Comments by "TheDionysianFields" (@TheDionysianFields) on "Alliance for Responsible Citizenship" channel.

@MelissaR784 I never suggested giving a CHILD a SMART phone. I support giving a tween a (non-smart) phone for general social coordination and emergencies. Plus, I support giving a later adolescent a smartphone with limited social media features (and probably no social media accounts at all until they're at least 16). We live in the digital age, and it seems to me both cruel and irresponsible to deny kids a reasonable level of (digital) contact with their friends and peers. Keep in mind that if you deny them, worse things may happen. I've had underage girls hit on me using their parents' social media accounts.
6
@catherinebye884 Yes, kids (like you and I) were happier before phones existed. But that isn't the current situation. I'm holding my ground and would argue that in any complex scenario, there's no "black or white" solution. Furthermore, an adolescent should always be offered options and/or be involved in the decisions being made that directly affect their lives. I've made several comments here that outline a detailed, nuanced perspective and I find no reason to budge on it.
4
@aeasthouse316 I agree 100% about kids being too soft. I was one of them. But toughening up doesn't always equal growing up. Plenty of tough people out there who are still children, arrested in their development. Kids have it both better and worse than ever. I certainly wouldn't want to grow up in the world today. Take a nuance pill. P.S. They can make it within a failing system. Capitalism is a dying star, and we yet have nothing to replace it with.
4
But then there comes a time to let go completely, and operate on pure instinct. This, I believe, is where the magic is created. Control is a double-edged sword.
4
I find them both to be ideologues. Show me the nuance.
3
@mogznwaz No, the world has largely become an unenjoyable place. Their angst is valid, even if they're all entitled brats.
3
@FJB2020LGB There's no one who wishes to do *your child* harm. There are people who wish to do *children* harm and they will seek out the most troubled child (i.e. the one who has the weakest bond with their parents, or perhaps has no way to call for help in an emergency). If you want to destroy your bond with your children and make them vulnerable, become a Fascist tyrant of a parent. Oh, wait, you've already got that down. Please don't have kids.
2
@msimon6808 I could, but all this not growing up has me preoccupied.
2
@ancientfuture9690 Practice and fundamentals are indeed essential. I'm a writer, and without strong grammar, I'd have nothing.
2
@maciejpieczula631 Much better.
2
@maciejpieczula631 Yes, I think control is very much a double-edged sword, and that some people never reach the "zone" because they're too bent on control. You have to let go.
2
I think they should be able to text at least.
1
@lisatowe778 No, I'm saying that I believe they should be able to text their friends.
1
@lisatowe778 When all of their friends or peers have phones and a kid isn't able to communicate and coordinate with them, he/she feels isolated. We can't remove 100% of the risk no matter what. But I would definitely restrict social media.
1
@lisatowe778 My issue at this point is clarity. Your original statement was that they are allowed a phone for *emergency CALLS* to their *parents*. I think that would be a pretty awful thing to do to a kid but it CAN be done (and was even done on an episode of one of my favorite TV shows). The only thing I'm guilty of is reading TOO CAREFULLY, which is obviously something you're not guilty of. But if you wish to challenge my IQ, pick any topic of debate.
1
Or vice versa.
1
The evidence would indicate that the world doesn't change, primarily because PEOPLE don't change. And by Kisin's thinking, once we've accepted this our politics will land in the RIGHT place and everything will return to ORDER. I'm not saying he's wrong, however… While acceptance (of reality) is no doubt essential, where Kisin sees it as the endpoint, I see it as the starting point. Someone, somewhere has changed...and for the better. To put it another way: things are what they are, but not necessarily what they always will be. What if all the evidence isn't yet in? Law and order have taken us a long way, but can they get us to the next level? "If you can change, and I can change...everybody can change." -Rocky Balboa
1
Yeah, I pretty much lost all respect for Aristotle upon hearing that one.
1
I do not belong to society any more than society belongs to me. Each day I decide the degree to which I'll lend myself to it. This doesn't mean I remain uncommitted to my immediate community, or that I lack any sense of civic duty; but I also have a duty and responsibility to myself (present and future) that may conflict with my social responsibilities. Piety is a grotesque concept, and the idea of telling a child what they should desire is to me disgraceful.
1
But they will feel highly estranged from their friends, which can cause other problems. My suggestion would be to give them a phone with limited features at age 14-15, as an intermediate. At the very least, a flip phone. But please--to all parents--don't ever give your child a phone and then monitor their activity.
1
@MelissaR784 Are you saying I shouldn't speak when I have something to say?
1
Nothing about surrender here. Very strange.
1
If only the message here was that simple.
1
@daddycool228 Not if we replace God with something we truly care about rather than a mystical entity that can supposedly punish us at will.
1
@crashtestdummy2337 A religious context does not imply God, or even affiliation.
1
@msimon6808 Sorry, I don't follow you.
1
If we lived in a normal society, they would market phones with a lock-out feature so parents could disable the social media functions until a certain age (probably 30, lol).
1
I'm pretty damn sure Dylan would not approve of this co-opting.
1