Gotta love stereotypes of a whole generation

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Actually, an entire species. But it's oh so true.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

It's as true as saying all black people are gangsters.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

No, of a generation. "People TODAY"

by Anonymous 13 years ago

As in 'all of humanity at this point.' Even the middle aged people. And, caped, morality isn't all about sex. There is also rape, murder, theft, and rejection of those opposing that.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/18/AR2006061800610.html..."The number of rapes per capita in the United States has plunged by more than 85 percent since the 1970s" http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm...Rape, murder, and theft have all decreased per capita since 1980. If you keep making generalizations, at least make sure you have the stats to back it up. If not, please stop because nothing you've said so far is true.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Thank you! There's actually a book out of statistics like this.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Generation: Group of genetically related organisms constituting a SINGLE STEP in the line of descent. I'd say that's what you're talking about.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Yeah, it's generalizing, but it's mostly true. How many people have lost their virginity at a young age, and treat sex like it's just something you do to get ahead or to be "cool"? Very few people hold doors, pull out chairs for someone to sit down, say please/thank you, or even attempt to go past high school or college.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Let's take this one by one. Studies have shown people are actually losing their virginity at a later age than in previous decades. You really can't have a study on chivalry, but I know people who still do those things. And really, was it ever actually widespread? And more people are going to college than ever before. Case closed.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

-Really? In my school, I'm pretty sure 99% of the students lost their virginity in/before 10th grade. - I've never seen people do any of those things. And courtesy was widespread. - Many people can't really afford college. It can get super pricey. Something about it is always in my local newspaper. Maybe it's different for each state, or county.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

See the link below. Only 46% of people aged 15-19 had sex. There's a 99% chance you're misinformed. And in October 2009 70% of high school graduates were enrolled in college according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I don't know where you're getting your info, but from 12 and 6 months old to 13 isn't better. People treat sex like a game, and even try to sleep with the most guys. It's no longer anything special. Also, whenever I go out, I get mad when I see a guy just drop the door without looking back, but that's not the only example of chivalry.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

The average age people lose their virginity is 17. Here's a link: http://www.newstrategist.com/productdetails/Sex.SamplePgs.pdf (Although it takes a while to load just a heads up) And if you look you'll see in 1988 60% of boys and 51% of girls ages 15-19 had sex. In 2002 (a bit dated, but the principle is the same) it was 46% for both sexes. And I agree there are a lot of people who aren't "chivalrous" but your original post said "lost" like a majority of teenagers used to be chivalrous. I don't think that really comes along until your post-college years for most guys, if at all.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Well, if you're raised in the South, you are certainly courteous to the point of chivalry. I said I always see people dropping doors, but there is usually a guy holding open the door, carrying the groceries, etc.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I have a feeling you're exaggerating things in your head just like with sex. People think it's a lot worse than it is because that's what they hear and it becomes a vicious cycle. There are still some good people out there.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

There are some good people out there, just like there is an exception to every rule, but a MAJORITY of people aren't chivalrous, moral, or care about educating themselves. Yes chivalry has been LOST. It was around and was mainstream, just not recently.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Come on now, at least read the other comments. 70% of high school graduates in 2009 enrolled in college. Saying a majority of people don't care about themselves is just ignorant. I'm the only one here providing proof, everyone else is just spouting off generalizations.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Enrolling in school is different than finishing school with good grades. Many people drop out of college or only take it to "party" and end up with HORRIBLE grades.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Give me some statistics and I'll take you seriously. Until then, you have no argument.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I really don't care what you think about me, no one takes you seriously. You are pompous and arrogant. Get a life and stop resorting to Google instead of coming up with your own opinion.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Sorry I actually back up my opinion with fact. It's called evidence.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

In all honesty, I mean today, as in post 1960. Things have been bad since then. But, just because things are getting better, that doesn't mean they aren't terrible. Even one rape is too many. Society condones some bad things. Cheating in school, cheating on your wife, pornography, and premarital sex. And don't come up with some statistic which I dont care about saying how those are on the decline. Most people won't own up to those when questioned.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I agree completely.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

That's a fair enough argument. However, you said people "today" implying people used to have nobility, self-respect, morality and chivalry. Ask Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X or any other black southerner if people had those things in 1960. And if you are willing to condone every single person because one person was raped, then so be it. I'd rather expect people to be good because a majority of people are good and pure. You're letting the bad ones fog your view of society.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

You do mean condemn, I assume. But, I am not condemning everyone, I'm saying that people today are corrupted, through and through. Rape shouldn't exist. And I'm not saying everyone was moralistic and all before 1960, but we did a better job of it. I admire the knights in like 1000 AD. You know why people acted racist towards blacks? They thought they were inferior. Because, with evolution, they are. They really thought that black people were like apes. That doesn't atone for it, but at least understand where they are coming from.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

You know that 46% is still alot.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

So now the definitions of nobility, self-respect, and morality are all about not having sex and pulling out chairs for people? What ever happened to things that are actually important like standing up for what you believe in, sacrificing on the behalf of others, serving the community, and helping the needy? I'd say the world is better than it was before. After all, things like slavery and racism are way less prevalent in many countries than ever before.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I hate stereotypers D: they're annoying and mean.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

You realize that was a stereotype, right?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Now stop bitching and go look for what is lost, so when you do find it you can tell the rest of us where we forgot it..

by Anonymous 13 years ago

douche

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Apart from caped crusader winning, why should we see chivalry as a quality more valuable than that moral stance of being nice? In addition to this, why should you assume that your presumably traditionalist conceptions of morality be any more correct than the prevailing one?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Because my moralistic values aren't set on not offending people, not bent on benifitting myself, and not trying to eliminate religion. Who are you, and why have you decided to comment on my posts?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Mentioning Immoral acts, which are probably an extension of amorality, is not a defense of a set of moral values not based on any reason. I agree that men should be nice to women, but no more than women be nice to men. The concept of chivalry is a meaningless construct, which is clearly worse than treating all well. In addition to this, why should we think that having sex at younger ages or being more sexually open a bad thing. Though there are undeniably negative consequences associated for some who do, perhaps a liberalization is a sign of destigmatization which will allow more to be more open, content, and happy (though yes, some portrayals of sex have had an opposite effect). Why should people be ashamed, why should people uphold laws not based on reason? Also, I believe I found you on the profile of some random person who posted. Have a nice day, yours sincerely, J Alfred Prufrock

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Oh yes! Let's let kids as young as 13 have sex, get her pregnant, and raise a child. That sounds smart. Oh and while we're at it, let's let people engage in bestiality. And polygamy. That's smart. If it feels good, why not? What a great way to live your life. It's impossible to argue with a person who apparently doesn't have any values besides himself. None.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

If it feels good, why not. Yes, why not indeed. Obviously I do acknowledge the psychological implications of young sex, and think that it would be both medically and socially irresponsibly, but my argument is that there isn't necessarily wrong with it. I do have care for others, I believe that the morally right action is the one which creates the most happiness or removes the most suffering from ALL people. I feel that you conceptions of morality and values are more based on feeling than anything else, and that claims to the bible are rather tenuous on these issues.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Oh wow. I didn't know you only cared for yourself. I'm also guessing you're unhappy and suicidal? Because generally people without people whom they care for are unhappy. But, if what you want to do is get high and ruin your life, feel free. Just don't kill someone while you're driving under the influence.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I don't think your listening. I believe my interests are equal to those over everybody else. I don't see how that could be considered selfish.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I'm not listening because I cannot decipher the drivel you keep posting. Please elaborate in eloquent sentences.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

By the way, I looked through your posts because I read on your page that you describe yourself as a 'confrontational person'. I simply believe that we should treat all with respect, and respect their will without imposing our own conceptions of morality on them, provided that they do not cause any harm to others. We can, on the other hand, try to persuade people, say a 13 year old, away from having sex, because there are many concerns for their wellbeing involved, but we should not attempt to use guilt in doing so.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Can you be more specific in your request, please?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

There wouldn't be this problem if you had the capability of sixth grade English. I simply cannot decipher the nonsense you wrote down in your previous two posts. Elaborate, please.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Main points 1) I don't think that there is anything necessarily wrong with any behavior that does not cause harm 2) I believe that the morally right action is the one which creates the most happiness, and removes the most suffering. This cannot be considered a selfish stance, as it values the interests of all people equally 3) I believe, and I may be wrong, that your conceptions of 'morality' and 'nobility' are not based on reason, but on tradition and cultural expectations. I believe that all these values can be improved through reason. 4) The concept of chivalry is a fundamentally sexist one, as it denies female ability for self sufficiency. This, though, does not mean that men should treat women poorly, quite the opposite, I think that all people should take time to show others care. 5) Perhaps if we liberalised culture, and did not claim that people had lost sense of 'morality', people would be less inclined to lose self respect. I hope this makes things more clear.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Chivalry in the classic sense (Middle Ages) actually gave women power. Knights would pledge loyalty to there lady and revered them.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Yes, you're right. In fact duty and special courtesy to women was only one part of the code of chivalry. Other parts included duty to God and duty to the innocent, something that I'm sure most people would admire. This, though, does not make the concept of granting women special courtesy (which I believe 'Scrantoncity' was making reference to) any more worthy than a kindness to everybody.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Chivalry is utterly moronic anyway.

by Anonymous 13 years ago