Narcissism on the Rise Among the College-Aged

[Winter Storm]

Just thought this article was interesting as I was just visiting my 17-year old neice's Myspace page (by request of my sister who couldn't view it now that it's private) and remarked on her nasty, ghetto and conceited comments she makes about herself and her friends. Basically, at 17 she thinks her shit don't stink and that she can do anything and knows everything.

Wonder where this attitude comes from:
"Permissiveness seems to be a component," he said. "A potential antidote would be more authoritative parenting. Less indulgence might be called for."

I seriously hope this phase is over by college.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/EDUCATION/02/27/self.centered.students.ap/index.html

[yankeeyosh]

I have a reply, but I am not allowed to say it anymore on these boards.

[Winter Storm]

I have a reply, but I am not allowed to say it anymore on these boards.

Ha ha ha, I should have known you be the first to respond. But it does touch on this Generation Me stuff that has been said before.

I'd like to hear what you have to say, Mark. Can you phrase it in a way that won't push buttons? Cause I clearly agree with this article from observation of the teens I know around here.

[meatwad]

Ha ha ha, I should have known you be the first to respond. But it does touch on this Generation Me stuff that has been said before.

I'd like to hear what you have to say, Mark. Can you phrase it in a way that won't push buttons? Cause I clearly agree with this article from observation of the teens I know around here.

Can't Understand Normal Thinking?

[and1grad]

Arent most kids that age all about themselves and whatever?

[and1grad]

Can't Understand Normal Thinking?
Is it seriously THAT difficult for you to not use that word?

[Winter Storm]

Arent most kids that age all about themselves and whatever?

Well yeah, but they article says its gotten worse. And websites like Myspace (which my neice is totally hooked on) has only encouraged more attention-whoring.

[wordsmith]

This was on the radio this morning...the morning show hosts were making a case for narcissism being prevalent anytime you don't have other people to worry about but yourself (spouses, kids, etc.).

[Winter Storm]

This was on the radio this morning...the morning show hosts were making a case for narcissism being prevalent anytime you don't have other people to worry about but yourself (spouses, kids, etc.).

Yeah true dat. Cause right now, it's all about me. :rolleyes:

[old_school_soul]

Can't Understand Normal Thinking?

See You Next Tuesday!

[meatwad]

Is it seriously THAT difficult for you to not use that word?

What? I was trying to figure out what Mark was talking about.

[weary]

Arent most kids that age all about themselves and whatever?
hell f*cking yess they are.

and, myspace is the devil.

[wordsmith]

Maybe because I have not been on the myspace page of a single person college-aged or younger, I don't see them as any different than any other online thing. Maybe because I mostly know older people who have them, and don't have any kids on my friend list, I see them as pretty harmless.

[wordsmith]

I have to say that the "Kids have too much self-esteem" thing has always grated at me (sorry, Mark, but it does!). Because most people, and DEFINITELY most kids, have their development most seriously hindered, and have the worst problems in their life as a result of, not high, but low self-esteem. It may be annoying to see somebody walking around who thinks, "Yeah, I'm special," when you think they're not, but but I'd rather see that than kids walking around thinking "There's nothing special about me."

On the radio show this a.m., they were talking about the poor performers that audition for American Idol, and how they break down and cry when told they're not good enough, and saying, "Do parents delude children about what their real talents are, are parents at fault?" The DJ (who I know and think is an arrogant asshat) was all, "I think parents just need to be honest with their kids...Kid not a good singer? Tell them, "Honey, you just aren't that talented." Kid not the best basketball player? Tell them that." To me, that's asinine, because it's like there's no middle ground. You don't have to tell your kid they're the best in the world, when they're not. But a parent who's not encouraging of his or her kid to cultivate something they enjoy doing, and beats them down, saying, "You're never gonna be that good?" That's gonna do WAY more damage than if somebody thinks they're your little star.

You don't need to smack kids down to give them reality checks. Life will give them reality checks. When I was in elementary and high school, I had a lead, if not THE lead, role in literally every single play staged until I graduated. When I went to college and did the theatre program, I had a sense going in that I was pretty good. I was okay, but I wasn't that good. I was just a kid from a small school and was the best at it that THEY had. My parents always told me I was great. My director and teachers always said the same. As a college theatre major, as it turned out, I wasn't, in fact, great. I wasn't the best. Most of the time, I wasn't even ONE of the best. Often, I didn't even get cast, period. Did it suck? Yeah. Did it ruin my life? Hell, no. It did induce me to switch my major to English, and focus more on something I really WAS actually pretty damned good at, writing. Do I think that those who encouraged me and told me that I was really great did me a disservice? Not at all.

[Krishna]

I'm sure that all of us who work with children and young adults were *stunned* to see that they are narcissistic.

But seriously...I dont necessarily agree that we're building up their self esteem too much, but I do think we're doing kids a great disservice with the "you-can-do-no-wrong" attitudes that some parents/guardians seem to display these days. You can build a kid's self esteem without turning them into people with "my way or the highway," "I'm above you" attitudes.

[AshleyJordan]

You can build a kid's self esteem without turning them into people with "my way or the highway," "I'm above you" attitudes.

See, I'd consider ""my way or the highway," "I'm above you" attitudes to be symptomatic of low self-esteem.

[Krishna]

See, I'd consider ""my way or the highway," "I'm above you" attitudes to be symptomatic of low self-esteem.

I guess you could argue that. But in my experience, the kids over the age of 8 that run around with those attitutes tend to be the "in" crowd kids with the parents who would think they were princesses even if they committed a Class A felony.

Low self esteem in high schoolers, for example, seems to manifest itself in the desire to blend in and follow the crowd in order to be accepted...and the constant feeling that they can't live up to expectations that they (and others) place on them. I can't categorize that as a "my way or the highway" attitude.

[BadKitty]

See, I'd consider ""my way or the highway," "I'm above you" attitudes to be symptomatic of low self-esteem.

I couldn’t agree more. These are certain symptoms of an unhealthy self-image. In fact, I think in a strange way narcissism is closely related, if not a function of, low self esteem.

[wordsmith]

And, you can encourage a kid to cultivate and develop his or her talents and skills, rather than actively discourage and say, "You'll never be the best, so don't embarrass yourself by trying," without giving off the "You can do no wrong," message.

[AshleyJordan]

I couldn’t agree more. These are certain symptoms of an unhealthy self-image. In fact, I think in a strange way narcissism is closely related, if not a function of, low self esteem.

My guess would be that it has something to do with being unsure of yourself or your place in the world, and that the narissistic (or demanding) behavior is a form of overcompensation, sort of "fighting back" against those feelings.

[BadKitty]

And, you can encourage a kid to cultivate and develop his or her talents and skills, rather than actively discourage and say, "You'll never be the best, so don't embarrass yourself by trying," without giving off the "You can do no wrong," message.

Totally. It's a fine balance, I guess.

[BadKitty]

My guess would be that it has something to do with being unsure of yourself or your place in the world, and that the narissistic (or demanding) behavior is a form of overcompensation, sort of "fighting back" against those feelings.

Yeah, being ill-adjusted. I think healthy self-esteem comes with a dose of not taking yourself too seriuosly. 'Cause you know better.

[wordsmith]

Seriously, most people who genuinely feel good about themselves ARE NOT the narcissistic people who find it very important that everyone in the world know just how great they are, and will drive it home to you with their behavior just so you don't make a mistake and think they're ordinary. Anybody who feels the need to draw excessive attention to themselves and their skills is somebody who's insecure that they're not quite good enough to be noticed on their own, and feels the need to ring their own chimes so you can't miss it.

[and1grad]

I couldn’t agree more. These are certain symptoms of an unhealthy self-image. In fact, I think in a strange way narcissism is closely related, if not a function of, low self esteem.
I think it can be either extreme. Hard to maintain balance at that age.

I'm not sure too high self esteem is preferable to too low self esteem.

[yankeeyosh]

Ha ha ha, I should have known you be the first to respond. But it does touch on this Generation Me stuff that has been said before.

I'd like to hear what you have to say, Mark. Can you phrase it in a way that won't push buttons? Cause I clearly agree with this article from observation of the teens I know around here.

Please...I will use forbidden terms here...so please...if it offends you, delete the thread because the last thing I need now is hounding.

Narcissism in Generation 'Y', which involves MANY (not all) teens AND twenty-somethings is, in my opinion, directly related to the Boom generation, who raised most of us. During the Awakening of the late Sixties and Seventies, a large component of the Boom transformed from a "community-oriented" generation (Civil Rights, Vietnam, etc) to an individualistic generation, as disillusion became widespread. When they started having kids in the late Seventies, these ideals often became projected onto their children, and in many cases, kids became the center of their parents' universe. Almost overnight, things became child-oriented...like Baby on Board signs, awards for everything under the sun, etc....unlike the childhood of Gen 'X', which was the least child-centric generation of the last one hundred years. So, there is little surprise that today's youth tends to be self-centered. Unlike their older siblings/cousins, many in this generation were overparented...and treated like trophies. And even among those that weren't, many see how their friends in their cohort act, and they might tend in that direction.

Again, if this is offensive, let me know immediately. I didn't generalize since I said "many" and "often" rather than "all". There are many, many exceptions, but this is, in my opinion, a trend rather than a rule.

[BadKitty]

Please...I will use forbidden terms here...so please...if it offends you, delete the thread because the last thing I need now is hounding.

Narcissism in Generation 'Y', which involves MANY (not all) teens AND twenty-somethings is, in my opinion, directly related to the Boom generation, who raised most of us. During the Awakening of the late Sixties and Seventies, a large component of the Boom transformed from a "community-oriented" generation (Civil Rights, Vietnam, etc) to an individualistic generation, as disillusion became widespread. When they started having kids in the late Seventies, these ideals often became projected onto their children, and in many cases, kids became the center of their parents' universe. Almost overnight, things became child-oriented...like Baby on Board signs, awards for everything under the sun, etc....unlike the childhood of Gen 'X', which was the least child-centric generation of the last one hundred years. So, there is little surprise that today's youth tends to be self-centered. Unlike their older siblings/cousins, many in this generation were overparented...and treated like trophies. And even among those that weren't, many see how their friends in their cohort act, and they might tend in that direction.

Again, if this is offensive, let me know immediately. I didn't generalize since I said "many" and "often" rather than "all". There are many, many exceptions, but this is, in my opinion, a trend rather than a rule.

I am not quite sure what is going on here and what the forbidden words are. All I have to say is that yout post makes a LOT of sense. I also enjoy the Generation Y books you've recommended.

[WorkInProgress]

I actually agree with much of what yankee just said.

[wordsmith]

Hah, Mark, it's pertinent to the topic, so don't worry about it. And, somebody asked you, so you're not threadjacking. Relax.

That said, (unsurprisingly), I'm not so sure I buy the theories of which you speak (but you knew that). I think narcissism is just a personality trait (some people are naturally more or less vain than others...I know doted upon kids who became spoiled brats, and some who were doted upon who grew up entirely unpretentious...it depends on the personality). Is it encouraged if you have a parent who tells you that everything you do is golden, and you can do no wrong, and anybody who goes counter to that is a fool? Of course. But I think that's an extreme. I think most kids who are encouraged are healthily encouraged. Not every parent is a complete nitwit who pumps their kid up so much it's to the detriment of the kid. FAR more parents are complete nitwits who do the opposite, let their kids go through life thinking they're disappointments.

In terms of generations, I really think that every generation has it's bratty, mega-entitled kids within the social order, and its kids who are down to earth. My mom's stories about growing up in the 50s-60s certainly recall memories of kids who were "mean girl" type snots who thought they could do whatever they wanted, just like exist today. I think that narcissism is pretty timeless.

[AshleyJordan]

I think that narcissism is pretty timeless.
That's been my experience. :rolleyes:

[wordsmith]

Been around a long time. Since Greek mythology, in fact. :rolleyes:

[beeblebrox]

This article seems like it's stating the obvious with the narcissism. I do agree that it's more on the rise with social networking sites and greater emphasis on materialism. I'll admit that I was a little self centered in college trying to figure out what I wanted to do, but my parents never exalted me and I dealt with bad grades and everything else. However, I think that I was a victim of my friends narcissism during my senior year of college. They completely ignored me, didn't stop by my apartment. I made all the effort and only got doses of their narcissism where they were much more focused on getting husbands.

[WorkInProgress]

Been around a long time. Since Greek mythology, in fact. :rolleyes:

Oh, you didn't.

[AshleyJordan]

Right and as the article mentions, some of it might be expected if you don't have kids, spouses, etc. to worry about yet. . . it kind of makes sense to be a little more self-centered. I'll admit that this is, to a certain extent, true in my life-- but I consider it a luxury that I have the time and money to spend on, say, a trip to a day spa to focus on self-reflection and my appearance. That might not be true later in my life. Might as well enjoy it while I can.

[wordsmith]

How many times do we talk on these boards about our twenties, and how they're "us" time, time to figure out what we want, where we stand, who we are, blah blah blah? How many times do we say, "You've got to do what you've got to do for you?"

That's fairly navel-gazing and classically narcissistic. But is it bad? I'm not so sure. Being self-absorbed is kind of a developmental stage that young people HAVE to go through to build and develop and be comfortable in their identities. But getting stuck there? Not so good. Being unwilling or uninterested in looking OUTSIDE yourself as well? Not so good.

[yankeeyosh]

To be fair, I think society, as a whole, has become more "narcisstic" than they used to. Twenty years ago, far fewer people went to gyms...far fewer people got makeovers...far fewer people had personal trainers, took "new age" medications, and went to spas. Aqua Net was enough for the most part. And this reverberates across all generations...from GI to Generation 'Z'.

However, the reason why we are singled out is because this has always been a part of our lives...we are Children of the Nineties, so we didn't know a time when fretting about oneself was not on the forefront of things.

[WorkInProgress]

If the news is to be believed, far fewer of us were as fat as we are now.

[beeblebrox]

To be fair, I think society, as a whole, has become more "narcisstic" than they used to. Twenty years ago, far fewer people went to gyms...far fewer people got makeovers...far fewer people had personal trainers, took "new age" medications, and went to spas. Aqua Net was enough for the most part. And this reverberates across all generations...from GI to Generation 'Z'.

I thought that the 80's was an extremely self centered time with greed is good and vacous displays of wealth. And think of the Roaring 20's too. It's cyclical and it came back to us.

[WorkInProgress]

I thought that the 80's was an extremely self centered time with greed is good and vacous displays of wealth. And think of the Roaring 20's too. It's cyclical and it came back to us.

Good point.

[PenforPrez]

I tend to agree more with Mark here. We live in an insanely narcissistic society. Look at the Baby Boomer obsession with individual wealth, which led to -- among other things -- the dramatic runup in housing prices a couple of years ago. More for me, less for everybody else.

Fewer and fewer people give a damn about the world at large; they only care about what they can grab for themselves. Consumerism in this country has gone insane. People want EVERYTHING they can have for themselves. Never mind the effect it has on the planet and the environment and their fellow human beings.

I also agree that a little bit of narcissism is not necessarily a bad thing. Sometimes you do have to want more and better for yourself, but that definition varies widely individually. For me, "more and better" would not be a lot: My own place to live, slightly more money and somebody special to share my life with. Basic things. Some people have that and consider it humdrum. :rolleyes:

Paul

[Jedi of Zen]

I think the article may have confused self-esteem and narcissicism a bit, but otherwise I completely agree with it. I think this problem tends to run across the entire scope of our culture - not just in college-age individuals (though I'm sure in many ways it's worse in that particular age bracket).

[AshleyJordan]

Fewer and fewer people give a damn about the world at large; they only care about what they can grab for themselves. Consumerism in this country has gone insane. People want EVERYTHING they can have for themselves. Never mind the effect it has on the planet and the environment and their fellow human beings.


Paul

Or some (again, me,) are "bobos"-- sort of combining social ideals with our consumerism . . .

[BadKitty]

How many times do we talk on these boards about our twenties, and how they're "us" time, time to figure out what we want, where we stand, who we are, blah blah blah? How many times do we say, "You've got to do what you've got to do for you?"

That's fairly navel-gazing and classically narcissistic. But is it bad? I'm not so sure. Being self-absorbed is kind of a developmental stage that young people HAVE to go through to build and develop and be comfortable in their identities. But getting stuck there? Not so good. Being unwilling or uninterested in looking OUTSIDE yourself as well? Not so good.

Not to sound like some sort of parrot, but I agree with this completely. Although, to me these things are not traits of a narcissistic behavior, but just healthy growing pains, or simply people taking care of themselves. You can’t offer much to the world, if you are not secure, stable, and well-taken care of yourself.

There is a difference between healthy self-interest and narcissism.

[yankeeyosh]

I thought that the 80's was an extremely self centered time with greed is good and vacous displays of wealth. And think of the Roaring 20's too. It's cyclical and it came back to us.

Yes, the Eighties were. But it mostly impacted Boom yuppies, many of whom foisted their ideals on their Gen 'Y' kids. The difference between the Eighties and Nineties was mainly that the former was just the tip of the iceberg...stuff like Jazzercize and yoga caught on during that period, but the "self-help" movement did not permeate this country as it has during the past dozen years...as the Boom generation has a clear grasp on society.

According to Strauss & Howe, the Twenties paralleled the Nineties in many respects.

[AshleyJordan]

According to Strauss & Howe, the Twenties paralleled the Nineties in many respects.

General sense of festivity? New inventions and technologies? Greater freedom for women? Just curious, always kinda liked the 20's.

[WorkInProgress]

General sense of festivity? New inventions and technologies? Greater freedom for women? Just curious, always kinda liked the 20's.

I'd expect those would be the three biggies, in terms of similarities.

[Syracuse]

I always had low self esteem, which was a major problem when I was a kid. But now it's like a godsend, because technically I'm not doing all that great, I'm not rich, lot of student loans, crappy car, crappy apartment, no gf, but because I have a nice job and a little bit of money I feel like I'm on top of the world, since I always was afraid I'd end up a total failure and have to live with my parents my whole life. If I thought I was the $hit when I was younger who knows if I could have dealt with adversity as well as I have.

[wordsmith]

To be fair, I think society, as a whole, has become more "narcisstic" than they used to. Twenty years ago, far fewer people went to gyms...far fewer people got makeovers...far fewer people had personal trainers, took "new age" medications, and went to spas. Aqua Net was enough for the most part. And this reverberates across all generations...from GI to Generation 'Z'.

Meh...but Olivia Newton John, Jane Fonda, the "Get Physical" aerobics and workout craze were yesterday's gyms and spas. I remember my mom getting a babysitter when my brothers were toddlers (so this was early 80s) so that she could go to an aerobics class held at the local civic center with a big group of other moms... buying fancy leotards and legwarmers and headbands and other crazy 80s accoutrements.

Trends and methods change, come and go, but the focus on self remains the same.

[wordsmith]

I thought that the 80's was an extremely self centered time with greed is good and vacous displays of wealth. And think of the Roaring 20's too. It's cyclical and it came back to us.

Exactly...I think it's just a matter of the perpetuation of trends of attitudes and consumerism than something specifically tied to a particular time period or generation.

[yankeeyosh]

Meh...but Olivia Newton John, Jane Fonda, the "Get Physical" aerobics and workout craze were yesterday's gyms and spas. I remember my mom getting a babysitter when my brothers were toddlers (so this was early 80s) so that she could go to an aerobics class held at the local civic center with a big group of other moms... buying fancy leotards and legwarmers and headbands and other crazy 80s accoutrements.

Trends and methods change, come and go, but the focus on self remains the same.

What generation is your mom?

[wordsmith]

Solid boomer, born 1952 (TODAY, in 1952, in fact).

[yankeeyosh]

General sense of festivity? New inventions and technologies? Greater freedom for women? Just curious, always kinda liked the 20's.

The Twenties, like the Nineties, were a period of booming economic times, national hubris, strong consumerism, rapidly developing technologies, a strong counterculture, and greater protection of children. There are glaring difference, of course...especially when it comes to race, but this period (identified as a High) has numerous similarities to our growing-up years.

[yankeeyosh]

Solid boomer, born 1952 (TODAY, in 1952, in fact).

Happy birthday :)

But that's the point...it was solidly a Boom phenomenon at the time.

[wordsmith]

But MY point is that being focused on those EXACT SAME THINGS (health/what you look like/whatever's the hip, trendy method of achieving those) has always been something that's gone on. Spas/gyms are what's hot now, but it's not a new concept by any stretch. Def. not something this era pioneered. Sheesh, sulfur and mineral spas were trendy hangouts of the aristocracy for CENTURIES.

What was more narcissistic than the court of Marie Antoinette and the like? I'm not sure I buy that narcissism is on the rise. I do think that it's increasingly seen as something accessible to all, though, versus the wealthy, the social upper crust, where it was once confined...partly because all the "upscale" things we enjoy are being made increasingly available to people with middle class salaries on knockoff versions...look at our designer coffees that pop up in chains, now, instead of exclusive cafes and bistros..."day spas" cropping up not at mountain retreats,but in middle class small towns...knockoff "designer" handbags, etc.

[yankeeyosh]

But MY point is that being focused on those EXACT SAME THINGS (health/what you look like/whatever's the hip, trendy method of achieving those) has always been something that's gone on. Spas/gyms are what's hot now, but it's not a new concept by any stretch. Def. not something this era pioneered. Sheesh, sulfur and mineral spas were trendy hangouts of the aristocracy for CENTURIES.

But it has only become mainstream recently.

[wordsmith]

See my edit.

It's becoming more mainstream because it's come down in price (and cache, as well, since that goes hand in hand), and is now marketed to the masses. But the same impetus was always there.

Are you more narcissistic now because you have a McGym in your town and spend all your free time there, are are you just as narcissistic as you were before you had one and did Jane Fonda tapes and Suzanne Somers' Thighmaster? Or were you less narcissistic when you just ran every morning outside?

(BTW, I don't think that being narcissistic and working out necessarily have to go hand in hand, the example is for simplicity's sake and to make a point based on what Mark was saying)

[AshleyJordan]

I do think that it's increasingly seen as something accessible to all, though, versus the wealthy, the social upper crust, where it was once confined...partly because all the "upscale" things we enjoy are being made increasingly available to people with middle class salaries on knockoff versions...look at our designer coffees that pop up in chains, now, instead of exclusive cafes and bistros..."day spas" cropping up not at mountain retreats,but in middle class small towns...knockoff "designer" handbags, etc.

I agree with Words on that-- a lot of things that were once luxury items are now much more widely accessible. In my hometown of ~20,000, lattes, trendy Thai restaurants, and upscale spas where you can get a seaweed wrap are all easily available. . . I hadn't even heard of any of those things probably until college:rolleyes:

[wordsmith]

I agree with Words on that-- a lot of things that were once luxury items are now much more widely accessible. In my hometown of ~20,000, lattes, trendy Thai restaurants, and upscale spas where you can get a seaweed wrap are all easily available. . . I hadn't even heard of any of those things probably until college:rolleyes:

Seriously. My hometown recently had a salon (which had been your basic Ethel's Beauty Barn type place, think Steel Magnolias) expand into a day spa...seriously, there is a VERY limited population of my hometown who probably has ANY clue what a French manicure is (and they probably wouldn't get it because it's French and therefore unpatriotic), let alone is knowlegeable about a hot stone massage or why it would cost that much money.

[yankeeyosh]

See my edit.

It's becoming more mainstream because it's come down in price (and cache, as well, since that goes hand in hand), and is now marketed to the masses. But the same impetus was always there.



cache?


Are you more narcissistic now because you have a McGym in your town and spend all your free time there, are are you just as narcissistic as you were before you had one and did Jane Fonda tapes and Suzanne Somers' Thighmaster? Or were you less narcissistic when you just ran every morning outside?

(BTW, I don't think that being narcissistic and working out necessarily have to go hand in hand, the example is for simplicity's sake and to make a point based on what Mark was saying)


OK...let's forget about fitness. What about other material goods like cars? People can't rely on maps anymore....they need a Tom Tom or something like that. They need XM radio. They need TV's in the back. Everything has to be specialized and "individualized".

[AshleyJordan]

The Twenties, like the Nineties, were a period of booming economic times, national hubris, strong consumerism, rapidly developing technologies, a strong counterculture, and greater protection of children. There are glaring difference, of course...especially when it comes to race, but this period (identified as a High) has numerous similarities to our growing-up years.

So, maybe the comedown kinda sucked (great Depression and any number of domestic and foreign issues in this millenium, respectively,) but, seriously, shouldn't we be thinking of ways to sustain some of the trends associated with the 20's or 90's, above? Doesn't sound that bad to me:rolleyes:

[AshleyJordan]

Seriously. My hometown recently had a salon (which had been your basic Ethel's Beauty Barn type place, think Steel Magnolias) expand into a day spa...seriously, there is a VERY limited population of my hometown who probably has ANY clue what a French manicure is (and they probably wouldn't get it because it's French and therefore unpatriotic), let alone is knowlegeable about a hot stone massage or why it would cost that much money.

It kinda fucks with my head because I go back home and have access to a lot of the same things I do here and have trouble remembering why I left.

[WorkInProgress]

cache?




OK...let's forget about fitness. What about other material goods like cars? People can't rely on maps anymore....they need a Tom Tom or something like that. They need XM radio. They need TV's in the back. Everything has to be specialized and "individualized".

XM radio is narcissistic?

Maps vs GPS units: not everyone can read maps and drive at the same time (see the recent TomTom thread). Not everyone can read maps (yeah, should be simple, but there it is). Not every AAA/Rand McNally/whatever is good everywhere (like my large, 50 state map book, which is great for general locations, and interstate driving, but not great if I'm trying to work my way through, say, downtown). For some, it might be easier than mapquesting directions every time they go somewhere new. (I have mapquested 4 sets of directions in the last week--yeah, that's more than usual, but still. That crap adds up.)

[cache]

cache?

Yeah. When you use that word, it gives you a free pass: you are right no matter what you say.

...that's why I am never wrong. :p

[yankeeyosh]

So, maybe the comedown kinda sucked (great Depression and any number of domestic and foreign issues in this millenium, respectively,) but, seriously, shouldn't we be thinking of ways to sustain some of the trends associated with the 20's or 90's, above? Doesn't sound that bad to me:rolleyes:

Well, we are...frankly, for the most part, the Oh-Ohs have been pretty much an extension of the Nineties...we had a crisis in 2001, but a few months later, the culture wars were back, glitz and glamor were in every headline, etc. We really haven't missed a beat.

[wordsmith]

OK...let's forget about fitness. What about other material goods like cars? People can't rely on maps anymore....they need a Tom Tom or something like that. They need XM radio. They need TV's in the back. Everything has to be specialized and "individualized".

I think this is a stretch, because I think you've moved on from narcissism to convenience...You could always argue that people who are gadgethounds use GPS, etc. not because it's more convenient, but because they like to flaunt that they're oh so cutting edge with whatever new piece of equipment, but you can ALWAYS argue that. Would you then argue that ALL new technology is based in narcissism? Is time-saving inherently narcissistic, then, with the implication being that we like things that save time because then we have that much more time left to focus on ourselves to the exclusion of all else? Or do people just like satellite radio?

[AshleyJordan]

Well, we are...frankly, for the most part, the Oh-Ohs have been pretty much an extension of the Nineties...we had a crisis in 2001, but a few months later, the culture wars were back, glitz and glamor were in every headline, etc. We really haven't missed a beat.

Respectfully disagree. This might be because I was pretty young during the 90's and sheltered, etc., but I remember the Clinton years as a pretty happy time. . . and with a greater sense of overall well-being (economic, domestic, certainly international,) than we have now.

Also-- glitz and glamour (just like sex, drugs, rock and roll, and sports,) will always sell. I think you'll find that in all cultures, in all eras, in some form or another. . . people need a distraction.

[wordsmith]

Also-- glitz and glamour (just like sex, drugs, rock and roll, and sports,) will always sell. I think you'll find that in all cultures, in all eras, in some form or another. . . people need a distraction.


Absolutely. Flip back through your history books, kids.

It's just more accessible now to "common" folk. Or, rather, a less glitzy, glammy version thereof is.

[yankeeyosh]

I think this is a stretch, because I think you've moved on from narcissism to convenience...You could always argue that people who are gadgethounds use GPS, etc. not because it's more convenient, but because they like to flaunt that they're oh so cutting edge with whatever new piece of equipment, but you can ALWAYS argue that. Would you then argue that ALL new technology is based in narcissism? Is time-saving inherently narcissistic, then, with the implication being that we like things that save time because then we have that much more time left to focus on ourselves to the exclusion of all else? Or do people just like satellite radio?

OK...bad example.

Sorry, I'm cleaning spreadsheets.

[dongle]

wait wait wait, slow down, I'm confused. Everyone is talking about the teens and twenty's as the "me" period of time when people focus on themselves. Gyms and spas and whatnot also cater to people worried about themselves. Is this what narcissim is? I thought the term referred to self love rather than self obsession. I see it as two entirely different things.

I agree, teens and twenty somethings have always been focused on themselves, where they are going in life, etc because they dont have family's or much else to worry about. I thought the point of the article wasnt that this is on the rise. What is on the rise is teenagers and college students belief that they know everything, that they are smarter than everyone else, and that the rest of the world is stupid.

My mom is a high school teacher and I cant tell you how many times I hear her complain about parents who call her mad as hell because she gave their darling little angel a bad grade. Obviously it's the stupid teacher's fault because no 16 year old would ever do poorly on an exam otherwise. This is narcissim. Go to the gym all you want, that's fine, as long as you dont believe you're butch and it's the bench presses fault the bar wont go up.

[yankeeyosh]

Respectfully disagree. This might be because I was pretty young during the 90's and sheltered, etc., but I remember the Clinton years as a pretty happy time. . . and with a greater sense of overall well-being (economic, domestic, certainly international,) than we have now.

Also-- glitz and glamour (just like sex, drugs, rock and roll, and sports,) will always sell. I think you'll find that in all cultures, in all eras, in some form or another. . . people need a distraction.

Well, I'm a little older than you, and I remember that despite everything the Nineties were an angst-filled decade. The results of one survey in a major paper called the decade the "Whiny Nineties".

[Winter Storm]

Did I start something here? Didn't mean to. Just thought it was an interesting article.

I haven't read this thread since my this morning due to a meeting.
Mark, are you behaving around here?

[AshleyJordan]

Well, I'm a little older than you, and I remember that despite everything the Nineties were an angst-filled decade. The results of one survey in a major paper called the decade the "Whiny Nineties".
I remember grunge, which was angsty. :p
Seriously, though, I'm pretty sure that this decade has greater problems and much less of a sense of well-being. . . any way you want to define it.

[AshleyJordan]

Did I start something here? Didn't mean to. Just thought it was an interesting article.

I haven't read this thread since my this morning due to a meeting.
Mark, are you behaving around here?

I'm obviously not a mod, but I think things are going fine. :)

[WorkInProgress]

Obviously it's the stupid teacher's fault because no 16 year old would ever do poorly on an exam otherwise. This is narcissim.

No, it's not. It's definitely rude and obnoxious, but not narcissism.

[yankeeyosh]

I'm obviously not a mod, but I think things are going fine. :)

I think it's a sinking ship... :(

[wordsmith]

I also agree that we're being pretty broad with what constitutes narcissism.

But it is kinda broad...it's basically self-love.

As the myth goes, Narcissus was a hottie who was being pursued by a nymph, Echo, who he wasn't into, and as his punishment for spurning her was to fall in love with his own reflection in a pool of water. Unable to rip himself away from his oh-so handsome mug, he eventually staved to death, and the narcissus flower grew where he died.

So that can be arrogance, it can be a falsely inflated sense of self worth (Narcissus was handsome, but was lacking in other positive attributes), etc.

I assume we're looking at appearance obsession as narcissistic, and that's bleeding over into "Going to the gym means you're vain," which I'm not sure is where we wanna be going.

I assume we're also lumping students who bitch for higher grades than they deserve, since that, too, is an inflated sense of what your efforts are worth, if not necessarily self-worth.

One reason the article's kinda sketchy to me is the vagueness of what constitutes narcissism.

[wordsmith]

I think it's going fine, too.

Why everytime there is a debate do people think "something's started?"

[BadKitty]

wait wait wait, slow down, I'm confused. Everyone is talking about the teens and twenty's as the "me" period of time when people focus on themselves. Gyms and spas and whatnot also cater to people worried about themselves. Is this what narcissim is? I thought the term referred to self love rather than self obsession. I see it as two entirely different things.
.

You know, I think narcissism has become incorrectly interchangeable with narcissistic personality disorder. I think it does actually mean self-love, and according to Freud (granted he was kind of a crack head) is a healthy human trait.

For the purposes of the thread I used it as “self-obsession”

I was about to get into the myth, but I just saw that it's been done already.

[WorkInProgress]

I think it's going fine, too.

Why everytime there is a debate do people think "something's started?"

It's just getting good!

[Winter Storm]

Why everytime there is a debate do people think "something's started?"

Well given our history of debates getting out of hand, I was a bit concerned that I'd inadvertently opened a can of worms.

Guess not. Carry on.

[wordsmith]

You know, I think narcissism has become incorrectly interchangeable with narcissistic personality disorder.

Right. I DON'T think it's interchangeable with the personality disorder.

[WorkInProgress]

I was going with something along the lines of "egocentrism and selfishness."

[yankeeyosh]

I remember grunge, which was angsty. :p
Seriously, though, I'm pretty sure that this decade has greater problems and much less of a sense of well-being. . . any way you want to define it.

The thing was...the more things got better in the Nineties (crime, economy, international relations, youth behavior, etc), the more public opinion went in the opposite direction.

But to be frank, things aren't so bad now...we've gone nearly six years since '9/11' (almost as long as the time between Okla. City and '9-11')....the economy is in a historically good position...crime is low...there really isn't too much to complain about.

'Course, our president isn't exactly helping the future...but that's anotehr thread.

[AshleyJordan]

The thing was...the more things got better in the Nineties (crime, economy, international relations, youth behavior, etc), the more public opinion went in the opposite direction.
Well certainly the Christian Right got a little reactionary, but outside of that, how do you figure?

[wordsmith]

I teeter between "self-absorption" and "arrogance."

What's interesting to me is that the connotations of it are generally negative...yet we're SUPPOSED to love ourselves, focus on what we need to be happy, etc. It's why I said that most people go through a developmental stage of navel-gazing.

[WorkInProgress]

The thing was...the more things got better in the Nineties (crime, economy, international relations, youth behavior, etc), the more public opinion went in the opposite direction.

Ok, so we all know that I wasn't here for that time, so perhaps that's why, or maybe it's because I was still pretty young, but I have no idea what you're talking about here. Is it that the public perceived those things are getting worse when they were, in fact, getting better?

EDIT: I was here for most of the nineties, after all. I just counted years. I was, however, still kinda young to be observing this kind of thing for most of them.

[wordsmith]

I'm not sure, either, and I'm older than Mark is. I was a college student for the last half of the nineties, myself.

[wordsmith]

But to be frank, things aren't so bad now...we've gone nearly six years since '9/11' (almost as long as the time between Okla. City and '9-11')....the economy is in a historically good position...crime is low...there really isn't too much to complain about.


Seriously? What's up, shitty war?

[yankeeyosh]

There was indeed a conception...even though in reality, it was not true...that things were getting worse. There's a psychological reason which I am quite unaware of...but Strauss & Howe consider it all part of an Unraveling of society....whether true or not...people get the sense that institutions are breaking down, and there's no sign of letup.

[WorkInProgress]

Also, the DOW just like like 500 points today. (But yeah, I'd agree that it's doing ok, from a historical perspective.)

[wordsmith]

Seriously? What's up, shitty war?

That troubles me WAY more than anything that went on in the nineties. Even the first gulf war, which I remember being really upset about, since we did news currents every day in 8th grade social studies in 90-91, doesn't touch that.

[AshleyJordan]

There was indeed a conception...even though in reality, it was not true...that things were getting worse. There's a psychological reason which I am quite unaware of...but Strauss & Howe consider it all part of an Unraveling of society....whether true or not...people get the sense that institutions are breaking down, and there's no sign of letup.
well that would explain the reactionary conservative political movement

[dongle]

No, it's not. It's definitely rude and obnoxious, but not narcissism.

oh maybe the article uses the word wrong too then. Cause I definitely got the impression that the article was saying the "I'm perfect and everyone else is wrong" behavior is on the rise rather than simply paying attention to ones self more.

[yankeeyosh]

Seriously? What's up, shitty war?

Well, I'm talking domestically.

[wordsmith]

So am I!

[AshleyJordan]

But to be frank, things aren't so bad now...we've gone nearly six years since '9/11' (almost as long as the time between Okla. City and '9-11')....the economy is in a historically good position...crime is low...there really isn't too much to complain about.



But look at the cultural/political/economic implications of 9/11 and a lot of the, er, controversial domestic and foreign policy it was a catalyst for. . . and just the over-riding sense of general economic/social insecurity. Income inequality. Environmental stuff (tsunami, Katrina, etc.,) and the implications of that. . . .
I think the 90's look *lovely* in comparison.

[wordsmith]

But look at the cultural/political/economic implications of 9/11 and a lot of the, er, controversial domestic and foreign policy it was a catalyst for. . . and just the over-riding sense of general economic/social insecurity. Income inequality. Environmental stuff (tsunami, Katrina, etc.,) and the implications of that. . . .
I think the 90's look *lovely* in comparison.

Could not agree more.

[yankeeyosh]

So am I!

But I'm talking on a historical basis. By far, the Nineties were better than the Oh-Ohs. I have no doubt about that. But you had Reagan in the Eighties...who almost got us all killed and whose fiscal policies resulted in the early Nineties recession...the Seventies, with the oil crises (which were really worse than today), Vietnam, Watergate, the collapse of cities and violence from busing crises, the Sixties with segregation and Vietnam, the Fifties with McCarthyism and racism, the Forties with WWII and racism, the Thirties with the depression and racism, etc.

[wordsmith]

But I'm talking on a historical basis. By far, the Nineties were better than the Oh-Ohs. I have no doubt about that.

No, you're talking on an opinon basis, really.

[AshleyJordan]

But I'm talking on a historical basis. By far, the Nineties were better than the Oh-Ohs. I have no doubt about that. But you had Reagan in the Eighties...who almost got us all killed and whose fiscal policies resulted in the early Nineties recession...the Seventies, with the oil crises (which were really worse than today), Vietnam, Watergate, the collapse of cities and violence from busing crises, the Sixties with segregation and Vietnam, the Fifties with McCarthyism and racism, the Forties with WWII and racism, the Thirties with the depression and racism, etc.
(Emphasis mine.)
But that's a whole other conversation. I thought we were discussing the 90's verses the 00's. :rolleyes:

[yankeeyosh]

(Emphasis mine.)
But that's a whole other conversation. I thought we were discussing the 90's verses the 00's. :rolleyes:

All I said is that in the Nineties, things were very good overall, but many didn't feel like it was. And the same trends are holding now...hence, we are still in an Unraveling rather than a Crisis period....but we may get to the latter soon, unfortunately, per Strauss & Howe.

[AshleyJordan]

All I said is that in the Nineties, things were very good overall, but many didn't feel like it was. And the same trends are holding now...hence, we are still in an Unraveling rather than a Crisis period....but we may get to the latter soon, unfortunately, per Strauss & Howe.

I'm sorry, Mark, you've lost me.

[yankeeyosh]

I'm sorry, Mark, you've lost me.

Sorry...I'm cleaning spreadsheets. Can I discuss this more later?

[AshleyJordan]

Sorry...I'm cleaning spreadsheets. Can I discuss this more later?

yeah sure.

[yankeeyosh]

yeah sure.

Well, here's the theory.

Since Arthurian times (aka Generation 'A' by me), there has been a cycle of what Howe and Strauss call "turnings", or eras where the mood of the population shifts based on various societal events, and generations are defined. The First Turning is considered a High. An example of that is the post-war period in the US...the Ozzie and Harriet era. There is general optimism that the Crisis (discussed later) is over, and society works to build on the newfound prosperity...a great sense of community normally occurs. This ended, according to Strauss and Howe, around the Kennedy Assassination Then comes the Second Turning, an Awakening. This is the period where people question the values of the power structure established in the High, and attempt to evoke change. The last one was during the Sixties and Seventies...and it had run its course by '83. The end of this period was marked by the Morning in America speech by Ronald Reagan in January 84...which essentially solidified the end of the era of mass movements. Some of the oldest QLCers might remember the tail end of this era. Yet, the bickering only just began, and an era of Culture Wars started...the Unraveling...when there is polarization and fragmentation, and low trust in institutions. There is high pessimism, even though things might otherwise be going well. As a result, people become more individualistic. The peak of this was in the Nineties...when we grew up, but appears to be continuing to this date. Then, you have the Crisis, when something significant happens, and society becomes more united...there will still be divisiveness, but much less of a sense of bickering as there was back in the Unraveling. The last one occurred during the Great Depression/World War II period. Some think we might be in one now, and for a while after '9-11', it seemed that way...but it looks like we might be in the beginning of the end. Howe and Strauss felt in 1997 (in the book The Fourth Turning) that it would begin around 2005...I feel that it will be somewhat later...around 2011, which is when the first cohorts of Generation 'Z' will come of age (they are, in my opinion, the "real" do-gooder Millennials Howe and Strauss tout). However, I have a theory of a sextennial cycle that I have not discussed on QLC...which has held true for the most part with a few short breaks since the Civil War. If it holds true, 2007 could be a year that something "significant" happens...although it may not necessarily be bad.

[capella]

I agree with Words on that-- a lot of things that were once luxury items are now much more widely accessible. In my hometown of ~20,000, lattes, trendy Thai restaurants, and upscale spas where you can get a seaweed wrap are all easily available. . . I hadn't even heard of any of those things probably until college:rolleyes:
Seriously? I live in a town of 80,000+ and we don't have any of those things. *sigh*

[wordsmith]

Yup. My town, which is only 7,000, only has the day spa, and that's a recent development. But 12 miles down the highway is a cluster of towns along a river that kind of flow together, and are only about 25,000 pop., total, and they have trendy eateries, gourmet coffee, a winery with a tasting room, upscale salon, lots of boutiquey shops, B&Bs...none of which were there five years ago. It's all in an incentive to boost area tourism, since there are a bunch of state parks within Chicago/suburbs' day's driving distance. So it's an attempt to cash in on the urban/suburban visitor dollar.

In any case, it's an example of an increase in the trend to make what was previously only the domain of the upwardly mobile accessible to the middle classes.

[capella]

We have houses as far as the eye can see.... and Winn Dixie. Even the Walmart is in the next town over (so it's not THAT far of a drive... 10-15 minutes, but seriously, it's ridiculous). And my town is on a HUGE lake that could have such a kickass waterfront park and etc. But do we have those things? No. We have commissioners that use city "credit cards" to eat at Hooters and write it off as a business expense on the taxpayer's dime. Grrrrr.... Local politics need to change where I am. But the morons I live around keep voting for these dummies. Ugh.

Anyhow, I liked Dogle's comment about the parents who get mad as hell. Like the one who wrote me that lovely note about how her child's missing assignments are a "failure on my part." I do think being overly self-absorbed to the point where you're right and the shit and everyone else is beneath you (or doing anything that requires effort is beneath you) is definitely more prevalent amongst the young. I talk to vet teachers around and they seem to think it's more of an issue than it ever was in the past. I don't pretend to know why this is though. It's quite annoying when you spend your daily work days trying to instill work ethic and manners in kids who don't have any home training and whose parents are often at odds with your example. It can be maddening and I do worry about how our future will be when these kids get to be running things. :eek: I can only hope that it's an age thing and they'll grow out of it.

[AshleyJordan]

Seriously? I live in a town of 80,000+ and we don't have any of those things. *sigh*

In Fl? Maybe it's because the "liberal Northeast" has a younger, yuppier demographic? There's also a huge private university in my hometown, and we all know colleges are tremendous agents of gentrification.

[cache]

Well, here's the theory.

Since Arthurian times (aka Generation 'A' by me), there has been a cycle of what Howe and Strauss call "turnings", or eras where the mood of the population shifts based on various societal events, and generations are defined. The First Turning is considered a High. An example of that is the post-war period in the US...the Ozzie and Harriet era. There is general optimism that the Crisis (discussed later) is over, and society works to build on the newfound prosperity...a great sense of community normally occurs. This ended, according to Strauss and Howe, around the Kennedy Assassination Then comes the Second Turning, an Awakening. This is the period where people question the values of the power structure established in the High, and attempt to evoke change. The last one was during the Sixties and Seventies...and it had run its course by '83. The end of this period was marked by the Morning in America speech by Ronald Reagan in January 84...which essentially solidified the end of the era of mass movements. Some of the oldest QLCers might remember the tail end of this era. Yet, the bickering only just began, and an era of Culture Wars started...the Unraveling...when there is polarization and fragmentation, and low trust in institutions. There is high pessimism, even though things might otherwise be going well. As a result, people become more individualistic. The peak of this was in the Nineties...when we grew up, but appears to be continuing to this date. Then, you have the Crisis, when something significant happens, and society becomes more united...there will still be divisiveness, but much less of a sense of bickering as there was back in the Unraveling. The last one occurred during the Great Depression/World War II period. Some think we might be in one now, and for a while after '9-11', it seemed that way...but it looks like we might be in the beginning of the end. Howe and Strauss felt in 1997 (in the book The Fourth Turning) that it would begin around 2005...I feel that it will be somewhat later...around 2011, which is when the first cohorts of Generation 'Z' will come of age (they are, in my opinion, the "real" do-gooder Millennials Howe and Strauss tout). However, I have a theory of a sextennial cycle that I have not discussed on QLC...which has held true for the most part with a few short breaks since the Civil War. If it holds true, 2007 could be a year that something "significant" happens...although it may not necessarily be bad.


Won't it be a good thing to be in our 30s during a "turning?"

[yankeeyosh]

Won't it be a good thing to be in our 30s during a "turning?"

Well, maybe, maybe not. Gen 'Z' and those that come after (the "true" Millennials") during the Fourth Turning will be the ones who will be the most impacted. They will be the ones who will be on the "front lines"...however, after the crisis passes, they will probably be rewarded, and be considered a "hero generation" like the WWII vets, while we and the 'Xers' will be derided as "nomads"...like the Lost Generation.

[cache]

Well, maybe, maybe not. Gen 'Z' and those that come after (the "true" Millennials") during the Fourth Turning will be the ones who will be the most impacted. They will be the ones who will be on the "front lines"...however, after the crisis passes, they will probably be rewarded, and be considered a "hero generation" like the WWII vets, while we and the 'Xers' will be derided as "nomads"...like the Lost Generation.

But what I'm thinking is the 30's and early 40's are prime time for career advancement into management and decision making positions. So if this time is equivalent to post WWII, then we will be the ones in charge of the "boom," right? It will be us leading this "hero generation." We are the Tom Hanks to the Gen Z's Private Ryan. :D That's what I mean by not a bad place to be.

[yankeeyosh]

But what I'm thinking is the 30's and early 40's are prime time for career advancement into management and decision making positions. So if this time is equivalent to post WWII, then we will be the ones in charge of the "boom," right? It will be us leading this "hero generation." We are the Tom Hanks to the Gen Z's Private Ryan. :D That's what I mean by not a bad place to be.

Well, not necessarily. Especially these days, when people in their twenties are frequently managing those in their thirties and forties. Throughout history, society has looked towards the youth of America to help solve problems. The 20-somethings of the Teens will rise up and contribute in a way that our generation and Gen 'X' really have not in the Oh-Ohs.