Does the “unambiguously crass behavior” we encounter daily in popular media necessarily lead to a worse society, as some have suggested? In this October 2013 essay in Time magazine, Libertarian journalist Nick Gillespie suggests that it doesn’t-—and what’s more, that as a society we’re getting better!
Read it here: Gillespie, "Society is coarser but better”
- Referring to U.S. society, Gillespie concedes that “we’re coarser” now than we were in decades past. He also cites desirable trends for young people over the same interval—lower incidence of extramarital sex, fewer arrests for violent crimes, and less cigarette smoking, among others. Is Gillespie suggesting any kind of relationship between the two trends? Why mention them together? Is his argument persuasive? Why or why not?
- Gillespie describes Justice Antonin Scalia’s writing for the Supreme Court as “brutally lapidary prose.” What does that description mean? Is it a compliment or criticism? Gillespie positions his argument in opposition to statements made by Scalia, but how might you describe his overall attitude toward the Justice? Disdainful? Respectful? Empathetic? Point to specific words and passages to support your answer.
- Popular culture is quite a broad phenomenon, and Gillespie offers no definition of it except by the examples he gives. What do you infer he means by “popular culture”? Does the lack of a clear definition weaken his argument? Why or why not?
- You may not have personally witnessed the trends over the last thirty years, but you certainly can observe the details of the present moment. What effect, if any, do you see the “ill-mannered society” having on social behavior? Do you see any relationship between the popular culture that people consume and the way they speak, act, think, or conduct themselves? Write an essay in which you describe the pop culture trends next to the social behaviors you observe, using your personal experience and observations as evidence and Gillespie’s article as your They Say.
They Say I Blog 
Society is Coarser—but Better
The article by Nick Gillespie was quite broad. He used some points comparing statements to what one Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said against his own views. The only clear and concise fact he used was “Violent crime rates for males between the ages of 10 and 24 are less than half of what they were in 1995 (for females, they’ve declined by 40 percentage points over the same time). Between 2009 and 2010 (the latest year for which data are available), the percentage of never-married males between the ages of 15 and 19 who reported ever having had sex dropped from 60 percent to 42 percent. For females in the same age group, the rate declined from 51 percent to 43 percent” (Gillespie). But then makes the statement broad by saying “High schoolers are less likely to be bullied like they used to be, and less likely to smoke too” (Gillespie). What evidence is he using to back up his statement? High schoolers with new technology have other ways to get bullied, and he shows no evidence towards the smoking comment. In this article he says society is better, which I can agree with because we are all experiencing society. He is also saying that the rudeness of some of the “popular culture” will not affect society. I guess you can just say it is a matter of opinion, and we will all just have to wait for the future to find out the outcome.
LikeLike
There will always be pros and cons with the way in which our society is able to express itself. Yes, things in public are a lot more risqué these days, but I think the pros of freedom of expression outweigh the cons.
In my opinion the quality of our future generations will be determined by the quality of the home environment in which they are raised in. You can have the strictest and most conservative society, but if you don’t have a home environment full of love and proper discipline, our children will not grow up to have respect for themselves or for others. If freedom of expression is not allowed, I feel it will just lead to resentment and rebellion.
LikeLike
The crude behavior shown in the media and TV shows today have most definitely influenced how society is today. Teenagers see their idol celebrities doing drugs and stumbling out of clubs late and think that’s what they should be doing. Seeing how people dress in certain TV shows influence how viewers will dress, so if the dress is to reveling or crude then society will start dressing that way. The TV shows used to be all about family and that was reflected in society by initiating “family time”, now most families don’t eat a meal together.
LikeLike
Today’s pop culture definitely has an effect on today’s society. From magazines to music videos, the bar for what is acceptable has moved dramatically. Everything has a certain audience in mind and everything basically advertises to that audience in some way.
Children start at informercials, everything they see they want. People idolize their favorite stars. These stars are placed in the public spotlight. Everything they do is brought to the publics attention, in turn giving our youth bad advertising.
Luckily, my daughter is too young to experience Miley Cyrus’s half dressed foam finger dance and ridiculous song lyrics. But the older children have all heard about drugs, partying, drinking and twerking from Miley Cyrus and want to do all of it because she does.
Even older generations are victims of pop culture. All the celebrity gossip magazines and ridiculous tv reality shows are just a few examples.
For some reason we are so interested in the lives of celebrities and some people even attempt to be just like them. One woman spent a ridiculous amount of money on plastic surgery to look like Kim Kardashian and another is attempting to look like a “human Barbie”
Our society is changing and more is becoming acceptable. It’s only going to continue.
LikeLike
In today’s society, things are taken a lot differently. Crude humor from back in the day is now a normal thing for people of this generation. I think that pop culture is actually helping our society. Kids aren’t really as sheltered anymore as they once were, and that brings them not to go crazy when they actually step into the real world. It also adds not only book smarts to kids but also street smarts which is something that really matters out in the real world.
LikeLike
Pop culture today is different from what it was back in Scalia’s day. The pop culture may be different but the way the youth who are viewing it is not. Some of these pop icons like Miley Cyrus are idolized by millions of people around the world. When she is seen obviously high on some mix of drugs, the youth are seeing this and thinking that it is cool. She sings and raps about smoking drugs her audience assumes that is what is “in” now. The younger generation is so focused on the lives of other people, and the next episode of of their favorite reality TV show, that they are trying to become like the stars they are so infatuated with. I cant image how society could be getting before if millions of adolescentes are aspiring to be like a half naked pop star riding a foam finger.
LikeLike
Scalia seems to be under the impression that the media in our pop culture directly influences the actions of our youth. While I do agree that it has some influence, you cannot credit all of today’s youth and their actions on just the media alone. Home environment directly correlates to this behavior. I believe the one paragraph he has with facts and numbers in it could be taken as several different ways. Families in this generation seem to be a little closer and less overworked then families in the past generations, which to me would seem to make a difference in lowering those numbers.Either way though, pop culture will forever be an argument based on opinion, so to each their own.
LikeLike
In believe that in today’s society much more has become acceptable even in just the past 10 years. It has become normal to regularly watch crude TV shows and not think twice about how what was just viewed. I agree with the article in the sense that our society has become safer and kinder. I believe the more exposure people have to this sort of thing the more the more humble and aware they can become. The lack of protection on today’s children from these outside sources seems to be doing them good. Just because the norm now isn’t what it was 10 years ago doesn’t necessarily mean its bad. The relationship between the pop culture and society isn’t a bad thing, in fact, it seems to be beneficial.
LikeLike
Yes. American society has changed drastically over the past ten or so years. However, I do not think that it is for the worse. I think is it for the better. In the article, Gillespie says that we are “ill mannered” but that is not true. These manners are what was appropriate in the past. Things change. Also another thing is society today is very individualized. We all want to follow our own hopes and aspirations. Older people may be making generalizations about young society based off of the pop culture they see. But I mean, not all girls walk around in short shorts and low cut tank tops. However, many older people believe the opposite. I think that this article was very accurate on its description of society today. It is right. Society has changed for the good.
LikeLike
I agree that television shows do influence some of our younger generation today. I say some because I don’t follow everything on TV. But the fact that there is more violence and sex at younger ages does have to do with what the television says is good or bad. This type of lifestyle is turning into our popular culture. Society is changing through articles, newspapers, and famous people. If Oprah did something her entire fan base would follow her foot steps. Society is changing for the newer days to come, we have more technology, more jobs, different fields. Our priorities have changed, I can’t tell right now if it is for the better.
LikeLike
“skankitude” Nick Gillespie, to U.S. society, Gillespie concedes that “we’re coarser” now than we were in decades past. He also cites “desirable trends for young people over the same interval—lower incidence of extramarital sex, fewer arrests for violent crimes, and less cigarette smoking, among others”. Gillespie concludes that there may be a relationship between lewd behavior and a lower crime rate. I agree that there may be a relationship, it seems younger generations are starting to experiment more and mature quicker.
LikeLike
Society is Coaser-but Better
In my opinion on the topic of popular culture and social trends I agree heavily with Mr.Gillespie. The behavior we encounter today in popular media does lead to a worse society. As a young adult I see a lot of things on Twitter, Instagram, Vine, etc. There’s a lot of wrong doings exposed to these social media cites such as drugs, alcohol, sexual content, and explicit language. Which is being viewed by mass amount of people ranging from ages 13 and up, maybe younger. This society is certainly evolving but I don’t think it is going down the right path.
LikeLike
Since the creation of the “celebrity”, generation after generation has been heavily impacted by the current fashion trends or behavior of the rich and famous. In the 1960’s, women dressed themselves to look just like First Lady, Jackie Kennedy. In the 1970’s both women and men dressed in flared pants and platforms. It is true that young and impressionable teenagers choose to imitate their idols but this is not news. It’s human nature to see something that is stylish and want to replicate that image in an attempt to “fit” it. Some may argue that family structure is a major factor to consider in the development of today’s generation. Young adults spend more time with friends and on social media now than they do at home with family. While those are all valid arguments, those are not the only arguments to be addressed. Antonin Scalia is correct in his argument that today’s generation is very outspoken and that their behavior lacks the proper etiquette rules previously taught to older generations. However, today’s generation is the child of a fighting generation; a generation that fought for civil rights, fought for the change of immigration laws, survived a terrorist attack inside of its own borders. Today’s youth has learned about the good old days when women could not vote, slavery was a way of life, children worked in factories, and only the rich could afford bread for their children during the depression. They know how life in America was before they were born and choose to enjoy the liberties given to them by previous generations. While pop culture is a heavy influence on today’s youth, it is definitely not the primary reason why men and women drop “F-bombs” in their everyday conversations. Young men and women in the United States know that they are free, free to do, say, act, think, and express themselves as they wish. They know that generation after generation, more and more rights have been given back to the community and it is because of that they feel the need to speak in a way that tells everyone around them, “Yes, I am a free individual, and I shall express myself in any way that I want!” Today’s generation has also been taught they can accomplish anything they want. They have been taught that if they work hard; they can be whomever they want; they know that they have a constitutional right to do as they please. Knowing that they can do anything their hearts desire has impacted not only their ambitious personalities but even the way they speak. They make a conscious decision to dress, walk, think and speak as they wish because they know they are free to do so. Let’s not forget that this new generation, has been raised by a different society; a society that no longer demands silence and obedience from their children. Parents of the current generation raised them to express themselves and speak up if anything is bothering them. Today’s generation was raised to protest, to ask questions if they did not understand something; they were raised to speak up in any way that they wanted to.
LikeLike
Bernard makes it a good point to introduce the happy medium needed in this issue. I accept that by being too strict in the home, children are more likely to resent their treatment and become rebellious and I also accept that if the home does not use proper discipline, children will not have respect for themselves and for others. However, I find fault in Dorothy’s stance on the issue. You imply that teens are being encouraged to do crass things by their “idols.” The first point I have to contest this stance is that in Gillespie’s article, it is put forward that as the occurrence of crude behavior on television increases, crude behavior in society has decreased. A second point I would like to make in response to your argument is that while you refer to celebrities as “idols” for teenagers, a majority of society sees parents, such as Caroline Jenkins, as the “idols” for children as they age. A parent is there to guide their child through life, to raise them. When one considers what an idol is, you must conclude that an idol is someone who is idolized and looked up to, who better to fill this position than a child’s own parents. Nadia makes an intriguing point, that people of older generations were sheltered much more than the children of today, and through the “skankitude” of pop culture, today’s children are becoming less sheltered than their parents were. However, an important fact to consider is that does this issue actually have any importance? If pop culture is needed to make less sheltered children, does that say there is a need to have children less sheltered. A part of Gillespie’s article which stood out to me and oddly has not been addressed is the fact that he criticizes the younger population for crudeness and cites its cause as children “soaking in violent video games, instantly available online porn, and ‘Here Comes Honey Boo Boo.’” The question I raise in response to this accusation is what effect does a parent’s lack of discipline or supervision of their children have on the likelihood of the child becoming crude. Personally, I feel that parents allow children to become crude by not being involved in proper raising of their children. I believe that if a parent does not start a child off proper and mannered, the child will fall into the crudeness of pop culture as mentioned in the article.
LikeLike
I believe that he compares the two and brings them together, because they are similar to how teenagers interact then and now. I do believe that teens have found other ways to “test the limits” these days with social media, then back when there wasn’t social media. I disagree that teens have stopped smoking, have intercourse, and stay out of drugs though, because we witness and hear them doing it everyday.
LikeLike
I believe that part of the reason we have less teen intercourse, less aggressive crimes in teens, and countless other offenses in today’s teens is because people have stopped caring. We’re used to all the, for lack of better term, junk because we’re used to it. We realize that those kinds of things have been going on since forever and that it’s not going to stop. With today’s increasingly crass pop-culture we’ve been conditioned that intercourse outside of marriage, smoking, and other misbehaviors are not as big of a deal as years ago(when Dick Van Dyke and Mary Tyler Moore had to sleep in seperate twin beds on TV instead of being like most married couples sharing a bed). We’ve been desensitized to what’s going on by our numerous social outlets that make it so easy to see bad things.
LikeLike
In this new generation of technology, it’s easier to be connected than ever. In fact, it’s so easy to connect with friends, that you don’t even need to connect at all. You can talk to your friends without even leaving your house! That may be a contributing factor as to why violent crime and frequent drug use has gone down. As for worsening moral values, I think that society as a whole is more accepting of what was previously thought of as inappropriate or risque. Scalia seems to hold on to old-fashioned morals and values, when the world has moved on.
LikeLike
This article by Gillespie shows a good case of cause versus correlation. In the article he starts by giving a summary of what has been occurring in the past 30 years relating to social standards relating to actions. Then he talks about the cause of the declining social standards, where he believes it causes the decrease in crime and other bad behaviors. However, the relationship between the two events is a correlation. Unless it has been tested for cause and effect, the two events are a mere correlation that occurred along side one another. There has been a huge change in the education and spread of safety information through the decades along with the increase of coarse behavior. Many types of social statistics has increased and decreased along side each other through the decades. These are not cases of cause and effect, unless tested, they are cases of correlation. Correlation is a mutual relationship, and these statistics share the mutual relationship of changing over time in the same time period. There also is not much of a logical relationship for a cause and effect for increase in coarse behavior and the decrease in bad behavior.
LikeLike
Gillespie’s article does show that society has ultimately gotten better. Yes, there are still a multitude of celebrities and other public figures that do inappropriate things, Sadly we cannot control these things nor should they really matter our ethics and morals are based on who we are as individuals we cannot blame society for making people who they are, that is something instilled in them.
LikeLike
It is true that over the past few decades, pop culture has become more crude and sexualized. Music and TV have much more bad language, compared to years past. Social media, celebrities, and news have changed current generations. Gillespie agrees with this but he also points out that actual crime rates have declined. HIs article suggests a relationship between the two.
LikeLike
While Bernard L. makes a good point about the home environment being imperative for a child’s upbringing, not every child is going to receive a good upbringing which is why the media plays such a crucial role in a child’s life today. Scalia did not grow up in a society that puts such a high priority on communication through social media. Children today are growing up in a world where they are receiving a lot of their information through the media as opposed to at home. This is not necessarily a bad thing, as Gillespie points out that violent crime arrests for teenagers are down and kids are less likely to bully. However, this just means that society is changing and with change comes different problems. Gillespie quotes Scalia saying “I am glad that I’m not raising kids today.” He is saying that he does not want to be responsible for how the next generation is going to change society. However, it seems like no generation is happy with how the next generation handles issues. At some point, the next generation will be the one in charge of society, and the future of society will be in their hands at that time.
LikeLike
Casey Blackbird’s claim that people have stopped caring about teen intercourse, drug use, etc. rests upon the questionable assumption that we have been desensitized to it; therefore, we see it as the norm. I disagree with this because the fact that we have so much coverage of these activities by others means that we can teach our children from an early age that these types of actions are unhealthy. Being exposed to it does not necessarily mean that we are desensitized to it, in fact, it means we are more aware of its prevalence in our society. If we were not aware of these things, we would essentially be sheltered and may not teach our children that these actions are unhealthy until they’ve partaken in them.
LikeLike
I agree with Bernard’s opinion that a loving home should foster a good understanding of what are appropriate societal expectations. However, I also do agree with Kayla saying that it is not the sole responsibility of the parents. Society today places so many pressures on the youth to act a certain way and because of these pressures children are maturing faster than they should. Parents can not always control what their children hear or see. The media’s role should be there push positive peer pressure when the parents cannot. By reporting on accomplishments like Nick Gillespie mentions, decrease in bullying and smoking, then children will understand that good actions get rewarded. If the media discussed celebrations rather than downfalls, then people would strive to be famous for doing good. People like Miley Cyrus, who get famous for being radically inappropriate, would hopefully realize that bad press is not always good press, and that your actions have ramifications greater than you imagine. Contrary to what Gillespie mentions, I believe that with the downward path our society is on today, this will ever actually happen, but it is up to my generation to shape the future. If others, like myself, are tired of being a coarser society then we have the duty and responsibility to change it.
LikeLike
I agree with Dorothy Carter’s opinion on this article but to a point. I agree that viewers are heavily influenced by television and the media but I think it is only to a certain extent. I wouldn’t go so far as Dorothy to say that viewers’ perception can lead to their family. I viewed this article as my generation and how they are affected by television and the media. I believe that many young people are influenced heavily but there are also some people who are not. I admit that I love reality television but I only view it as entertainment. The people on the television shows do not affect my life in such a way that it affects the relationships around me. I think Dorothy has a strong opinion about it which I do not fully agree although I do see her side of it.
LikeLike
Though I agree with Dorothy Carter’s argument to a point, I do not believe that popular culture has had an effect on the ways that typical families interact. I agree with her point that the views that are reflected by popular culture are emulated by the people who keep up with popular culture. However, I believe that this is where the emulation stops. Dorothy makes the point that many families do not eat meals together anymore, she neglects to mention any other factor that could influence this family decision. For example, in families with working parents and school aged children, it can often be difficult to find a common dinner time where every member of the family would be available. I believe that instead of promoting this idea, popular culture and television are simply reflecting the standard way of living in today’s society.
LikeLike
The relationship between “skankitude” and “desireable trends” that Gillespie is suggesting is that since the racy behavior is more public, is becoming less of an enticement. The “skanky” behavior is becoming less of a forbidden territory. Also, this type of behavior is frowned down upon in many social circles. I think Gillespie is referring to popular mefia…Music videos, movies, ect. I think his being broad does not lessen his argument because it is easy to understand the underlying meaning. I think most people see popular culture as a form of entertainment, but would be Incredibly embarrassed to act in the same way.
LikeLike
Carroll High School is making an effort to stop the bullying epidemic by setting aside homeroom time to address the issues concerning bullying in a classroom setting. On one hand, this shows that bullying is becoming a problem in today’s society that needs to be prevented. On the other hand, bullying isn’t any more of an issue than it used to be. Kids are more sensitive and the issue of bullying is being brought up to authority more than it used to be. Nick Gillespie, in his article “Society is Coarser–but Better” stated, “High schoolers are less likely to be bullied than they used to be, and they’re less likely to smoke too.” Gillespie believes that our society is less violent than it used to be. He also believes that our society is more crude, but since we are exposed to more, it’s becoming “the norm.” However, we believe that as society is becoming more crude, there are more problems rising to the surface involving violence, drinking, drugs, and bullying.
Gillespie stated the following in his article:
“We may well be an increasingly ill-mannered society, one that’s soaking in violent video games, instantly available online porn, and Here Comes Honey Boo Boo like our mothers used to soak in Palmolive liquid. But we’re also one in which youth violence, sex, and drug use are all trending down. If that means putting up with, you know, ladies cursing and other examples of unambiguously crass behavior, it seems a terrifically small price to pay.”
He’s basically contradicting himself in this statement. First he says that we are becoming more violent, but then proceeds to say that “youth violence, sex, and drug use are all trending down.” If this were to be the case, then why have schools created programs such as Kids Into Not Smoking (KINS) and Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE), and TV programs have been produced such as 16 and Pregnant and Teen Mom. Our society is becoming more educated about drugs, alcohol, and sex due to these programs, but we think these programs are only making kids more curious, causing the children to want to experience them.
Overall, Gillespie believes that our society is more crude, but it doesn’t mean that our society is becoming worse, such as more violent or more into drugs. He believes that as we are becoming more crude, we are basically becoming a better society. Gillespie stated, “When it comes to drinking or smoking pot on a regular basis, the trends are small to begin with and generally flat over the past dozen years.” We find his statements contradicting. We see it as society is becoming more crude, it’s also becoming more violent, more into drugs, alcohol, and sex. As society is becoming coarser, it is becoming more problematic.
LikeLike
Pop culture has evolved over time, which has changed the mindset of our generation. Our parents’ generation and others before us grew up in a completely different world. From seventies rock and roll to eighties pop music, at some point, every generation has dared to be different. Over the decades, we have held true to our devotion to pop culture, mixing in our own trends. With every new trend, comes a different mindset. As much as we’d like to think that our ideas are original, it’s hard to ignore the influence that pop culture has on our minds.
According to the article “Society is Coarser-But Better,” written by writer Nick Gillespie, pop culture may be crude, but it has in turn made us a kinder and safer society. Gillespie claims that even though there is more deviant behavior portrayed through pop culture, violent crime rates, drug use, and underage drinking has declined over the years. He states, “If that means putting up with, you know, ladies cursing and other examples of unambiguously crass behavior, it seems a terrifically small price to pay.”
Gillespie claims that our society is more than functional despite our vulgar fads, however, the reader has no other choice but to accept that with time, we will continue in these trends. As a reader, it’s hard to join him in this argument when he “doesn’t give an F***.” His argument is automatically weakened by the careless tone this statement brings to the article. Teenagers may not care about some of the important issues in the world today, but that doesn’t mean we don’t care about our futures. We don’t want our culture to decline the point where we worry about our own kids’ lives. It’s so hard to imagine pop culture becoming any more audacious.
Even though Gillespie makes a very interesting argument, some of his points are flawed. He states that even though vulgarity is increasing in pop culture, deviant behavior has overall decreased. He argues there is a relationship between the amount of deviant behavior portrayed in pop culture and the decrease of deviant behavior in society. There could be many other factors Gillespie doesn’t mention that could be the cause of the decrease of deviance. Even then, Gillespie doesn’t give a clear connection between the two, other than a few facts about the decreasing deviant behavior.
The influence of pop culture will become stronger over time, but it is not necessarily a bad thing. We would be lying to ourselves if said the world will never change. We all have to face the fact that every generation has to deal with change. Acceptance is the key point when living in a generation surrounded by pop culture. As pop culture changes, so do the people influenced by it. These changes are surely noticeable and important; generations can become more vulgar and coarse or go back to the goody-goody days. Pop culture’s purpose is to keep us moving. Without it, we would be caught in a stand-still. Fashion trends, along with music and art is just society’s way of showing what that generation stands for. Pop culture changes societies, however, it’s important that generations evolve over time.
LikeLike
Walk into any daycare and you will hear young voices singing the famous, somewhat annoying, “Do You Wanna Build a Snowman?” from Disney’s Frozen. Ever since this movie hit the big screen in November of 2013 it has impacted the behaviors of children everywhere. Young girls aspire to be Elsa, the beautiful and elegant Snow Queen. Boys imitate Kristoff’s macho and somewhat goofy behavior. Although Disney’s Frozen is not a negative influence on our social behaviors, it reflects how all aspects of media, even the negative, effect our everyday thoughts and behaviors.
Nick Gillespie, an American libertarian journalist, wrote an article titled Society is Coarser – but Better, where he claimed that while society is no doubt becoming cruder, pop culture has not negatively affected social behaviors. He presented statistics supporting this claim, for instance: violent crime rates have declined for males between the ages of 10 and 24, high schoolers are less likely to be bullied, and the occurrence of extramarital sex has declined in teenagers between the ages of 15 and 19. Although these statistics may be true, what we observe in day-to-day life seems to be contradictory.
As we walk through the halls of our high school or hang out with friends on the weekends, we are surrounded by crude behaviors. We hear profanity in conversations that don’t benefit from the colorful language. We hear teenagers openly discuss sex as if it’s meaningless, just an activity you do for entertainment. We hear boys in particular congratulating each other on the number of kills they got last night in Call of Duty. While we weren’t alive a few decades ago, we can imagine that these topics were unheard of in daily conversation.
The way we talk isn’t the only thing that has changed. Fashion styles have evolved to show more skin, leaving less to the imagination. Girls of all ages bear their midsections for the world to see and shorts keep creeping higher up the thigh. All of these changes reflect the change in pop culture over the years. In years past, married couples couldn’t even be shown in the same bed, while now, graphic sex scenes are commonplace on TV and in the movies. The language in the songs we listen to require them to be labeled “explicit” and even children movies contain profane language. We can’t help but connect the dots between these trends and our own, cruder behaviors.
While statistics may show that we engage in less risky behavior (such as less premarital sex and lower crime rates) society’s behavior has in fact become cruder, reflected in our daily speech and dress. Gillespie avoids discussing our everyday behaviors, sticking mainly to sexual and criminal activities, but the way we dress and the way we talk everyday are indeed social behaviors that reflect the crude nature of our society. Although many people would like to avoid this change in behavior, as long as pop culture continues to becoming cruder our social behaviors will too.
LikeLike
Hundreds of years ago, everyone prayed. People were centered around their religion and society’s rules stemmed from that. Ladies were modest, men were professional, and no one was twerking. In startling contrast, according to the Pew Research Center, in 2012, 2.4 percent of the U.S. Population was Atheist, 3.3 percent was agnostic, and 13.9 percent was “Nothing in Particular”. In other words, nearly twenty percent of the population of America was unreligious. Now, ladies wear things with incriminating names like “mini-skirt” and “V-neck”, men consider skinny jeans and ripped T-shirts stylish, and we look and act nothing like our ancestors. The question is, is that a bad thing?
As humans progress, we invent, discover, and improve things that, at times, have a huge impact on the quality of life that we have. Now we have the Internet, microwaves, television, and perhaps the most unappreciated, indoor plumbing. With this progress, however, has come other things that we didn’t have in the past. Our schools and movie theaters live in constant fear of a shooting, suicide rates are rising, and unplanned pregnancies are being discovered left and right. This is not to say that being able to make a midnight bathroom run without putting shoes on has corrupted society, but there is definitely a strong correlation between progress, and moral distress.
All of our inventions and discoveries have made it so much easier to access anything we want, this, coupled with the decline of religion, and by default, modest morals, is responsible for the pop culture themes of sex and violence that Americans are experiencing today. However, with all of our new progress have also come things that those modest people never had to face. Every month there is at least one public shooting to be reported, along with rapes, murders, and a vast array of terrorism antics. Would the people of the past be able to live amongst such things while still maintaining some degree of sanity? I don’t think so. Justice Antonin Scalia said “One of the things that upsets me about modern society is the coarseness of manners. You can’t go to a movie—or watch a television show for that matter—without hearing the constant use of the F-word—including, you know, ladies using it…. My goodness!” But without being exposed to harsh language and sex and violence and all the things that we consider to be horrible for our mental health, would we be prepared for all the modern day catastrophes we have to live with?
Society could choose to abandon bloody video games, outlaw readily available online porn, and make premarital sex illegal, but the things that all of those “unacceptable” concepts are prepping us for will not stop. There will still be crazy people shooting up schools, there will still be rapists and murderers, there will still be bombings in foreign countries and cyber-bullying and car accidents and kidnappings. But without our pop culture exposing us to death, sex, fear, and loss, our society wouldn’t be able to function amid the chaos. We have been fed these realities in smaller, more diluted doses as we have grown up with our reality TV and our internet and our Xboxes. So if all of this exposure is helping us cope, and essentially, playing a significant part in our ability to carry on through these modern day terrors, maybe we can pardon a little twerking.
LikeLike
Almost every person in the United States knows about Miley Cyrus. Disney Channel star gone “bad”. Her infamous twerking is legendary, in the worst kind of way. The picture of her twerking on Robin Thicke during the MTVs shocked the nation, and started a revolution of various parental figures crying out, “Why is this allowed on TV? It should be banned! Our children will use Miley as a role model and we will be raising our own little Cyrus’. How can we stop this?” While the media will more than likely, never remove Cyrus from its eye, citizens can censor her by changing the channel. For the citizen trying to change the channel, they are greeted by various shows depicting partial nudity, alcohol, cigarettes, drugs, sex, and Here Comes Honey Boo Boo.
The media today is full of “inappropriate behaviors” and many are worried about what effect it has on their children. After all, according to the University of Michigan, children who are between ages 2-5 spend 32 hours watching TV on a weekly basis. This means, depending on the shows the children watch, 32 hours of pure garbage depicting sex, violence, and substance abuse. Many parents would be horrified if they found out their child had been watching a show where a character smoked, and then their child ended up being addicted to smoking in later years. Obviously, this means since that character smoked, and the child saw them smoke, it lead the child to become a smoker. What if I told you that line of thinking is flawed? According to Nick Gillespie, the behaviors shown on TV are “a small price to pay” when compared to the fact that the generation of pot smokers, twerkers, teenage pregnancies and alcoholics is actually smaller than it was in years past. Gillespie states, “Despite recurrent and unbelievable media scares to the contrary, children – whom we assume to be the most impressionable among us – aren’t acting up as a result of the culture they consume.”
In the halls of Carroll High School, there are those who are obvious delinquents. Many students look towards the old office when talking about those with less than desirable behaviors, but what many do not realize is that they are regular students. These students just chose a path that was not laid out for us as the “better” students. We consume as much TV as the alternative students, possibly even more depending on the involvement in outside of school activities. You can hear conversations about various TV shows where sexually explicit content, violence, and drug use is common (Game of Thrones or Orange is the New Black anyone?). This is seen as a regular experience when entering high school. If you end up being the person who doesn’t understand the first word of a sex joke, then you are seen as an outcast or “living under a rock”.
I desperately did not want to be an outcast, there are things that could be worse, but to a teenager just entering high school, I needed to learn how to curse and fast. I had some of my friends inform me about the various activities that I was not yet exposed to as a middle schooler. Yes, I had heard of some terms, but I had no idea what they meant. Once I had learned, I could never go back to unlearn these things, but it did not change the type of student I am today. I don’t go out into the parking lot to smoke a joint, or participate in any type of gang activity after school to make a few bucks. Despite the overly inappropriate actions and indecent behaviors I had witnessed on my own time, in front of the TV and in the real world. I have only become more knowledgeable about the world and its inner workings when it came to those topics. I was grateful for my friends who had opened the doors to the world of adult humor and topics. I have not experienced any backlash from this information except for those moments of immature giggling because someone had said something vaguely inappropriate. I don’t see my introduction into the inappropriate world as something negative, and I don’t see others’ journeys as negative either. It has just become a fact of life that people are rude, inappropriate, grody, and immature when it comes to topics of sex, drinking, drugs, and all the things in between. The media just shows us what life is like for others, but that does not mean that is how we should live.
LikeLike
“It’s the best of both worlds.” Everybody remembers what Miley Cyrus used to be. She was a tween pop star at night and a normal student during the day. We all remember her as Hannah Montana. But today, that girl is no more. In her place is a tongue-wagging, twerking, grinding, smoking, drinking star. As Miley Cyrus evolved, so has society. Nick Gillespie explains in his article “Society is Coarser — but Better”, “Today, we’re struggling to make sense of Miley Cyrus’s relentless display of skankitude.” At first society was shocked at her crude displays, but now she is celebrated. This is an example of how quickly society can change to fit the standards that the media and celebrities place.
Popular culture has become a plethora of swear words, inappropriate films, and skanky celebrities. Today, teenagers are being swarmed by popular culture, and it is not something our society should be proud of. Pop culture has received a negative connotation, however, it never used to be that way. In the early days, pop culture was a positive influence. It was okay to look up to singers or movie stars. Now, in this new day and age, parents do not want their children looking up to Miley Cyrus. However, that is not stopping teenagers from worshiping Cyrus. Celebrities are beginning to set the social norms in today’s society. What a teenager sees a celebrity doing, will trigger the teenager to believe that it is okay to, for example, twerk. Twerking is just one of the newest additions to our so conceived “social norms.”
This development of pop culture has also caused society to change. The example given about twerking in the latter paragraph is evidence of just that. Pop culture influences society to change. As Gillespie states “I don’t know anyone who would seriously challenge the idea that America has become a far cruder society over the last 10, 20, or 30 years.” In this case, change is not the best for our society. Twerking and cursing are not something we should go around flaunting. As a society we should be able to resist the urge to follow pop culture.
As celebrities take media limelight, it is hard to deny that celebrities do not contribute to social norm. In essence, media is omnipresent–media sources can be found all around us. Even within school where the focus is supposed to be education, students are often more absorbed in social media, music, Netflix, and other aspects of internet media. Upon returning home, television and movies are alluring distractions from mundane schoolwork. When we spend so much of our lives under media’s influence, stars of the media become personally relatable. Celebrities may not always be who we aspire to be, but their behavior is certainly an influential factor. As media personalities become more and more lewd–or with magnitudinous “skantitude” as Gillespie suggests– the effect is reflected in society. For example, consider Miley Cyrus. Though Ms. Cyrus may influence some young girls to act in a more provocative manner, there can also be optimistic effects. Once the “skanktitude” threshold has been crossed, people begin to reject such behavior. It takes maturity to dissent from the social behavior of celebrities–often its children that idolize their favorite characters. Therefore, though “skanktitude” has risen to meteoric heights, its presence has also led to its own polarization.
In addition to how sleazy celebrities behavior is viewed, Gillespie argues that such behavior does not lead to more criminal activity. Though its true “skanktitude” may be considered deviant, we would argue his reasoning is misguided. We certainly agree scandalous celebrity behavior should not have an impact on criminality, but we assert that celebrity behavior would not affect criminal behavior in the first place. “Skantitude”, in essence, is simply a deviation of our collective assumptions of how people should act–a deviation of social norm. “Skanktitudinal” trends do not violate actual laws. Though it may come across as offensive to some, being “skanky” is by no means illegal.
Even though Nick Gillespie is right in his article about how society is more crude, his correlation between crime and media is wrong. The “skanky” celebrities we have today do not break actual laws, nor pressure society to break laws, but they break social norms. Not only do they break them, they set them too. So as music, TV shows, and movies have evolved to be more risky and vulgar, it has caused society to also feel like it is allowed to be more coarse. As Nick Gillespie states in his article “Yes, pop culture is crude, but who gives an F-word?” Yes, the media does have an influence on society, but really does it matter? When Hannah Montana turned into the wrecking ball Miley Cyrus we know today, at first it was a shock, but society turned more accepting. As will happen with all pop culture influences.
LikeLike
‘Skantitude.’ What determines a person a skank? This term has changed drastically, over the years, as certain people have different views on what they think is a skank. My views are more than likely different than those of my Grandparents, but they may be along the same lines. I feel we live in a society that has grown to be more open to sex, drugs, and violence. Virtually everything on television has a reference to sex or drugs in some sort of way. Just this past Saturday, I was visiting my grandparents, and on television was a show that referenced the couple having sex. My grandmother’s immediate response was, ¨All television is just sickening. All these Los Angeles actors are all about sex.¨ My initial response was it was just part of the show; I didn’t really think anything of it. It was easy to see that my grandparents’ generation thoughts on sex and drugs is much different than that of my generation. It’s not that I think talking about sex and drugs is okay, it’s just been everywhere.
Pop Culture is definitely taking a change as well. Miley Cyrus, a former Disney pop star, has been seen ¨coming in on her wrecking ball¨ half naked, making multiple sexual references throughout the song. Seven years ago, when she became a sensation for little girls on her Disney Channel show called Hannah Montana, you would have never have seen her dressing and acting like a ¨skank.¨ It came as a culture shock when she was acting like she was to these girls who had idolized her for many years. Now many of these same girls, see nothing wrong, with Miley, and the attention she has drawn to herself with the many flamboyant things she’s done to herself.
In ¨Society is Coarser- but better¨, author Nick Gillespie says ¨There is every reason to be optimistic for our kids future.¨ I say we should be a little worried, because I don’t want my kids growing up listening to some of the music on the radio and watching some of the things that are on television now too. There seems to be too much acceptance of wrongdoing, and a lacking of punishment for these behaviors. But some people will argue back with what I said about today’s behavior, saying times have changed, and it’s not acceptable to punish for certain things.
Nick Gillespie also says, ¨When it comes to drinking and smoking pot on a regular basis, the trends are small to begin with.¨ From my understanding, he is implying that we don’t have to worry about these wrongdoings, because there’s not many people smoking pot, or drinking. I say otherwise. Just because someone doesn’t do these things all the time, doesn’t mean that because they only do it limitedly, that it’s okay. It’s still bad, and can still do a lot of harm.
Our country has been moving in a direction where the acceptance of many new trends, positive or negative. Though I’m not from my parents generation, I take a stand similar to the one they would take. It’s not okay for Miley Cyrus to be an idol for the youth, especially for the things she wears, and sings about in her songs. I’m not saying the future isn’t bright for the youth of our country, but there’s a good chance, we will accept worse behaviors than the ones we do now.
LikeLike
I agree with Nadia’s point that crude humor is a normal thing for this generation. Teen’s and young adults are more comfortable with conversations about more, once taboo, topics while some parents still aren’t comfortable with it and shelter their children. This could in turn backfire on the parents making the children act out, and possibly get into trouble when they go off to be on their own. So the question becomes to what extent should parents share and debunk the trending topics teens and young adults are into this day in age.
LikeLike
I do not agree with Dorothy Carter’s opinion that teenagers see celebrities and immediately want to follow in their actions. Most teenagers have more common sense than to blindly look up to a certain celebrity and follow exactly what they do, because at this point in their lives they have a clear understanding of right and wrong and where their morals align in relation to pop culture trends. I think the biggest influence of a teen’s decisions can be attributed to peer pressure and the decisions one’s friends make, more so than the latest pop culture trend.
I will also agree with Bernard L in that another factor of one’s largest influences comes from the quality of their home life. Because your family is who you spend the most time around you are the most susceptible to their views and morals. Especially when raised to think or act a certain way, or to keep certain standards, a teenager is typically going to resort to those familiar ways than to branch off an obscure path into the latest fad. Family members and friends, the most constant group of people in your life, will influence your decisions more than any pop culture trend because they are more trustworthy and relatable than stranger celebrities.
LikeLike
Bernard makes a great point here when he brings up “Nature vs. Nurture” in regards to this article. I agree with him that having the freedom of expression in our society is far more beneficial than the negative aspects of it people seem to dwell on. There will always be people who think differently than you, who will think exposing themselves in a different way is okay, and that may not agree with your opinion. While a lot of media today is considered promiscuous and overbearing, we still continue to allow such behavior to be tolerated in our media. It all comes down to your roots, how you were raised, and what you believe in. And fortunately (in some aspects), everyone is different. Your environment at home directly influences your behavior, in my opinion. Popular culture may try to influence one thing, but your home environment and core values always prevail.
LikeLike
In today’s society pop culture is the main influence in young children and teenagers.Nick Gillespie made some good points in his article and I agree that it is not as bad as it seems. On the other hand we do have young children that do see the TV shows with the cussing and Miley Cyrus twerking and they want to do that. That is where I think our society is going down. Today you see four and five year old cuss out their parents for not letting them use the phone. 12 year old with loads of make up and barley any clothing on. That is where I think our society as a whole needs some work.
LikeLike
I was surprised upon reading what Antonin Scalia had to say about not being able to watch television or movies without constantly hearing the F word. Although that may be true for some movies and television, it is not true for all. Also, I don’t think the unmistakably crass behavior observed in popular media is leading to a worse society, I just think it is exposing society to different types of behaviors that they may not be used to. It is stated that 72% of Americans are convinced that “moral values” are getting worse but whether or not that is true I do not think it is because of popular media; I think it is because of how people are being raised nowadays. All in all I think popular media does have some influence on people but not enough to lower their moral values and it definitely depends on what they are watching or listening to.
LikeLike
The article gives me some new hope for society today. Reading that the crime rates in youth has gone down since 1995 is very positive news. If society was based only on what was on TV or the internet then I would be concerned about the future. The Famous people who always make the news are the ones that do the most outrageous stuff and are often the worst examples. Many youth today follow and watch these people purely for entertainment and realize how a bad role model they actually are. Knowing that television is not impacting the youth as much as people often state is a fact that should be celebrated.
LikeLike
So Nick Gillespie has decided to argue against Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia’s and Pop-singer Annie Lennox’s stance that society’s morality is declining with an argument flawed by correlation equal causation. Where to begin? Gillespie agrees with the other two that society as a whole is becoming “far cruder” yet disagrees that this is necessarily a bad thing. He is under the impression that choosing between lower crime rates and a crude society are mutually exclusive choices, which is nonsense. Gillespie sighted statistics about how crime, sex, and drug rates are lowering and he somehow related these patterns to our vice-filled society without showing empirical or logical connections between the two. Gillespie’s argument fails because he has yet to empirically prove that a society’s ill-manners reduce crime and sex. His entire essay could be dismissed as an illogical defense of the un-defendable: this culture’s vices. Until Gillespie can link crime with vice, there is no reason for me not to object to Miley Cyrus’ twerking while supporting lower crime rates. In fact, I have all the more reason to do that, so that this culture may be just a little bit better. Because unlike what Gillespie thinks, America’s culture could use some overhauls without having to sacrifice those lower drug rates.
LikeLike
I somewhat agree with Gillespie. I do think that as a society we are getting better, when it comes to the spread of awareness. In the article, Gillespie mentions how rates relating to marriage, crime, and even bullying have decreased over time. Knowing that shows, reality in particular, can bring awareness and such an impact, as to reducing rates is great. However, while I do believe that bringing awareness is great; I think that certain shows can bring off negative energy. For example, reality shows don’t usually put some people that are on the show in such a good light.
LikeLike
Society is Courser – but better:
I completely agree with what author Nick Gillespie says when he explains his opinions on societies transformation over the past several decades. Although it is true that society today has become more coarse it is also true that previous generations have made worse mistakes. Most teenagers growing up in the 70’s and 80′ started smoking and drinking at the age or 10-13 years old, and that was normal. In modern society you hardly ever see any 10-13 year old doing either of those things. As Nick says “there’s every reason to be optimistic about their future. And the larger society’s too.” There will always be positive and negative aspects of society.
LikeLike
1-I believe Nick’s argument is persuasive. Back in the days it was easier for kids to get away with certain things and not get punished for it. For example; smoking weed in public would get you in trouble 10 times now than it would back in the 70’s. Also kids now a days are setting big goals for themselves. we’ve heard of whats happened in the past a lot, about how doing drugs and having sex can lead to a bad future, instead now a days us kids tend to put our focus on bigger and brighter things.
2-I would describe his attitude, as respectful. we are growing up in a completely totally different generation where we have it a lot easier than other people did back in the depression time and the world wars. So we tend to speak out our mind and not hold back on how we feel. Cursing and using the f bomb is more of a way people use to express their feelings towards something, I don’t believe it’s necessarily wrong but it all depends on where and how you use it.
3-Our generation has been taught that they can be who ever they desire. so the quote “Popular culture” to me is more like we are all as one in our culture and we are all aiming for the same thing, which is success.Nick doesn’t really need a definition to explain what he means by ‘popular culture’ it explains itself, especially if you are living in the Popular culture.
4-The popular culture doesn’t really effect me, and I don’t know if it effects anybody else. we are all effected by different things, so it would be hard to tell what somebody is effected by and what makes them act the way that they do. Maybe the way that some people dress, I could say that they are effected. after all to me that’s all fashion and style, something we all like to try.
LikeLike
1)Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia talks about how appalled he his on todays media/ manners. He says that he is glad that he no longer has to be a parent due to the “bad” influences that are commonly seen today. Gillespie then goes on to tell us how much crime, violence, and sex has declined in teens. Gillespie mentions these two together to show us how crude media does not influence how we act as teens today. I think that this is a persuasive argument because this is a big controversy today, and showing how much ,percentage wise, all those things have gone down shows that we will be okay even if the world gets cruder.
2)To be brutally lapidary prose means that we are set in stone and will not change your ways. You only see things one way, and no matter what you will not change your mind. Gillespie uses this term as criticism against Antonin Scalia. Gillespie says ” who gives an…..F-word?” to what Scalia has to say. As long as premarital sex, violence, and crime goes down, then who cares what they watch. He is not to worried on how our children are going to turn out.
3)What Gillespie means by popular culture is what is trending to teens at that time. I do not think that not having specific examples hurts his argument. This is because pop-culture is continuously changing all the time, so by not having a specific example makes this article relatable for anytime now and in the future.
4)The only time that I happen to see ill-mannered society on social behavior is on smaller children. I think this happens because they are still learning what is right and wrong in the world. Normally the parents are quick to stop these trends, or do not let their children see such things into they are old enough to handle it.
LikeLike
1)Gillespie cites these two trends together because today’s generation watches or listens to whatever social media is presented to us. Young adults have the choice to whether be like them or stay apart all the negative choices social media shows us. He cites statistics of smoking, drinking crime arrest, and so forth, that’s because there is positive media reaching out to young adults about the consequences of the choices they make; for example, there are many commercials about what smoking can do to you. I agree with Gillespie that today’s generation is getting out of hand, but I don’t think it’s “every individual” He’s stereotyping all young adults, when not every person has the same interest in things.
2)I would describe Gillespie’s attitude as understanding because he is respecting Scalia’s opinion about today’s generation, but Gillespie ties in his opinion with Scalia’s. In paragraph 6, Gallespies points out where Scalia is wrong.
3)By not giving what he thinks popular culture means, it weakens his argument because the reader doesn’t know if he’s wanting to say that popular culture has a negative effect or positive effect among young viewers.
4) I think popular culture is having affect on today’s generation, but not to every individual, instead the ones who like to “follow” the latest trend. Miley Cyrus before had millions of young girls wanting to be just like her and parents were okay with it because at the time she wasn’t a bad example, talking in present parents probably don’t want their children to be like Miley. But popular culture is not the only at fault for today’s generation, parents are also at fault. If parents took the time to discipline their children and taught them right from wrong, maybe they wouldn’t fall into the bad crowd.
LikeLike
I think that Gillespie is suggesting that because our culture has exposed the current generation to violence, sex, and substance abuse though television and video games, the need to commit such crimes has gone down. The relationship between the two trends is the fact that the earlier generations were told sex, drugs and violence were not allowed and not to be talked about, creating a rebellious era, while current generations have been exposed to it all explicitly. He mentioned them together to show how exposure to such topics have almost satisfied one human tendencies to act out. For example, people can take out their anger through playing video games rather than taking it out on someone or something else. I didn’t think his article was very persuasive because I believe children should not be exposed to certain content before the appropriate age. Also, I think some things should be explained to a child from a parent and unfortunately the television has taken that role in many households, often leaving children with the wrong idea about many important values.
I think it is a compliment when Gillespie describes Justice Antonin Scalia’s writing for the Supreme Court as “brutally lapidary prose”. Overall, I believe Gillespie respects Scalia and understands the toll technology has had on society compared to previous generations. Gillespie uses words such as “cruder” and “coarser” to show how he agrees with Scalia when it comes to our society now, but explains how he disagrees that it is influencing younger generations to “act out”.
Popular culture is what is popular among a culture and has the ability to influence a society based on “what’s in” or “what’s hot”. Celebrities and musicians are constantly trying to take things to the next level and “wow” the world. I believe the lack of definition does not weaken his argument because something new is always coming out and pop culture is constantly changing. However, if he were to have a better definition on pop culture it would have supported Scalia’s argument because pop culture has a huge influence on society and behavior.
People have become completely consumed with acting like the way people act in movies. Which usually consists of selfish and obnoxious behavior. I think we have created a self obsessed culture that has forgotten morals and values for the temporary satisfaction of beauty and lust. For example, women are influenced in today’s society to be sexy and revealing and unfortunately many women see it as “it’s my body, I can show whatever I want,” rather than understanding the boundaries of modesty. Men, on the other hand, are encouraged to lust over women and even cheat to satisfy immoral needs. Many movies promote the wrong message towards relationships and sex and this has created a very crude culture.
LikeLike
I do not think that he is suggesting that the two trends are related. I think he only mentions them together because he is showing how society has changed. Yes, we maybe coarser in the sense that we are not as easily offended by the language and trends out there today, but if all of the rates have gone down then that would not trace back to us being thicker skinned. His argument on the other hand is decent, but because he puts these two together it can be a bit misleading. 2. The description “brutally lapidary prose” is referring to his writings being very impressionable, elegant, and concise. To me this seems like a compliment because they are saying what he writes stays with people. I would say that he approached the manner is a respectful way. He gave facts to prove his point, he did not just simply state his opinion. Gillespie states “youth violence, sex, and drug use are all trending down.” which he proves by stating “Violent crime arrest rates for males between the ages of 10 and 24 are less than half of what they were in 1995 (for females, they’ve declined by 40 percentage points over the same time). Between 1988 and 2010 (the latest year for which data are available), the percentage of never-married males between the ages of 15 and 19 who reported ever having had sex dropped from 60 percent to 42 percent. For females in the same age group, the rate declined from 51 percent to 43 percent. High schoolers are less likely to be bullied than they used to be, and they’re less likely to smoke too. When it comes to drinking or smoking pot on a regular basis, the trends are small to begin with and generally flat over the past dozen years.” 3. When he mentions “popular culture” and then follows with examples such as Here Comes Honey Boo Boo, Keeping up with the Kardashians, and Miley Cyrus I know exactly what form of culture he is talking about. Yes, age might be a huge factor into this, but anyone who watches television has more tan likely heard of at least 1 of the 3 and can make the same inferences as I have. So it would only weaken his argument if a reader who is not connected to the modern celebrities stumbled across the article and read it. 4. The effect that I see is that people are just becoming to comfortable with bad actions. Yes, people show feel free to express themselves as they please, but we should not praise bad behavior and model ourselves after it. It just comes back to people having enough morals and self respect to behave and act in a mannerly conduct.
LikeLike
I believe Gillespie states the two together BC back in the older days sex drugs violent video games and etc were frowned upon now in today’s society since anybody can view or be around that kind of stuff they are less curious about it so therefore less kids do it.it definitely helped me understand better. 2) when he states brutally lapidary prose I took it as what he says makes people fully understand what he is actually saying. I feel that they just fully haven’t accepted how economy is today it is true that us kids do do whatever we want to but at times its good that we stand up for ourselves. 3)I do not think that it weakens scalias argument BC anyone reading this would know what pop culture is and knows that culture is a constantly changing thing , the definitions that he showed were enough to prove his point 4)everyone sees things and takes things in differently .everyone is different in their own way teens are going to do what they want to , its a way of showing who they really are .but as far as little kids those are the ones that need to be sheltered from the effects of society until they are old enough to make their own decisions and fully understand what something means.
LikeLike
Nick Gillespie begins his post with a direct quote from a Supreme Court Associate Justice which directly attacks todays youth. He continues by saying that our society today is allowing their children to be around sex and violence. The ties between the two trends are the fact that sex and violence were not allowed in the earlier years, and in today’s time, they are allowed. I think he mentions them together to reveal the idea that children being exposed to sex and violence because of electronics might not necessarily be a bad thing. I do not really believe his argument is persuasive because he is never truly bold with his statement. To me, the point he is trying to make is hidden.
To me, Gillespie’s description of the writing means that he believes that the Supreme Court Justice is overreacting and is blowing things out of proportion. However, in his criticism, I believe he is being respectful because he presents numerous points, such as watching Keeping up With the Kardashians, that support the Supreme Court Justice’s argument.
I believe that Gillespie is targeting mostly teens in his argument. I do definitely believe that not having examples hurts his argument because this whole post is about teenagers.
In today’s culture, social media has a huge effect on people. Setting goals on how many likes we can get is what our lives have come to. In my opinion, society definitely puts emphasis on beauty and looks, which is extremely shallow.
LikeLike
I do not see a relationship between the two trends. I am not sure why he would mention them together because it makes his argument non-persuasive. I do not think Gillispies’ argument is persuasive because he tells us one thing but then give statistics arguing against what he said.
Gillispies’ description on Scilia’s writing was criticism in my opinion. I would say that Gillispies position toward Scilia is a little disdainful and envious, because Scilia says that he’s glad he does not have to raise kids in this day and age and Gillispie is a father with two boys.
I would say Gillispie is saying that pop culture includes TV shows, movies, and music. I think the lack of a clear definition does not weaken his argument because pop culture could be a lot of things and is a very broad topic.
I do not see the effect on social behavior. Yes, I do see a relationship between the popular culture that people consume and the way they speak, act, think, or conduct themselves.
LikeLike