Talk:Adolescence/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives

Template:Archive box/image/undefinedTemplate:Archive box/auto/undefinedTemplate:Archive box/1/undefined

← Archive 2 |

Archive 3

| Archive 4 →

[edit] illuminato...

Several paragraph summaries?

Ok.

A. you CREATED the article on adolescent sexuality.

B. the text in the adolescent sexuality section is IDENTICAL to that of the article.

C. Despite my attempts to fix that and make it into a summary you have REPEATEDLY reverted it.

D. why in the hell would you do all of the above?, as someone in the adolescent sexuality article talk said. "Sounds like a duplication of efforts to me" no offense but you need to set your brainwaves to the tune .

Nateland 20:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed Repeditive Sentence

hey guys i removed

Both boys and girls are now "entering puberty at least two years earlier than previous generations. This means they are ready for sex earlier physically, but not emotionally or cognitively."[5]

because it shows up twice in the sexuality paragraph and its just the exact same thing as the first sentence.

Repitition sentence was removed not the original sentanceMaverick423 21:30, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] O_O! high school students? EXCUSE ME??

The picture which is supposedly of American high school students...

Well, like another person said, on closer inspection it seems there are like 30, 40, and 50 year old men and women in the background or upper row of desks i should say. (This seems to be more like American COLLEGE students, it's not a retarded class as any 40 year old man I'm pretty sure who was still in high school would be in some form of whatever)

Could someone PLEASE find a different picture? I think i'll take a quick look for some on the CC picture search and perhaps the internet archives lists upon lists of pictures... ok that's all for now,

more to come later

Nateland 22:30, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

ya know what he actually got something here i see bald people and everything here this is not a high school class picture. however i don't know if this means that a new picture is going to have to be found Maverick423 14:43, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

This picture is from NASA. NASA visited Oñate High School of the Las Cruces Public School district and took some photos. Those older people probably include the guest speakers from NASA, the teacher of that class, and other interested faculty from the school. I don't think NASA would lie about this being a picture of high school students. Jecowa 15:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Then you know what?, state it as such! YES!, just mention it in the picture caption. Nateland 21:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure thing. Jecowa 00:18, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

For anyone who wonders, we are referring to this image which is located at commons at time of writing. Jecowa 00:36, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Adolescent sexuality section needs revising, read below

The section is in desperate need of revising. I have placed proposals on the talk page for the main article on adolescent sexuality for how to revise, although I think that the adolescent sexuality section should be kept as a summary which it currently is not... It's highly biased as well.

I've already moved on pretty much from trying to edit and improve this particular article to the main one on adolescent sexuality so maybe some other people can step up to plate?

Nateland 22:33, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

This section reads like nothing more than a collection of vaguely pov quotations. It's unencyclopedic. Manderr 02:39, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Completely biased and full of untrue information

Especially the section on teen sexuality- sounds like someone had a bad relationship at 15 and decided to make up a load of rubbish. This whole "hook-up" thing is nonsense, and teenagers can be just as emotionally developed as physically developed, although some may not be. I changed it to make it a bit more subtle a while ago (but not necessarily emotionally, for instance) but the edits were removed; this information is completely biased and incorrect. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.67.162.83 (talk) 23:01, 9 March 2007 (UTC).

Yes, I agree completely! I previously didn't want to say anything about that, but it does seem like someone was hurt in the past, has come up with a hypothesis based on their own emotional disturbances, and then tried to find opinions that corroborated with the hypothesis (rather than the other way around). I am frustrated about it, though, because I feel bad removing a section that someone has clearly gone to so much effort to create. --Strangerer (Talk | Contribs) 21:18, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, Illuminato was the user who created this section. And his record of using reverts to keep favored POV inside of articles. Then creating spin-off articles to try and ward away complaints or when his favored materials are in danger of being removed and kept removed due to consensus by more than 3 wikipedians. As well as using varying tactics to try and validate his actions. Makes me think he is a simple POV-pusher who, even if he DID have bad experiences shouldn't act this way on such a simple website.

Also, the main article on adolescent sexuality has been updated and thus the current section should be updated. The section itself seems irrelevant to the article on adolescents worldwide as a whole and I say it should be removed and a link at the top of the article saying 'for the article on adolescent sexuality see adolescent sexuality. There is strong opposition to the current and the exact same data has been literally copy & pasted into numerous other spin-off articles.

I'm removing this section. And I hope i'll get support when doing it. Nateland 20:50, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External Links

I removed all the external links apart from one which I nearly removed. This is because all of the others linked to teen help articles and the such, which isn't the kind of website this article should be linking to. Cream147 _{Shout at me for doing wrong} 06:24, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What a load of rubbish!

"All teens have sexual lives". That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. I myself am 13 years old and I have no sex life at all, real or fictional (not that I want one). Why did they invent such a stupid thing? There are many teenagers like me around the world, and in my opinion, one of the writer's next statements "Sexual life is important for teenagers" is also incorrect as we see that many of the teenagers with sexual lives are rude, irresponsible and very noisy, a trait which most of the teenagers without sexual lives do not possess. You may think I am inventing this, but I have my sources as I have moved a school in the last year and I've been researching the behaviour of the 2000 (approximately) students in my school and of the 3500 (approximately) in my old school by doing surveys. I have finished explaining my point.

87.69.217.141 14:48, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

All teens DO have sexual lives, but some develop them later than others. 81.79.29.194 22:44, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Comment: Perhaps the meaning of "sexual life" ought to be clarified. Obviously, not all people have sex as adolescents, but all teenagers are involved in some aspect of sexuality. What does this encompass? --Strangerer (Talk) 23:26, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I dont Philip1992 (talk) 14:37, 25 November 2007 (UTC)Philip1992

[edit] Qoutations in the adolescent sexuality section

Directed at Illuminato.

When I edited the section on adolescent sexuality I removed the phrases by ponton lynn saying sexuality is a vital part of teenagers lives. (Sexuality is important to people, but not neccesarily vital, and the phrase seems out of place. Especially considering ponton lynn's views are U.S. centric).

And the phrase saying adolescents might not be psychologically mature enough to have sex and could face emotional distress. I'll need clarification. What kind of emotional distress?, how can willingly having sex make you emotionally unstable?. I thought if people had a sexual drive strong enough to make them initiate sex they'd be emotionally capable of withstanding the pleasures sex can bring them.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but I need some clarifying.Nateland 03:49, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I disagree that Dr. Ponton's quote there is US centric. If anything, you have made the section more US centric. The words "United States" did not appear in that section before your recent edit. It is well documented that distress can result from sexual activity before a teen is ready for it and you can find it on the other articles on this topic. Your brain does not fully develop until you are into your mid twenties and having a strong sex drive does not mean you are emotionally prepared for sex. All the evidence is to the contrary, in fact. If you can find a source that says physical capability means emotional readiness I will certainly look at it, but I don't think you will be able to find one. --Illuminato 04:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Illuminato, first off. There are adults who have the maturity of a ten year old and adolescents who are wise beyond their years. Saying they're not emotionally mature, (when in the context of your revert stated it as universal fact that all adolescents are harmed by sex) is a broad statement to make. Maybe not brain size wise etc. But in the context of sexuality that can only serve one purpose. POV. And POV is what started this whole 3 months long debate...

Also, saying adolescent sexuality is of concern to the wider society inside of an article on adolescence worldwide is a pretty big statement to make. Can you back that up with worldwide facts, quotes, statistics, and proofs of consensus among all classes and races and peoples?. (That's how you'd have to reasonably prove such a statement )

And no Illuminato, proving your facts is up to you. Wiki policy says that the poster of a controversial statement has to provide the proof for it. Don't just dump the burden of proof on me.

That's all for now. And please refrain from edit warring so much. It's causing many people trouble and grief. (Don't you have other things to do then just patrol a small category of wikipedia articles looking for changes not to your liking?). Nateland 04:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

First, please do not edit my comments, even if for typos. Formating is one thing, changing text is quite another. Secondly, there is loads and loads of research that says teens bodies mature far faster than their emotional or cognitive abilities. Just pick up a copy of any medical or psychological journal, particularly one dealing with young people - Adolescence is excellent. If you want specifics from that journal try "Adolescent Sex And Mass Media: A Developmental Approach" by John Chapman at Penn State, or if books are more to your liking read "Today's children: Creating a future for a generation in crisis." by David Hamburg. Its a cruel irony, in fact, that while teens bodies are maturing faster than ever we are prolonging their adolescence. I don't envy you being so young in this day and age. --Illuminato 05:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Illuminato, you've critisized me and claimed immaturity on my behalf because of minor typos instead of fixing them. I simply fixed a few typos on your behalf as a courtesy. If you don't want me to show you courtesy then fine. Say so and I won't. Also, stating that adolescents aren't mature enough to have sex is not a small or even proven statement. The burden of proof is on you. And in case you didn't realize, back a couple centuries ago people went out into the world around age 14 and had children at even younger ages almost regularly in some parts due to much shorter average human lifespans...

Yet, despite young sex the world continued on. Nowadays with modern technology people live longer and thus it seems the expectation to have sex later has popped up or just simply increased due to this fact. Trust me, if your statement is true then about 200-1,000 years ago the world would have been frought with emotionally devastated people. Now which is truer?.

Thousands of years of history.
Or the opinions of a few dozen scientists in narrow scoped fields that were formed within the last 50 years or so?.

I'm not saying life back then was necessarily fun for the average person. But it was filled with much more evil then today. War, death, rape. Yet even young children saw and normally lived through it if disease didn't get them first. And back then it seems no one thought twice about having children as soon as possible or as soon as necessary.

I'm reverting your edits User:Illuminato. And if I have to, I'll go all the way up the ladder to get you blocked. P.S. the burden of proof is on you. Did you read all of the above?. Or did you just choose to 'conveniently' ignore parts of what I said?. 20:12, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Nateland, changing text in an article is one thing, doing it on a talk page is another. In an article the text belongs to WP and anyone can edit it. On talk pages what I said is mine. It is my thoughts I am conveying, and should not be be changed by others. There is a difference. Also, please read WP:MOS and you will see that the word "sexuality" in the in section title should be lowercase. Just look at the other sections in this very article. All multiple word titles only have the first word capitalized. Finally, the sentence said that teenagers are not emotionally or cognitively mature yet. Our brains our still developing into our mid-twenties. This is not the opinion of a few rouge scientists, this is fact. I have cited two sources saying it is true - where are your sources saying it isn't? Show me good science saying a 14 year old is emotionally mature and I will read it with an open mind, but I don't think you will find one. You can't delete cited material simply because you don't like it. If it is untrue, thats one thing, but you have not shown me anything that says it isn't. --Illuminato 03:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Illuminato, maybe that statement is fact. But its placement in that section gives a tone saying adolescent sex is going to harm adolescents psychologically in the least. And saying it's particularly of concern to people. WHAT people?, people in the united states?. Sure, there's a big enough culture war over adolescent sex in the US. Worldwide?, I don't think so.

Because of this placement of your facts it violates WP:NPOV. I'm reverting your edits for neutrality. They belong in the part on culture or social aspects of adolescence. NOT in a section where they make sexual activity look inherently damaging. OH yes, Illuminato. Can you quit going on about spelling and punctuation?, people make mistakes. THat doesn't mean their views on a subject are meaningless.... Nateland 15:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

It is very bad form to change anyone's talk comments, even your own. I also see comments that have not been signed -- also bad form. It would be a good idea if everyone took time to do the 'four tilde' thing. Also bad form, are emotional threats to ban someone. Everyone wants an article to be good. Discussions in talk should be based upon fact which can be backed up. Brian Pearson 13:09, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Adolescence Psychology Section Edited

I just edited the Adolescence Psychology section and cited all the references, I also made the section neutral, earlier it was just referring to the Adolescent Psychological process as being mostly negative. I have now added factually verified information and have removed the phrases which didn't really mean anything and/or were just misleading and most of all, were unsourced.

Do not revert the changes, you could visit the references to verify all the information I have added. Correctus 14:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Picture added

Added a new picture to the article of a few teenagers in Nicaragua, the image itself is public domain and was found in the "Boys" category of Wikipedia's public domain images. There are no old people in the picture so I dont think there would be any more problems regarding the introductory image. If you want to comment on my change please do so! Correctus 15:59, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Adolescent sexuality

Sexual orientation occurs before the teenage years. The article makes it sound as if this is a new thing as kids enter adolescence. Some sexual activity may be at an increase at that time, but attraction to the opposite sex and appreciation of beauty can begin at a much younger age. Brian Pearson 13:16, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, yeah, as well as attraction to the same sex. Just sayin'. Hordaland 16:48, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WTF? - "Teenagers-Older children"

Um...am I the only one that has a problem with this?

1) Nothing is cited...at all...

2) The tone is very casual with some grammar errors that shouldn't exist - such as ending the last sentence with a comma, and using the word "you"

3) Is it fair to say that scientifically anyone from the age of 1-20 are children? I thought that "children" was only a legal term (in the United States) when referring to anyone under 18. Is there a source that provides a different scientific interpretation?

4) Some people think that they are called teenagers because - who are "some people"? 10, 100, 1000?

5) Numbers ending in "teen" were never meant to transform into the term "teenager" - says who?

Correction - you are right, but it's kind of irrelevant, don't you think? And why is the word colloquialism not used anywhere in this section?

6) A "Teenager" it is just the usual Western slang for a child in High school. - what about 13 year old middle schoolers? (in the U.S)

I request that this section be entirely deleted. Or as a second alternative, completely rewritten in an academic tone with verifiable sources. Viper2k6 05:43, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Change the egregiously NEGATIVE statements about African and African-American boys rites of passage

These statements are RIDDLED with negative connotations. Re-write these statements to reflect the true, positive, forwarding thinking viewpoints of the Africans, and the enslaved Africans in america, towards their young men entering the world.

"African boys "also" have a coming of age ceremony in which, upon reaching adolescence, the males state a promise to "never" do anything to "shame" their families or their village. This was also continued among African-American slaves in the early days of slavery before the practice was "outlawed". "
The stealthily use of wordplay in these wretched statements above skew the reality, and manipulate the reference point of progress for Africans.

No where in this paragraph are these negatives words and perspectives used to describe other groups' celebrations of the rites of passage of their young. Why are they being used to describe the Africans' practices and traditions all of a sudden?

"also" - communicating some type of after thought regarding the African tradition, perhaps, Wikipedia?
"never" - wow!
"shame" - wow!
"outlawed" - wow!

Tell the TRUTH Wikipedia.

Africans want their boys to UPHOLD, and represent the families and villages WELL, as they embarked on life. The promise was NOT to shame, but to UPLIFT the villages and reinforce a positive reputation around the world.

This was the same belief and practice as the enslaved Africans, and this noble practice was unfortunately outlawed by racists whites groups who dominated the society at the time.

CHANGE THESE STATEMENTS TO REFLECT THE SENTIMENT OF THE AFRICAN PEOPLES.

WIKIPEDIA IS SUPPOSED TO BE A REFERENCE TOOL.

jlh629 03:10, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

It seems to me, Africans make up a number of different countries in a large continent. They have a large number of varying beliefs and value systems. My impression is that you are over-generalizing possibly from a specific source or area. Brian Pearson 00:49, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Risk and stigma not specific to the U.S.

In the United States, sexual activity among adolescents is sometimes associated with a number of risks as well as stigmas and taboos. I don’t really see the point of this sentence. The risks of pregnancy and STIs are not specific to the U.S. (and neither, arguably, are any emotional risks). Many countries have stigmas against sexual behavior. In some cases the stigmas are much more stringent than the U.S. - see honor killing for example. I would suggest removing this sentence altogether since it doesn't add any information. Fionah 11:00, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I removed it Fionah 08:31, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Puberty and climate change

I also removed the following sentence from the Puberty subsection: Yet others propose a climatological connection and attribute the decreased average age of menarche in part to climate change or global warming. This theory wasn't referenced and it wasn't mentioned anywhere in the main puberty or menarche articles. Also, it seems a bit unlikely even just looking at correlations. The trend for earlier puberty seems to have begun in the mid-20th century (when global warming slowed down) and slowed towards the end of the 20th/beginning of the 21st century (when global warming accelerated). There's no evidence that age of puberty has dropped fastest in areas most affected by warming. Fionah 08:39, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I remember reading that the decreased age was connected to weight gain. Many kids are heavier now than they used to be. I'll see if I can find a source to back that connection up, when I have time. Brian Pearson 01:26, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

By the way, I just came across this article[1], which suggests that the onset of menarche in adopted girls may be earlier. "Biological fathers send out inhibitory chemical signals to their daughters," said Robert Matchock, assistant professor of psychology at Penn State's Altoona Campus. "In the absence of these signals, girls tend to sexually mature earlier."

In fact, it's more likely that excess body fat jump-starts puberty than the other way around. Additionally, girls who are overweight before their first periods are almost eight times more likely than their slimmer peers to be overweight as adults.[2] This is the article I had in mind, re weight gain causing earlier menarche. Brian Pearson 02:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

There's actually quite a bit in both the Puberty and Menarche articles about potential reasons for the trend to earlier puberty. I think we only need a summary of the main findings in the Adolesence article. Fionah 22:51, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request fix/removal of picture.

This article contains a picture with a caption which reads A North American teenager. This picture, often replaced, is always biased and stereotypical. It asserts the American stereotype about teenagers as truth, and in this violates neutral point of view. To restore neutral point of view, I suggest we do one of those things:

Remove the picture.
Replace the caption with one which makes it clear that it is illustrating a stereotype.
Replace the picture with one of a teenager wearing average clothes and standing in a normal pose.

Cyb3rdemon 00:58, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree this picture needs to be replaced. He looks like a defiant gang member. Brian Pearson 02:35, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't mean to disagree with this topic, but just a shout out to "mynameislegion"-- Thanks alot man for deleting my picture on the "teenager" site.. My hammick pic had been there for four weeks, I had told my friends and family to take a look, then you have to add those crappy pics in there getting all of the mods riled up. Now that's not to diss you cyber, I understand you have a job to do and made that edit for the better of the wikipedia community. 71.145.134.97 06:14, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Order on the talk page, I have made my dicision.

OK, I have made my dicision. As king of the users I would like to inform that Puberty be merged into Adolescense. It dosen't make sense with seperate articles because they tell the same thing. We can't have general information and then foreign iformation with a headline text about the form of puberty. I am a bit concerned and angry that you can't even merge and article properly. That just won't do! Obey or you are blocked. I become a tyrant easily. The Mingler 02:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Photo used

Uhm, the photo used now ('An American 14 year old Adolescent who needs a shave')... It makes me laugh (which doesn't realy should mean that it is a bad thing), but I am wondering a few things. Is the photo that is used, a photo from someone who gave his permission to include this photo in Wikipedia/ this article? And the second thing that I am wondering about: isn't it subjective, to say that this adolescent 'needs a shave'? --Robster1983 17:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes. That photo is of me. Taken by me... I give full permission for use of the photo and despite 'needing a shave'. It seems to be the only fairly neutral picture. That's why I uploaded it because all the other pictures were so disputed.

Although my sideburns might make me look a bit older and out of place... however many adolescents do have facial hair.

Anyways, unless you got a better photo I say we put the one of me back up. Seeing as this article could use a picture or two.... Nateland 18:39, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

No, I haven't got a better photo, and now that I know who this photo belongs to, I can't see why not to use this photo :-) Although it perhaps would be nice to title the photo as: 'An American 14 year old adolescent with the typical facial hair'. Wouldn't that be better?

Thnx for replying to this btw! --Robster1983 21:34, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] How is this a controversial topic?

I don't think it's really that controversial. Anyone agree?--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 16:17, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Nope, I can't see why this topic is controversial either. So I agree with you. Robster1983 18:26, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. Adolescence is a very controversial topic. We have the Youth Rights movement which believes that adolescents are responsible and competent people, and the opposition which believes that more restrictions on youth are necessary. Dr.Epstein, a psychologist, recently wrote a book called The Case Against Adolescence which convincingly states that adolescence is an artificial extension of childhood invented in the 1800's (I would suggest that you read it, a short summary is located here [3]) . Cyb3rdemon 00:32, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Surely this is not a controversial topic anymore because there is no longer much argument on the talk pages etc rather than because the topic itself is without controversies. Is that what is being discussed? I would say there is no need for the controversy template at the moment as the article is stable and its content seems to be agreed. CaptinJohn 12:45, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dudes, speak 2 me

Hey! R any o' u teens who enjoy their childhood n dont really look forward toward adulthood. I kno i am. I wish that once i turn 17, i stay 17. I love bein' a kid. N i kno that their r somma u who r teens that rather b known as children than adults. If so, put it on my talk page. --Mr. Comedian 20:09, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

oiolk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.206.222.51 (talk) 11:37, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A teen is still a kid

adolescents r kids. they big kidz. a lil' kid unda 12 n big kid ova 12. IT TICKS ME OFF when people say i aint no kid. i still a kid. A TEEN IS A KID. a kid is any1 unda 21. --Mr. Comedian 19:38, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I just don't care anymore

I'm fine with this article even though I totally disagree with it. Everyone hates me around the stages of life articles. I don't even care about them anymore. I'm just a kid and everyone wishes I was dead now. You guys are mean. --Mr. Comedian 12:38, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I like tlking bout dis..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.127.245.140 (talk) 01:24, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] fight and die

I think that phrase should be reworded a bit. "Join" is a better example.