off computer/phone.

Which ultimately boils down to

1) we know these devices and apps are addictive, but we as parents gave them to our kids anyway, and

2) we don’t really trust our kids to make good decisions for themselves and we are terrified of them having to face actual consequences (probably because we fear it will just reflect poorly on us?).

So they have no sense of agency, gobs of entitlement and devices in their hands that are designed to prey on their deepest insecurities.

Most teens are incapable of setting heathy limits with their devices. Same as most adults, to be honest.

Devices and computers are here to stay. Having your kid being the only teenager without one isn’t the solution.

It is the solution. All the CEOs of tech / social media companies agree and they do not allow their kids on social.

But I can also tell you have never tried it, so you have no clue whatsoever about what you asserted.

which CEOs and how old are their kids? I can see not under 13, and limiting (we do, no tiktok) but no social media seems hard to navigate socially if you mean no what's app, snapchat...

DP. This is pretty well documented.

https://www.fastcompany.com/90900166/tech-social-media-protection-children

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all funnels back to phones/computers/social media.

1) they aren’t interacting bc of these things.
They would rather be on phone/computer

2) public parks are empty bc kids are at home on computers

3) parents are forced to be over involved and over parent, because if they didn’t, teens would be on their computer/phone all day long. Parents have to schedule things in order to get them off computer/phone.

Which ultimately boils down to

1) we know these devices and apps are addictive, but we as parents gave them to our kids anyway, and

2) we don’t really trust our kids to make good decisions for themselves and we are terrified of them having to face actual consequences (probably because we fear it will just reflect poorly on us?).

So they have no sense of agency, gobs of entitlement and devices in their hands that are designed to prey on their deepest insecurities.

Most teens are incapable of setting heathy limits with their devices. Same as most adults, to be honest.

Devices and computers are here to stay. Having your kid being the only teenager without one isn’t the solution.

It is the solution. All the CEOs of tech / social media companies agree and they do not allow their kids on social.

But I can also tell you have never tried it, so you have no clue whatsoever about what you asserted.

which CEOs and how old are their kids? I can see not under 13, and limiting (we do, no tiktok) but no social media seems hard to navigate socially if you mean no what's app, snapchat...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. This is controversial but I think part of the issue has been the multigenerational lack of large families, meaning that kids don’t have large extended families. There is nothing quite like close cousin relationships especially if they are lucky to be geographically near each other. And siblings may fight like rabid puppies between themselves but they often back each other up outside of the house. I think part of the distress is the breakdown of essentially family clans, something we literally evolved with.

+1

This theory is dumb. You can have close friends that are just as close or closer than family.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all funnels back to phones/computers/social media.

1) they aren’t interacting bc of these things.
They would rather be on phone/computer

2) public parks are empty bc kids are at home on computers

3) parents are forced to be over involved and over parent, because if they didn’t, teens would be on their computer/phone all day long. Parents have to schedule things in order to get them off computer/phone.

Which ultimately boils down to

1) we know these devices and apps are addictive, but we as parents gave them to our kids anyway, and

2) we don’t really trust our kids to make good decisions for themselves and we are terrified of them having to face actual consequences (probably because we fear it will just reflect poorly on us?).

So they have no sense of agency, gobs of entitlement and devices in their hands that are designed to prey on their deepest insecurities.

Most teens are incapable of setting heathy limits with their devices. Same as most adults, to be honest.

Devices and computers are here to stay. Having your kid being the only teenager without one isn’t the solution.

It is the solution. All the CEOs of tech / social media companies agree and they do not allow their kids on social.

But I can also tell you have never tried it, so you have no clue whatsoever about what you asserted.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all funnels back to phones/computers/social media.

1) they aren’t interacting bc of these things.
They would rather be on phone/computer

2) public parks are empty bc kids are at home on computers

3) parents are forced to be over involved and over parent, because if they didn’t, teens would be on their computer/phone all day long. Parents have to schedule things in order to get them off computer/phone.

Which ultimately boils down to

1) we know these devices and apps are addictive, but we as parents gave them to our kids anyway, and

2) we don’t really trust our kids to make good decisions for themselves and we are terrified of them having to face actual consequences (probably because we fear it will just reflect poorly on us?).

So they have no sense of agency, gobs of entitlement and devices in their hands that are designed to prey on their deepest insecurities.

Most teens are incapable of setting heathy limits with their devices. Same as most adults, to be honest.

Devices and computers are here to stay. Having your kid being the only teenager without one isn’t the solution.