I was born in the WRONG decade.

i was born in 1993 too, and i feel the exact same way. i know i was just born in the wrong decade >_>

 

i've been told that as well.

 

living then would be so nice

 

And because someone disagrees with you, that automatically means they don't question?

I'd say it's just as ignorant not to believe anything you haven't seen with your own eyes. It's just as ignorant to call someone a "sheep" just because they disagree with you, and just because you can't understand the information they present.

That's not what she said. You still don't get it.

Why is that? Are you apologizing for what you have to say?

 

It could be his ref to the fact that the post was well over a hundred lines long, quite a read to the "Sup" and "txt" generation.

And I wonder if you even read the whole post since you only quoted the last three lines in your attack, which seems to have its own agenda aside from the discussion at hand.

 

i feel like i was born in the wrong time period 2!!! i feel like im home whenever i see anything related 2 the 60s i think im a reincarnated hippie!!

 

Not at all.
Mine was a general comment about the widsom of anyone taking any old report or study at face value, without question. It wasn't directed at Caliente specifically.
This post is pretty old and it's hard for me to get back into the mood of it, but I think my point was that there are all kinds of studies, done by all kinds of various entities, for any number of reasons. Sometimes, those studies achieve "results" that are geared to elicite a certain reaction from the general population. Sometimes, the "results" aren't true. Don't any of you remember the marijuana "studies" that said it was a "gateway" drug to heroin, or it would make you insane? Didn't anyone see "Reefer Madness?" My point is, don't believe everything you hear, just because some seemingly benign study group says it's true. Trust your own eyes and ears.

Yes, I agree with that first statement. In fact, it was my point. Too many people believe what they're told, in spite of what they can see for themselves. It would be wrong to disregard your own observations in favor of the results of some study that you didn't witness. However, I think both Caliente and I were speaking in the broader sense and not actually calling each other names. The word "Sheep" is used as a term for gullible people who blindly follow a shepherd that they suppose has their best interest at heart.

Really?

It looks to me like she's exactly saying that these children, in every case, became something that they were not after watching violent TV. This is contrary to my personal experience, and I've had a fair amount of experience along these lines, so I tend to doubt that which Caliente and the study are trying to convince me is true.

I don't know how you could mis-interpret my admiration for people who actually read the whole post as being an apology. It doesn't seem like Shale had any trouble understanding what I was trying to say.
Most people will see a post of that length, pick a couple of points taken out of context, and post something completely irrelevant.
I don't make any apology for the content or the length; I merely appreciate people who actually take the time to read it and make an effort to understand it.

 

I was born in the 80s and would have lost to have been around in the 60s - much more my cup of tea!

 

I, of course was a baby boomer - a child of the sixties. I watched tv - some. There were only 3 channels, ABC, NBC, CBS. No Cartoon Channel, Discovery, Fox, Bio, SciFi and on and on. Also no video games. We had to focus on what we had - which was whatever strange little thought was creeping around in our brain. Much of this was "Why are my friends being sent off to die, Why are bombs going off in churchs, Why are dogs being siced on civil rights protesters, Why can't my black friend get a drink of water at the fountain.

All this and more caused a different perspective on life. Now, I am perfectly satisfied to watch one of the 250 channels I can get on Dish TV, or spend hours looking at naked men and women on the internet, or blasting away on cops in a video game.

Times were different in the 60's, priorities were different. We lived in the streets, we loved as a group, spent large amounts of time looking into ourselves - some times with chemical assistance.

I miss the 60's and I wish all the kids today who wish they could be there - could be there.Maybe because I am old, but I see "1984" occuring more and more every day and no one has any idea it is happening much less any idea what to do.

TV & electronic entertainment have changed the motivation of this generation. It would not suprise me at all if the powers that be are so far beyond my comprehension that that have planned much of the mind melt that is occuring today.

And all those who feel they were born out of time - I wish them luck. I hope they can find what is lost and undo what has been done. The satisfaction is knowing that we tried.

 

This puts it all in perspective so well.

I'm a generation younger but our histories overlapped some I think. So much of my childhood years has been re-hashed as I've gained some mileage... and seen things from a fully adult perspective, which is more or less 30 and up.... it's not strictly a years thing... I've worked with a 17 year old man and I currently work with a 41 year old boy. My early upbringing was at the hands of an inexperienced mom and a dad who wanted no part in child rearing- but was reluctantly dragged in the process by an understandably insistent mom who wanted and deserved help. His resentment in having to be a dad in more than just bread winner reflected itself in how he did the job.... but his parenting was largely look at as nobody else's business until near the end of his life.

He was almost old enough to have served in WW!! and had some military background. I can imagine him as a teen being gung-ho about our exploits in Europe and the Pacific and yearning to be part of it. I see both him and my mom who was considerably younger than him (16 years) being products of much closer knit communities... and their interest in what was going on within the neighborhood and town echoed in some of their conversations- positive and negative. The things that were generally tolerated then are not now... of course there are things that we accept now that they didn't then--- culturally they really couldn't- at least not if they wish to be seen as good citizens. The music they were steeped in, the things that made news, things that moved them, that divorce was 100 times more scandalous... the politics- what were the countless issues that moved people more profoundly than headline news stories and music?

Saying that you were born in the wrong decade seems pretty intuitive at the surface but if you were born in another are you sure you'd have developed into the same person over time?

 

i was born in 92 and i feel the exact same way.its almost a feeling of being trapped in a generation you dont want to be a part of.and really thats exactly what it is.nobody embraces the important things in life anymore,like love and peace,or freedom.the worlds gone to hell.i just try my hardest to surround my self in such things,regardless of what the world around me is doing.i say we join together and start a hippie commune,and live our lives as if the 60s never died.peace,happiness,love,freedom,and helping your brothers out.thats what its all about.whos with me!?

 

So the number of lines quoted equals the number of lines read? That's Hipforums logic, I guess.

 

But you automatically assumed that the study mentioned was somehow invalid because you disagreed with its conclusions, even though you were totally ignorant of it.

The trick is to be discerning enough to recognize good research from bad, and not to simply sit there like a Luddite and run down information about which you are completely ignorant.

A second trick is not to make unwarranted inferences from totally unrelated examples, in attempts to deflect attention from your lack of understanding. What the hell does Reefer Madness have to do with what we're talking about? Nothing.

No wonder you don't believe anything, if that's your level of comprehension.

 

Okay, what we have here is a guy who just wants to argue for the sake of argument... I can play that game, too.

Um... "the study mentioned"?
Would you kindly direct me to the specific study that was mentioned, and where I disagreed with the conclusion, of which I'm so totally ignorant?

Right. There was no study mentioned, only an off-hand comment about studies, in general. You are the one who seems willing to believe them, even though no specific study was named and you have no idea of what data they might contain or how they were conducted. You are presenting yourself as the very embodiement of that blind obedience to which I referred. You imply that you believe a study which you have only heard of in referrence, and of which you have no understanding. Some people will believe anything, if they hear it on the news, or a forum, or it aligns with their own beliefs.

So, tell me all about the good reasearch in this supposed study.
I'm no Luddite, I can assure you. I enjoy technology more than most. But, that doesn't make me gullible to the point where I'll believe someone, simply because they wear a white coat and have pens in their pocket. I'll leave that to you, thanks.

What is it that you think we're talking about?
The topics of a thread may change or split may times before it's done. Try to keep up.
However, just to appease your question, part of what we were talking about was wether or not we were going to believe reports, without any knowledge of the studies or of how they were conducted. Reefer Madness was simply one example of some nice propaganda that was packaged in a manner intended to impress the viewers into believing a certain point of view. Many "reports" or "studies" are also simply propaganda packaged in a way to make easily influenced people believe a certain thing. Try to use a little independent thought, when attempting to tell the difference. Many times, you may find that your own experience belies the opinion of the "report."

First, I believe many things. I try not to believe things that aren't true, even when everyone tells me they are, if I can see quite plainly that they aren't.

Second, your comment is simply a cheap deflection tactic. It contains nothing more than the written equivalent of shouting, "Oh Yeah?!" It's the intellectually bankrupt person's version of throwing the pistol when he runs out of bullets. If you're actually smarter than this, you should be embarrassed by that last line.

Next time try explaining how I failed to comprehend.

Thanks for playing. We have some lovely consolation prizes for you.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.

 

I am 14 and I also get very nostalgic about it... I once even cryed a bit over it..

 

I was born in 91' and I know how you feel, I believe its because now a days you barely see any hippies. Just everyone else but hippies.

 

Well- to be honest you didn't see very many then either... though a lot of folks LOOKED like hippies... particularly in the early and mid 70's when the visual trappings became publicly consumed and the youth found something else they could use in rebellious torture of their folks who may well have vocally derided what they saw and I can't think of a better way to get a long haired teen is to forbid him from growing his hair out like "Those weirdos in San Francisco... or that band that plays that..... music you kids listen to".

Mind you this was probably spoken in one form or another in most household that were run by the generation that had rallied to national service after Japan had launched its "unprovoked" attack on Pearl Harbor and in the process helped dig our economy out of the Great Depression. You had a first generation of values steeped in large scale uncertainty- often of where the next meal was coming from being imposed on the next generation that didn't see the need for such parsimonious behavior when there was so much around.

In one way or another values get broken down when they don't seem to make much sense and the direction that the country had taken after a war was won that most would readily agree that we had every justification to enter. Our mission in Korea didn't make quite as much sense from the standpoint of containing an enemy who had not yet attacked us but in contrast to the costly multiple front action that took place in Europe and the Pacific a four year skirmish that resulted in a relatively quick end to open violence.

Vietnam made even less sense and dragged on and on as a slow, steady escalation that got bloodier and bloodier as the 60's dragged on. The foot soldier in this conflict was from a generation that did not know war the way those in Korea did. They had not been part of the intimate day to day process of a war effort that seemed as justified as WWII and many wanted nothing to do with the endless blood bath that was in the papers and on the evening news with fresh body counts for a purpose so vague as stopping Communist expansion.

You'd be pissed at the prospect of getting the "Greetings from Uncle Sam" letter that represented the abrupt end to your childhood and since your friends faced the same prospect at the hands of the local draft board it would have been a frequent topic of conversation. You'd insist that you were born in the wrong decade and yearn for a country whose military escapades were not joined by hundreds of thousands of conscripts who had little or no belief in the cause if they understood it at all.... and all for the opportunity to be shipped back home in a flag draped box.

 

I was born in 1991, and I wanted so much I was around in the 60s, but when you realize that 60s had major issues, like racism and war in vietnam, and techonolgy back than was in its early stage, it was really hard to live back than, however much we think 60s was great, great time. sure, society was awesome, everyone you meet was friendly-oriented, most of rock and roll legends were alive and psychedelic drugs were highly spread around. why couldnt we have another summer of love, or why you wouldnt enjoy in your life just like hippies did? you could say society is capitalistic, but society is capistalistic for past 100 years, everyones facing the money's way. major difference between these times and the 60s is that youth is turned to their pcs, ipods, mobiles and techonolgy in general, and losing interest in social protest for changes. as long as their have their iphone, its cool. I still want to live in 60s, but while I'm stuck here, I want to go through everything that hippies experienced.

eace:

 

Excellent post.

As one who lived in the 60's, I can tell you that it wasn't really all that great. I mean, sure, the nostalgia is pretty cool, and it was a lot safer to be on the road... but I can assure you that we weren't any happier than the kids of today are with their social and political environment. A lot of the things that went down were positively frightening. Riots are very exciting, but in the same sense as the old curse: "May you live in interesting times." "Interesting" and "exciting" aren't always good, or fun.

The rock icons weren't icons, yet, we just liked their music. The hero status came later. The artists of today will be icons in another 30 years. Not everyone we met was friendly. A lot of people were very paranoid. You constantly wondered about strangers; are they narcs? Will they rip me off? Still, there were so many of us at the time that the horror stories are relatively few.

It only seems like a wonderful time to be alive when you look at it through the rose-colored glasses of time. It really wasn't all that great of a time to be around - except that there were a LOT of us and we did tend to support each other, so we could travel cheaply and still be relatively safe.

There's a lot to be said for living today. Like Will Rogers said, "Things ain't what they used to be, and probably never was." Griff Niblack said, "If you're yearning for the good old days, just turn off the air conditioning."

 

I was there - and you are absolutely correct about the problems. Our friends were being killed in Nam, racism was rampant, a president had been assasinated as was a civil rights leader.
But we had hope, hope that we could change things.
I feel today hope is scarce. I can see the society being similar to the book "1984" when everyone was so busy surviving they could only look at their problems. Afraid the government is tracking our every move. Afraid we will lose our jobs, afraid of pollution, cancer, poverty and so on. We just lay low and hope not to be noticed.

For all the problems back then life was still better. I wish you the best in seeking the experience of the '60s.