Interesting lecture

[ironphoenix]

Michael Kimmel at Dartmouth (1h28m). I don't usually watch, let alone repost, all of long videos; this one is worth it. He addresses two things, and links them; I think each one is worth hearing about, even if I'm not sure I agree with his attempt to make them All One Thing. The two things are: a proposed new phase of human cultural development between adolescence and adulthood, based on cultural practice in the (North)Western world; and markers and rituals of masculinity and their relation to the changes in women's gender.

The first part gets into the question, "why are twentysomethings not acting like 'grown-ups'?" His answers are worth considering.

As to the second part, for those who were asking that famous question, "But what about the men?", this is a pretty good answer. He doesn't ignore women by any means, but there is a really solid treatment of masculinity here.

I'm not sure I buy his attempt to link these two things as closely as he does; I think his fieldwork among the sports teams, fraternities, and sororities of US colleges may have slanted his views a bit there. Still, I think it's a video well worth the considerable time investment.

[Note: there's about a 5-minute intro before Michael comes on.]

Comments

[khall.livejournal.com]

Any study that starts out with the premise that 'kids are worse today than they were in the past' is suspect, to me. I wish I could find that quote from the greek guy in 17bc.:/

K.

Not the right one (spurious)

[khall.livejournal.com]

"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers." - See more at: http://quotationsbook.com/quote/44998/#sthash.cLasKzOw.dpuf - So-crates.:P

K.

[beable]

I've always liked the Shakespeare quote:


I would there were no age between sixteen and three-and-twenty, or that youth would sleep out the rest; for there is nothing in the between but getting wenches with child, wronging the ancientry, stealing, fighting

(A Winters Tale, act 3, scene 3)

[khall.livejournal.com]

:)

K.

[ironphoenix.livejournal.com]

I didn't get that whole "everything is going to hell with the younger generation" vibe from what he was saying, myself (I can't stand that mindset either). I got the sense that where we are as a society is related to where we have been, and that the current younger generation reflects that. The question in my post, I grant, may make it sound like that, but he isn't joining in the negative judgment of their collective character.

[ironphoenix.livejournal.com]

I'm fond of Horace's line: "Our sires' age was worse than our grandsires'. We, their sons, are more worthless than they; so in our turn we shall give the world a progeny yet more corrupt."