[HN Gopher] Schools opened, suicide attempts in girls skyrocketed
___________________________________________________________________
Schools opened, suicide attempts in girls skyrocketed
Author : aaronbrethorst
Score : 189 points
Date : 2021-07-24 15:37 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (insidemedicine.bulletin.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (insidemedicine.bulletin.com)
| kaminar wrote:
| Once again proof that men are more successful.
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| " In writing this, I have found the surprising reverse
| correlation between suicidal behavior and time spent in school--
| both prior to the Covid-19 pandemic and during it--gnawing at me.
| Could it be that the pressures around school itself are among the
| most important stressors related to suicidality among teens? If
| that's so, the underlying reasons could be related either to
| academic or social pressures. Regardless, no one would argue that
| we should do away with in-person learning just because more time
| spent in the classroom appears to be associated with increased
| rates of attempted or completed suicide."
|
| One could argue that in person schooling should be an option
| moving forward.
| thaumasiotes wrote:
| What is supposed to be meant by "reverse correlation"?
| Correlation is a symmetric phenomenon, and the final part of
| the quote makes it clear that the correlation between these two
| behaviors is positive, not negative:
|
| > more time spent in the classroom appears to be associated
| with increased rates of attempted or completed suicide.
| UncleMeat wrote:
| Common parlance. The assumed situation is that isolation
| would increase mental health problems and suicide risk.
| Instead it went in the other direction. To distinguish this
| from positive correlation for nontechnical readers, "reverse
| correlation" makes sense.
| sodality2 wrote:
| Would it not be inverse or negative correlation, instead?
| UncleMeat wrote:
| Technically a negative correlation, but I'm not sure that
| this wording would be more clear for readers.
| thaumasiotes wrote:
| Something has gone wrong when you want to describe a
| positive correlation as "negative".
| retrac wrote:
| Could that just be... delaying the inevitable? Sorry to phrase
| it like that. At some point your daughter has to come into
| contact with others. If it's a social effect -- and I suspect
| it is -- then exposure to the self-image issues, or bullying,
| or status competition, or whatever it is at work here, might
| just lead to suicides when exposed to these things in college,
| rather than in high school. While the focus is mostly on
| teenagers, young adult women of college age, also seem to have
| been strongly affected by the pre-pandemic spike we were seeing
| already.
| wizzwizz4 wrote:
| The _school system_ is a highly abusive environment, in many
| places. Young adults doing meaningless busywork in a highly-
| restrictive environment with artificial social dynamics is
| bad enough without some of them being modelled off prisons.
| retrac wrote:
| "Young adults doing meaningless busywork in a highly
| restrictive environment with artificial social dynamics",
| unfortunately, also sounds a lot like college and many
| jobs. (I personally found school a torment -- ignored and
| bored -- but somehow I was fortunate enough not to be
| outright bullied... until my first job.)
| wizzwizz4 wrote:
| Hmm... A cynic1 would say that school is intended to
| train children to put up with such an environment. I
| think a greater effect is bad environment design, people
| copying the familiar without paying attention to the
| trade-offs, and the inertia of how things used to be
| done.
|
| 1: someone overly cynical; not an adherent of cynicism
| spoonjim wrote:
| The busywork is a huge aspect of it. I used to have very
| compulsive behaviors that pretty much ended when I had the
| responsibility of a family to take care of. Teenagers have
| too much mind power and too little responsibility for it...
| when people were getting married at 17/21 there was not as
| much time to stew over things.
| throwawayboise wrote:
| Women can be bullying and status-seeking at any age, but it's
| at its worst in high school. By early 20s many have developed
| some maturity and the beginnings of a sense of perspective on
| social things, maybe because they've seen enough of
| themselves, their friends and peers suffering.
| duxup wrote:
| >One could argue that in person schooling should be an option
| moving forward.
|
| Would that have an impact longer term / have any other
| consequences?
|
| I feel like there's just so much more to this than 'more
| suicides, in person school optional now... problem solved?'
|
| For someone contemplating suicide is just not going to school a
| solution to their struggles?
| Zababa wrote:
| > For someone contemplating suicide is just not going to
| school a solution to their struggles?
|
| It could be if you're suffering heavily from bullying.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > in person schooling should be an option
|
| It always has been an option.
| joezydeco wrote:
| I witnessed this first hand. My daughter is in this age bracket
| and our school was 100% remote up until the spring of 2021. The
| return to school was hybrid, two days a week, and divided 50/50
| by alphabet.
|
| Her anxiety levels went through the roof. Thankfully we didn't
| get to an extreme case of suicidal ideation but things were
| pretty bad for a while. Medication has helped, but getting a
| therapist appointment is nearly impossible. They're 110% booked.
|
| What we understand is that during the shutdown the 'alpha' girls
| all coalesced on social media and shut everyone else out. They
| also took vacations, had slumber parties, and did a ton of things
| that everyone else was avoiding because those families tried to
| listen to the current advice.
|
| When the return to school happened these cliques instantly had
| fresh prey: the unconnected, the minorities, the non-english
| speakers, the ones that didn't purchase new clothing over the
| lockdown, the ones that didn't go to the slumber parties and
| vacations. And half of your friends/allies were in the other side
| of the alphabet and working from home.
|
| This is all stuff that boys of this age don't care about. But the
| girls are vicious. Two of our friends have physically relocated
| out of the district, two others are going to change schools.
|
| TLDR: Preteen girls are awful, and always have been, but the
| lockdown concentrated and amplified it to horrific proportions.
| Zababa wrote:
| > This is all stuff that boys of this age don't care about. But
| the girls are vicious.
|
| That's not totally true. Sure the buys may not care about new
| clothes or slumber parties (though I doubt it), but they will
| care for other reasons. Bullying doesn't have a gender.
| cletus wrote:
| Bullying may not have a gender but in the aggregate it's
| different between boys and girls. Note the word "aggregate".
| There are invariably anecdotes the contradict the aggregate
| view but the point is that it's not an absolute, just an
| aggregate.
|
| There's lots of research on this topic.
|
| You see the ripples of this well into adulthood. You see it
| as the expectations placed on girls and women where they're
| held to a higher standard than boys and men are. And who are
| the agents of that? Other girls and women.
|
| I'm not female but all of my experience has been that no one
| tears women down more than other women and that female
| bullying is generally much, much worse than male bullying (at
| least until male bullying graduates into violence including
| sexual violence).
|
| Why? Because it seems to be much more multi-faceted. Instead
| of being primarily physical dominance and signaling, it
| encompasses social alienation and psychological torment.
| Zababa wrote:
| My point was more about the victims but I guess I wasn't
| clear enough about that. The thing is, boys and girls bully
| in different ways. Most people go to mixed schools, so
| there's not a clear separation between boys and girls.
|
| > You see the ripples of this well into adulthood. You see
| it as the expectations placed on girls and women where
| they're held to a higher standard than boys and men are.
| And who are the agents of that? Other girls and women.
|
| The part about girls and women being held to higher
| standards than boys and men is news to me. Is this your
| impression, or is this backed up by data/studies/something?
| throwawayboise wrote:
| > at least until male bullying graduates into violence
|
| My experience is that it mostly starts there. Most of male
| "bullying" is establishing physical dominance. It's almost
| all intimidation, physical threats, pushing/shoving,
| fighting. The psychological, gossipy, demeaning sort of
| bullying is more from the females.
| watwut wrote:
| > Most of male "bullying" is establishing physical
| dominance. It's almost all intimidation, physical
| threats, pushing/shoving, fighting. The psychological,
| gossipy, demeaning sort of bullying is more from the
| females.
|
| Not true. Guys are very effective at spreading lies about
| people and in using condescension and insults. Men and
| boys are very effective in demeaning other people.
|
| They absolutely not limit to physical violence -
| especially at teenage age. In fact, their most common way
| to get at others are words. The physical violence happens
| on top of it.
| tolbish wrote:
| That doesn't sound true at all. Male bullies don't just
| prey on the weak, they also prey on the out groups. An
| example of this would be bullies who picked on brown
| people after 9/11, who would call these people horrible
| names to make them feel unwelcome.
| pessimizer wrote:
| If someone calls you a racial slur to your face, what
| they're saying is that they (or the people they are
| surrounded by) can beat you up. It's a dare.
| tolbish wrote:
| Not true at all. It could also be they want you to be
| humiliated. It's not always about the threat of a
| physical altercation. Much like the cases of girls
| bullying brown girls after 9/11, boys bullied brown boys
| after 9/11 in identical ways.
| webmobdev wrote:
| I've noticed this too personally in my social circle since
| childhood - my female friends in the circle are often more
| direct and personal (and thus seem more vicious when they
| are discussing something unpleasantly personal about you or
| others), where as the guys are often more diplomatic and /
| or laid-back. And some of the ladies do get pissed at you
| if you don't support them in avoiding or alienating someone
| they have tiff with.
| twelve40 wrote:
| > Two of our friends have physically relocated out of the
| district, two others are going to change schools.
|
| how would that even help though? was what you are describing
| specific to this school then? would moving to another,
| unfamiliar group of preteen girls just add to anxiety?
|
| (in my case, relatively sheltered boys so i don't see much of
| this... for now, anyway)
| mandmandam wrote:
| As someone who relocated to many different schools, I can
| tell you that a different school can work wonders. It's a
| fresh start, in a new environment, without the local
| prejudices and grudges.
| anon9001 wrote:
| The goal is just for time to pass in the least unpleasant way
| possible, so moving to a fresh group would buy some time
| before the same problems become unbearable again.
|
| Pretty much the same reason we change jobs.
| watwut wrote:
| It works, because it is not true that all girls are evil
| bitches.
|
| But, if parent thinks that, the parent won't teach girls how
| to find better friends, how to deal with issues nor curb
| asshole behavior in his daughters.
| vmception wrote:
| > Regardless, no one would argue that we should do away with in-
| person learning just because more time spent in the classroom
| appears to be associated with increased rates of attempted or
| completed suicide. But it is an upsetting insight, nonetheless.
|
| This suggests that the predisposed or susceptible population is
| weeded out by adulthood, yes?
|
| Seems like a good enough reason to keep the status quo, while
| others continue research about the actual reason, assuming there
| is consensus on decreasing it.
| ineedasername wrote:
| The number of _reported_ suicide attempts decreased during school
| closures. That might mean actual attempts decreased too, but it
| could also be another piece of fallout from people deferring
| treatment because they or their families didn 't want exposure to
| COVID. Or mental health services were over burdened by increased
| issues from other areas of the population.
|
| Or it really was going back to a school environment that is often
| socially toxic. Or some combination of these and other factors.
| qwerty456127 wrote:
| To me it seems school environment always is extremely toxic.
| Probably the most toxic thing I can imagine. Perhaps prisons
| are worse but I'm not sure.
| [deleted]
| hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
| I have a theory I'd propose:
|
| The biggest cause of teen suicide is essentially feeling rejected
| in some way by your peers: being bullied, a breakup, "mean girl"
| switches from former friends, etc. When schools closed, the
| immediate pressure of any of these negative social interactions
| went to the background (or at least simmered on social media).
| When schools reopened, kids tried to figure out where they fit
| back in the "totem pole" of adolescent social hierarchy, and the
| rise in suicides is a result of kids not figuring out where they
| fit in when they went back.
| isthisreality wrote:
| Are those causes or just symptoms of a society in which parents
| and schools are inadequately preparing the youth for emotional
| trauma, how to handle it, and how to not be a sociopath?
| starkd wrote:
| I think it's premature to dismiss the suggestion that school
| closings are the cause. Suicide is a complex topic, and the
| pandemic introduced a lot of disruptions not immediately felt.
| The suicide attempts could very well be a delayed effect, as
| proposed by the parent comment.
| musingsole wrote:
| Perhaps, but the desired effect (reduced suicides) was
| clearly visible during the lockdown. SOMETHING(S) changed
| that helped more of our children stick around for at least a
| little bit longer. So what?
|
| Whatever the cause, I'm willing to forgo scientific
| correctness to say what was obvious before the pandemic: OUR
| SCHOOL SYSTEMS ARE TERRIBLE FOR YOUR HEALTH
| starkd wrote:
| They are a bit like modern day prisons, are they not?
|
| Expensive modern day prisons.
| bloopernova wrote:
| Anecdotally:
|
| I was bullied a lot in school. When I became avoidant and just
| stayed at home, I was a lot happier because I didn't have those
| stressors.
| hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
| Agreed. Honestly, there are _many_ times I 've been very
| thankful that I grew up in an age before social media. At
| least when I went home the torment would stop and I could
| relax somewhat. I think kids who are bullied today have it so
| much worse with the ever presence of cellphones and the
| internet.
| bazooka_penguin wrote:
| Public school was probably the most miserable part of my
| life, especially as one of the only asians in a black and
| white heavy school district. The few years my parents
| afforded private school to get me away from the violence was
| only a little better. Moving to Southern California where the
| schools had significantly more asians was a big improvement.
|
| Needless to say, I'm not a fan of public schooling and the
| one size fits all approach
| voisin wrote:
| I concur. Perhaps the break from schools opened their eyes to
| the notion that life didn't have to be the total hell that it
| is for a lot of young kids and then being forced back was too
| much to handle, on top of all of the other stuff everyone has
| been struggling with this last year.
| k__ wrote:
| Same here.
|
| I spent most of my time in front of TV and PC until I was 17.
|
| The only thing that changed was getting Internet on the PC
| when I was 15. So, I could finally talk with people that had
| something in common with me.
| xyzzyx wrote:
| This is my theory too. A friend of me noted that one positive
| thing about lock-down is the complete lack of FOMO (fear of
| missing out). Which seems particularly important at that age.
| neolog wrote:
| > a result of kids not figuring out where they fit in
|
| or a result of kids _figuring_ out where they fit in and not
| liking it
| zaphar wrote:
| There are likely a lot of factors powering the correlation in
| the article. Absence of school social pressures could be one.
| Better access to your family as a support network and
| subsequent loss could be another. Since it is morally
| questionable to do experiments to isolate the level of
| contribution we'll likely never know.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| Supports the "Hell is other people" theory.
| Zababa wrote:
| Also supports my "School is hell" theory.
| Dumblydorr wrote:
| This data isn't that convincing, a lot of factors go into this
| messy correlation between ED visits for girl suicide attempts and
| covid closure of schools. The title of the link doesn't mention
| ED visits for attempts, which is the actual outcome of interest
| here, so IMO the link title is too strongly worded from an
| epidemiologists viewpoint.
|
| Now conjecturing as to correlation confounders. Maybe the girls
| need more time at home with pets, family, hobbies, more time in
| their yard, less time exposed to commuting and classes they don't
| want to take or people they don't want to see. School is such a
| diverse set of stressors and the data here isn't clear to begin
| with...
|
| A more verified takeaway is that girls attempted suicide around
| 2X more often than boys. This we know has something to do with
| technology and social media, whereas the schools opening is still
| potentially spuriously linked.
| isthisreality wrote:
| The higher attempt rate for girls is probably due to boys being
| more effective at killing themselves (4x as effective, in
| fact).
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27942628
| parineum wrote:
| The confounding factor that I find most interesting is the fact
| that parents were likely also home much more during this time.
| xyzzyx wrote:
| It's almost as if putting kids in a peer-pressure-cooker
| environment is a bad idea?
|
| I might be biased, I'm autistic and my high school experiences
| were abhorrent and ended up scarring me for life. Primary school
| and college were fine, but high school? Forget about it, absolute
| bloody nightmare :)
| retrac wrote:
| There was something very off before the pandemic. Girls were
| already diverging sharply from the historical norm and from boys
| over the last few years: https://els-jbs-prod-
| cdn.jbs.elsevierhealth.com/cms/attachme... "Sex- and Age-specific
| Increases in Suicide Attempts by Self-Poisoning in the United
| States among Youth and Young Adults from 2000 to 2018". It's
| disproportionately a specific method (poisoning) and it is
| gender-localized and somewhat social class-localized. This hints
| at a social contagion.
| tomjen3 wrote:
| Those graphs only go back to 2000. Do we have older data?
| retrac wrote:
| Not specifically on self-poisoning hospitalizations in those
| age groups. But this is longer term data for completed
| suicides, for US teenagers:
| https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/figures/m6630qsf.gif
|
| And since someone may well ask, the enormous difference by
| sex in those two charts is because the first chart I linked
| is hospitalizations related to self-poisoning. The above CDC
| chart is completed suicides. Girls tend to choose techniques
| that are generally less fatal, like poisoning. Boys tend to
| hang or shoot themselves, while the latter of those is very
| rare with girls. It's rather fascinating, and disturbing, how
| intensely localized these things can be, and how they're
| driven by social factors and what's culturally familiar.
| gpt5 wrote:
| Cry for help vs giving up.
| mprovost wrote:
| Instagram was founded in 2010.
| Krisjohn wrote:
| Then the problem is not Instagram.
|
| When IG first arrived it was basically Flickr for mobiles. It
| didn't have a horrible algorithm or any real novelty other
| than being a slick mobile interface for sharing the same
| stuff that was being shared on the web.
|
| Also, as a working adult, I didn't get my first iPhone until
| my boss handed it to me in 2010. I doubt a critical mass of
| 10-14 year old girls were bullying each other on IG from
| 2010.
| renewiltord wrote:
| My girlfriend and I broke up that year too. Sharon, if you
| see this, you need to get back with me. Little girls are
| dying because of what you did.
| moneywoes wrote:
| Haha
| _Understated_ wrote:
| > Instagram was founded in 2010.
|
| You may not be far from the truth: last year I watched a talk
| given by Jonathan Haidt (sp?) and he specifically showed the
| suicide numbers increasing when the "Like" button appeared...
| the increase was not an anomaly, it was obvious.
|
| I can't find the video unfortunately :(
| pepperonipizza wrote:
| https://youtu.be/CI6rX96oYnY
|
| He talked about it here on the Joe Rogan Podcast
| xook wrote:
| While this may not be the exact video, would this[0] be a
| worthy substitute? I'm not in a position to view it in its
| entirety at this moment, but I would be interested later
| when there is time.
|
| [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhwTZi3Ld3Y
| voisin wrote:
| I am not disagreeing but I am interested to know which
| specific factors make it so different from things in the
| past. I remember growing up and the boogeyman was sexualized
| videos on MTV and violent video games. I didn't believe it
| then and I don't quite believe it now. Not to say I don't
| believe social media has negative impacts but this is a
| pretty sharp rise.
|
| It also coincided with the post-2009 financial crisis. Could
| be more financially unstable households. Could be a feeling
| if being left behind as pressure to excel academically and
| socially increased due to a desire to get into better schools
| for some financial security. I don't know. Just throwing out
| other hypotheses.
| rubyn00bie wrote:
| Previously, media showed _others_ who were severely removed
| from the reality of one's day. Today, media shows you
| people closer to you, its a presentation of who you know.
| No longer is it disconnected from your reality, but it is
| your reality. Social media has sort of changed media
| consumption from a window into a mirror... and staring at
| oneself all day long is either gonna make you a narcissist
| or absolutely hate yourself.
|
| Now take the world of a teenager, which is already small,
| and blast it at them 24/7 full force. Imagine the insane
| bullshit you see from adults on social media trying to
| distort reality... now imagine how extreme a child could be
| imitating those same adults. The big difference being we
| (adults) don't then have to go spend eight hours around
| some crazy asshole. These kids do. It's haunting.
|
| Social media seems less social the long we have it. I think
| "petty media" would have been a better term and
| communicated its relative importance in our lives much
| better.
| MeinBlutIstBlau wrote:
| If you really want to see "who" is most affected by this,
| divide it up by state and income. If we see that most
| states align with this, we could attribute it to your
| statement. However, if it's solely based on income, then
| higher income states will outweigh lower income ones and
| we'd be able to pinpoint it to affluence and the pressures
| of innadequacy.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| I am sure there are myriad reasons, and surely the
| underlying fact of income/wealth/security gap widening
| plays a role in all of the change we are seeing.
|
| But I would posit that it is possible that constant
| exposure to people in your network's achievements (or
| appearances thereof) can elicit emotions that have negative
| consequences over long periods of time. I think tribal
| species probably have an innate function of trying to sort
| and rank members for various purposes, and maybe that
| program can get overloaded.
| craig131 wrote:
| I think a lot of this might be projection from the HN
| community. How is this even relevant to schools opening?
| It seems obvious that forcing kids to wake up at 7:30 to
| go to a conveniently free and "safe" underfunded facility
| so both parents can work yet still not make ends meet is
| the actual culprit. The gender difference is notable, but
| kids and young girls are very cruel to each other,
| especially when packed together in close proximity.
| wonnage wrote:
| The self-esteem movement many of us millennials grew up
| with feels like it has largely the same motivations as all
| the corporate-sponsored mindfulness initiatives that are in
| vogue now. It's a way to shift responsibility for dealing
| with a shitty environment to individuals, instead of fixing
| the environment. If you have low self-esteem it becomes
| _your_ problem to fix, maybe you should try these SSRIs,
| surely it can 't be the fact that everything costs 5x what
| it used to and wages have stayed flat.
|
| The new buzzword in private school now is "resilience",
| which I feel like is tacit acknowledgement that kids need
| to deal with things sucking in the future.
|
| Self esteem (1990 - 2000s) = denial: "I don't feel bad!"
| Resilience (2010 -) = anger: "I feel bad, but I'll fight
| and come back stronger!"
|
| Maybe the future pattern will be as follows:
|
| "Solution-driven" = bargaining: "I feel bad and here's what
| you can do so I feel better" "Pragmatic" = depression: "I
| feel bad and I should feel bad" "Peaceful warrior" =
| acceptance: "I feel bad and that's normal when the world is
| a post-apocalyptic nightmare in 2060"
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| TV and other media is easy to tell fact from fiction. TV is
| obviously fake. Social media blurs the line.
|
| Ordinary but attractive humans curate, stage, and edit
| snippets of perfect lives. Bleeding edge algorithms inject
| these false realities into our subconscious.
| oceanghost wrote:
| This.
|
| My friends 16-year-old daughter posts photos from a
| completely different reality if you didn't know her
| personally.
|
| She posts glamour shots of her and her friends doing all
| the silly Instagram model stuff you see, in locations
| like beaches, in front of Disneyland (She just took a
| picture in front of it, it wasn't even OPEN) etc. And
| somehow she always looks thin.
|
| The reality is, her family was pretty hard hit
| financially by COVID-- and that she's a kinda dumpy
| teenager whose flunking out of High school. Literally a D
| and F student.
|
| But she has 700 followers on instagram.
|
| EDIT: I just remembered I have a friend whose a minor
| fitness celebrity and its the same thing with him. He
| posts photos of him doing all this wonderful stuff,
| driving an expensive car (which I know is a rental). I
| help him with his website sometimes and he questions me
| about his hosting costs (less than $200/yr) and asks if
| its necessary it cost that much. So he can't really have
| much money or glamour in his life.
| retrac wrote:
| > I remember growing up and the boogeyman was sexualized
| videos on MTV and violent video games
|
| Ironically, I think that generation may have been more or
| less right about the imagery being a negative, but wrong
| about the mechanism by which it works on us negatively.
|
| Sexualized imagery does not turn boys into rapists. But it
| does seem to promote body image insecurity, social status
| worries, and general anxiety, in those who see it,
| particularly those of the same sex, and where the person is
| seen as desirable to emulate. Violence in the media, also,
| probably doesn't make us violent. But it may well skew how
| accurately we estimate the likelihood of interpersonal
| violence. Quite a few studies hint at a link between how
| terrified someone is of being murdered and how much gory TV
| they watch, basically.
|
| t;ldr: instead of turning us into sex-crazed impulsives
| like feared, it turned us into sex-hating neurotics.
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| You don't need old school MTV to find this. Just go to a
| grocery store and see all the women's magazines that
| promote insecurities. It's an entire business model.
| Female editors are presumably highly represented at these
| magazines and they don't seem to have a problem with the
| destruction they wreak.
| ayngg wrote:
| I think the difference is that the MTV sexuality scare was
| predicated on the belief that sexualized videos would
| normalize sexualization in youth with negative
| consequences, whereas in social media applications create
| the incentive structures for that behavior to thrive.
|
| I assume the fear was girls would sexualize themselves
| because of what they saw was popular on MTV, which they
| believed would make them popular as well. I guess the big
| difference is that girls that sexualized themselves at that
| time never had an access to large audiences without
| perceived consequences like girls do on social media today.
|
| I don't think depicting violence in video games is similar
| because I would say the violent aspect of games isn't the
| defining aspect of the content that people want to emulate.
| For example all the video game streamers and influencers,
| like girls who sexualize themselves, generally want the
| popularity, and the popularity is derived from being good
| at the games (or being the entertainer), not by being
| violent or emulating the violence from games, whereas the
| popularity of sex symbols is inherently their sexuality. It
| was starting with internet chat rooms, but there was really
| no way to broadcast your sexuality to thousands of people
| back then without exposing yourself to risks like doing it
| in the public. Social media both removed these risks by
| creating a physical separation between the audience and the
| person sexualizing themselves, and provided an audience
| that provides the attention that those sexualizing
| themselves desire. It sort of created the missing pieces
| for the incentive structures that reinforce the behaviors.
|
| It isn't just sexualization too, social media has allowed
| many communities that were either too niche or
| 'undesirable' to thrive in offline communities to flourish
| and become normalized over time.
| slowmovintarget wrote:
| The problem now is the feedback and amplification
| provided by the social media platforms. It is an actual
| slippery slope as opposed to a fallacious one. People are
| pushed to go further and further to gratify the urges of
| others for validation proxies in the form of internet
| points. (Followers, likes, and eventually money.)
|
| There's a reason that the execs at most of those social
| media companies don't let their kids use their own
| product. Something we've seen from tobacco execs in the
| past.
| ayngg wrote:
| Yeah, like a lot of large industries, big tech exploits
| the value of data and the erosion of privacy for profit
| while outsourcing the social costs for someone else to
| solve. Almost by design they have created something too
| big to control.
| maininformer wrote:
| Jonathan Haidt is if the same opinion
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| retrac wrote:
| I fear that it may be as simple as that. Because if that's
| the cause, I'm not sure we can fix it.
| spoonjim wrote:
| The Clean Air Act provided a legal framework to fix air
| pollution. We need a similar approach to fix mind
| pollution. I don't think this is impossible because
| Zuckerberg has managed to piss off apparently everyone
| across the political spectrum. If it was someone like Steve
| Jobs I would say the problem would be much harder.
| isthisreality wrote:
| I see regulation as a last resort. Bigger government is
| rarely the answer. Social media is certainly exacerbating
| the mental health crisis, but I believe the smarter play
| is to better prepare our children for social dynamics,
| healthy communication, and emotional intelligence. I
| prefer to improve the people than to restrict their
| freedoms.
| spoonjim wrote:
| I think somewhat "bigger government" is a perfectly
| appropriate response to vastly bigger corporations. Three
| years ago there were no companies worth $1 trillion and
| now there are three companies worth $2 trillion.
| machinehermiter wrote:
| This is like people reading research in the 50s that
| smoking causes lung cancer. Even if true what are we going
| to do? Everybody smokes so lets just keep smoking instead
| of trying to quit.
| prepend wrote:
| Pi-hole blocking Instagram works pretty well for me,
| although not perfectly.
|
| We can also treat this like smoking and opioids and
| lawsuit/tax excessively instagram and use it to pay for
| public mental health services.
|
| It seems like there will be a clear evidence trail that
| Instagram knowingly marketed and permitted use of their app
| by children under 13. So that's some future
| administration/state AG payday, I think.
| retrac wrote:
| You are right. I should not be defeatist. If social media
| is truly ruining our mental health (it's not really an
| "if" anymore, is it?) then it is both reasonable and
| necessary to start doing something along those lines.
| Synaesthesia wrote:
| Yeah but it was quite diferent back then, a lot more niche
| and photographer-y. Its a totally different network today.
| ianai wrote:
| That definitely looks like an impactful year from the graphs
| there.
|
| I think if I had kids I wouldn't let them on such sites until
| 16/17 or never. Granted, I have a strong opinion against
| social media before this data.
| chovybizzass wrote:
| You won't be able to shelter them from their friends who
| will all get phones and use tiktok or whatever comes next.
|
| When I finally broke down and got my daughters cell phones,
| they were addicted. I wanted to take it away but I coudln't
| without causing a lot of bad things.
| balfirevic wrote:
| > or never
|
| How does that work?
| ohazi wrote:
| Poorly
| balfirevic wrote:
| Thank goodness!
| Dumblydorr wrote:
| How would you handle it if they begged, pleaded, and
| explained how all their friends use it and it'd be social
| ostracism to not use it?
|
| I'm not a parent yet but I dread this situation. I'm good
| at denying urges personally, so I'd tell them desire is a
| constant part of life, we can't always get what we crave.
| Further, I'd state actual facts about girls mental health,
| they will see and be exposed to unhealthy mindsets on this
| app.
|
| Some good that'll do. When I have kids, it'll be "dad, why
| can't we join the VR orgy party? It's not real sex!"
| MrFoof wrote:
| From what I hear from everyone I know with kids...
|
| _> How would you handle it if they bought their own 2nd
| cellphone, and only used the cellular network to escape
| your control._
|
| That's what _really_ happens. Lock your kid down? They
| 'll get right around it by going outside of the
| infrastructure and devices you supply. They'll just carry
| two phones around, and you just won't be wiser about the
| second one unless you catch them with it.
| turtlebits wrote:
| Kids need to learn self control, reason and consequences
| before giving/using a cell phone. (as well as most other
| screen based activities).
|
| Parents are relying too much on screens as a form of
| parenting/entertainment without teaching these critical
| skills.
| retrac wrote:
| Yes. Our collective age is showing, perhaps. One can buy
| a new phone or tablet, with a month's data plan, with a
| few days' lunch money now, in some places. This
| translates into there being no practical way to keep a
| dedicated teenager off the Internet, unless they're
| literally never allowed out of the house and monitored
| 24/7. (And that might well be child abuse without very
| good cause! And you've probably already lost if you're at
| that point, anyway.)
|
| It won't work with every child... but I am a big believer
| in fostering the means for a child to make the right
| decisions for themselves. Yes, the social pressures are
| immense. But you know, I do remember following my dad's
| advice to get up a few times an hour, exercise and
| stretch, when playing video games. Older children worry
| about their health, and try to make good decisions within
| their abilities, just like adults do. Perhaps we can't
| really protect them from this per se, and can only try to
| help the next generation save themselves, from this mess
| we've made for them.
| Wowfunhappy wrote:
| Where can you buy a phone/tablet that's capable of
| browsing the internet, and a data plan with enough data
| to be worthwhile, for a few days of lunch money?
|
| Actually, would retail stores even sell a data plan to an
| unaccompanied minor? You could buy a SIM online I
| suppose, possibly via a gift card, and watch the mail
| carefully to ensure the package isn't seen, but it all
| seems like a lot of work for a small amount of web
| browsing.
|
| I'd think that in the worst case scenario, the child goes
| through the process once, browses the internet for a
| couple of days on a super crappy device, uses up their
| data, and realizes the whole thing wasn't really worth
| it. Maybe they do it again in a few months when they're
| particularly bored; whatever, it's a few days out of the
| year.
| zimpenfish wrote:
| > Where can you buy a phone/tablet that's capable of
| browsing the internet
|
| CEX (UK secondhand games/electronics) will sell you a HTC
| Salsa* for PS3 ($4.12) and Argos (generic catalogue
| warehouse) will sell you a SIM for PS1 ($1.37) that you
| can then top up with PS10 ($13.75) at ATMs, etc., for 7GB
| of data.
|
| Total cost: PS14 ($19.24) which is probably under a
| week's worth of lunch money these days.
|
| * Should still work on 3G HSDPA 2100MHz.
| retrac wrote:
| https://www.amazon.ca/ZTE-Z557-8GB-Android-
| Smartphone/dp/B08... That's about 50 USD. Same day
| delivery, too! Devices can be found even a bit cheaper
| sometimes, as little as 35 USD. I see such devices in
| corner stores, grocery and drug stores. It's a bit of a
| clunker sure. But it'll stream porn or display Instagram
| just fine. (That device actually has a faster CPU, though
| less RAM, than my present smartphone, from 2018, which I
| have seen no need to upgrade yet.)
|
| A prepaid data plan will set you back about 25 a month
| here, but Canada has infamously high mobile fees. I know
| people in the EU who pay about $10 a month for unlimited
| mobile data.
|
| And yes. They will sell one to an unaccompanied minor.
| Sure, maybe not a 6 year old, but if a 14 year old comes
| in with the money, that's a sale. There's no law against
| it (at least here). And unlike with a 14 year old trying
| to buy a giant butcher knife or spraypaint or whatever,
| society doesn't seem to have a "uhh, wait a minute" catch
| on this particular one. It's just a phone. Every kid has
| a phone, right? They probably just broke their last one.
| Again.
| Wowfunhappy wrote:
| > It's just a phone. Every kid has a phone, right?
|
| It's the plan I was thinking the store wouldn't sell,
| don't those have to be in someone's name? (But I might be
| wrong, I've never used a prepaid SIM.)
|
| > I know people in the EU who pay about $10 a month for
| unlimited mobile data.
|
| Perhaps, but not on a prepaid plan. I'm _sure_ you can 't
| buy a post-paid plan as a minor, that wouldn't make any
| sense!
| Macha wrote:
| It's a hard one to know. I knew my parents CC details
| from about 12, and they knew this, they would often ask
| me when buying stuff online rather than fetch it from
| their wallet in another room. If I wanted to buy
| something online, I just asked first, made the purchase
| and gave them the cash from my own savings from pocket
| money.
|
| I'd like to think I was pretty mature at that age, and my
| parents would like to think they had done a good enough
| job raising me that this would never be a problem, and it
| never was. But we can clearly see from stories of kids
| spending large amounts of money in FIFA or mobile games
| or whatever, that this is not true for every kid.
|
| The fact that online purchases were a slow user
| experience in the 90s meant that I had the concept of
| purchases, and paying back my parents in cash reinforced
| the concept of spending real money. Since I had my own
| savings, I could also see the impact to myself if I spent
| more than reasonable on Pokemon cards or whatever.
|
| If it had just been pressing a button in a video game
| like it is for modern kids, and wasn't trusted to mind my
| own money (or that money was just numbers in a bank
| account), would I have realized the same at age 12? Or
| would my parents ended up as the ones that "should have
| known better". How much of that is good parenting, versus
| a different environment? I don't know.
|
| I don't have kids of my own, and my life situation is
| such that I don't consider it a practical near term
| possibility, but I'd like to think I could raise my own
| kids so I could extend that level of trust, but a lot of
| people would see just the fact that the kids had that
| kind of information irresponsible in its entirety.
| Jcowell wrote:
| Yup the solution isn't always about restricting but
| educating. Teach them the Ill effects in a respectable
| matter and deal with the consequences in a respectable
| manner. Parents job isn't to not make kids mess up but
| allow environment for them to fail and learn from those
| failures and to reduce (not eliminate) the fallout.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Nowadays, corporate and govt surveillance is pervasive.
| Consequences cannot be "dealt with" after the fact, and
| deletion is no longer an option. Mistakes are a part of
| your "permanent record," (with a nod to Jane's
| Addiction).
|
| It's not like the old days when you knew they'd find a
| Playboy magazine eventually.
| tehjoker wrote:
| For a sec I thought you were talking about Snowden's Book
|
| https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250237231
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| It's the same phrase, and related, yes.
| orzig wrote:
| The lock on my front door could probably be picked, but I
| still use it. Raising the effort required to do something
| can have a perfectly good ROI without being perfect. Same
| goes with reasoning and any other approach you might try
| to take (preferably in conjunction)
| causality0 wrote:
| _all their friends use it and it 'd be social ostracism
| to not use it?_
|
| Is that a thing? I have plenty of friends that use
| Instagram but they don't look at each other's stuff or
| talk about what someone they know in real life posted. If
| they care about people they know seeing it they put it on
| Facebook or in the group chat.
| tailspin2019 wrote:
| Are you asking if social ostracism amongst teenagers is a
| thing?
| bart_spoon wrote:
| They are clearly asking if social ostracism due to not
| using a social media platform is a thing.
| tailspin2019 wrote:
| I suppose my comment was a bit snarky because (in my
| view) social ostracism amongst teenagers is very
| definitely and obviously a thing for _almost every reason
| under the sun_ for some groups of kids - it's the nature
| of being a teenager. Emotional intelligence is not highly
| developed at that age, so social bubbles/cliques can be
| (but definitely not always) a bit fickle/fragile. Hence
| the topic of this article.
|
| Being prevented from using a social media platform at
| that age, that one's peers are all on would definitely
| lead to possible social issues in some groups.
|
| I'm assuming the commenter I was responding to is not a
| teenager (given mention of Facebook being their peer
| group's primary social media platform), so their
| experience of their peers being able to use social media
| in a more healthy manner is unlikely to map to the
| teenage experience.
|
| Some assumptions on my part. Not the most constructive
| "best possible interpretation" response, I'll admit. I'm
| also not expressing a strong opinion that kids should be
| "allowed" or "blocked" from usage of social media. It's a
| very tricky issue but absolutely not one to be dismissive
| of.
| [deleted]
| turtlebits wrote:
| What happened to the days where you earned the privilege
| to have/do things? That there are consequence with
| breaking the rules? Show them how to use it responsibly,
| the downsides that can come out of it.
|
| Start with limits and let them earn the right to have
| more access. When you kid starts riding a bike you don't
| let them ride everywhere, you let them stay on the block,
| and if they understand safety and are being safe, you
| slowly expand the range they can go.
| [deleted]
| iamstupidsimple wrote:
| > How would you handle it if they begged, pleaded, and
| explained how all their friends use it and it'd be social
| ostracism to not use it?
|
| Having been on both sides of this, as a teenager and
| having saw my siblings go through it, I don't envy you
| either.
|
| But I can talk about my personal experiences. I was very
| introverted as a kid, and tools like Facebook gave me a
| bit of social autonomy and confidence, and it absolutely
| strengthened my in-person relationships. I know others
| that feel the same.
|
| Not being contactable via the internet definitely can
| cause social ostracism, but a reasonable middle ground
| for me is something like Discord or WhatsApp, which is
| semi private and avoids the toxicity of The Feed.
| longhairedhippy wrote:
| This is totally anecdotal but I have 3 teenagers and I
| think the most important thing is keeping up with what's
| going on in their lives and taking an active interest in
| making sure they are emotionally equipped to deal with
| the problems that come up.
|
| Teens are just people with very little experience dealing
| with their seemingly huge amounts of emotion so parents
| should help them process. We can't protect them from
| everything so trying to just hide the bad stuff is not
| going to work, folks will grow up without the tools to
| deal with it when things go wrong.
|
| Keeping up with what's going on and jumping in when they
| get stuck, either because the situation is overwhelming,
| they don't have the proper tools, or they're just putting
| too much weight on their shoulders, is super valuable.
|
| Unfortunately, with all of the pressures of daily life,
| combined with the struggles of folks in lower socio-
| economic environments, lots of people do not have enough
| time or surplus emotional budget to give it the proper
| attention, they're just trying to survive.
| BrandoElFollito wrote:
| I have two teens and I like to say that they live in an
| antique arena. This is a large flat place, with high
| walls.
|
| In normal words it means that they have a lot of freedom
| and I am not particularly bitchy about that. I tell them
| they have to go to bed but I do not care too much if they
| do when on vacation. One day I will get mad and force
| them to do that, and they know what they did wrong and
| that this is the"punition". They usually come, beg a bit
| and I let go.
|
| So they know that there is a lot of vagueness about the
| "rules" within this area, which they make use of. Also
| the fact that they have two parents and when they get a
| "no" from one, they may get a "yes" from the other (and
| the first one would not care)
|
| Then come the walls. The walls are rigid and extremely
| strong. They know that they must not try to break them,
| because terrible things will happen. The most terrible
| thing would be a loss of trust - something they do not
| want. They know that we trust them and that the whole
| flat area above is because of that.
|
| They also know that they can come to us with questions,
| to which they will always receive an answer. Some of
| which they will agree with, some not. There are no taboo
| topics (though some were complicated, when the older one
| asked me what a whore is (or later, what cunnillingus is)
| at the ripe age of 10, and the younger one (8 at that
| time) ran with a chair from the other room to be part of
| the audience...).
|
| They also know that they can talk with us about things
| they will do someday - and how to do them safely. Sex is
| an obvious one, but also alcohol. The younger one (14)
| told me today that he would like to try how it feels to
| be drunk when he is 18. I told him that they are risks
| and that he must be very careful. To what he said "at
| home of course! with you around just in case!". I hope it
| will be this way but I listed the risks anyway.
|
| Now that I think of it, we do not even exactly know what
| the walls are. Certainly things like theft, but they are
| so remote from our ethics that we do not list them.
| enriquto wrote:
| > making sure they are emotionally equipped to deal with
| the problems that come up
|
| This is a terrifyingly difficult prospect. I guess almost
| nobody in the world is so well equipped for that. There
| are really hard problems that nobody can "deal" with
| alone, like the death of loved ones, or social ostracism
| from your whole peer group. No matter how "well equipped"
| you are, some things may be simply overwhelming.
|
| EDIT: I learned this the hard way. I am well off
| economically and emotionally, always had a cushioned
| life, I became the father in a happy family, really felt
| totally invincible. But something happened at the age of
| 41 (sudden death of my dad, in very bad circumstances)
| that I was not prepared at all to deal with. I used to
| mock people who couldn't cope with their own problems,
| but as an adult I learned that some problems may be
| really too big to rationalize off. I guess many teenagers
| find themselves in such difficult situations that cannot
| really solve (like being a victim of overwhelming social
| pressure), regardless of how loving and close their
| parents are.
| paulryanrogers wrote:
| My parents were liberal in allowing tech but had some
| practical limits which I think helped. (Dial up cost us
| $.25 per call.) Time limits and discussing their
| interests seem like a totally reasonable alternative to
| complete abstinence.
| throw0101a wrote:
| > _Further, I 'd state actual facts about girls mental
| health, they will see and be exposed to unhealthy
| mindsets on this app._
|
| Contra: whether they're online or not, conversations
| about them will take place. And if they're not online
| then how can they defend themselves, either as an
| individual or by herding their friends in their defence
| as well.
| austincheney wrote:
| > How would you handle it if they begged, pleaded, and
| explained how all their friends use it and it'd be social
| ostracism to not use it?
|
| I would be an adult and remind them that they are
| children and can fuck off.
|
| When they completely lose their minds about this smash
| the shit out their phone. It's not actually their phone.
| It's mine. As the adult I pay those bills. If that
| creates big tears they can pay for their own damn phone.
|
| I am a parent of teenagers and have gone through this.
| ramphastidae wrote:
| Speaking from experience, if you keep that up, your kids
| will break contact with you as soon as they are old
| enough. If you decide that your parenting style is "fuck
| off," you can expect the same attitude from your kids
| towards you when you are older. Hope you are ready to die
| on this hill.
| ipaddr wrote:
| This is the I better be my child's best friend or do what
| they want or they won't like me and will never talk to me
| again parenting dtyle.
|
| In the end you don't want to be friends you want to set
| clear guidelines and expectations.
|
| Venting f-bombs teaches them to vent f-bombs.. not great.
|
| Your kids will be back for money regardless..
| austincheney wrote:
| If that's what happens only because you set boundaries
| around social media there are far deeper failures already
| in place.
| anonymousab wrote:
| > only because you set boundaries around social media
|
| Social media is social interaction. It's an inextricable
| part, if not the centerpiece for many kids these days.
| This is the modern equivalent of saying "no friends
| allowed"/"you can only see and talk to your friends for a
| couple of minutes a day", as hyperbolic as that may seem.
| Extreme rejection and rebellion is a logical outcome from
| that.
| austincheney wrote:
| It's not the centerpiece if you are doing your job as a
| parent.
|
| > Extreme rejection and rebellion is a logical outcome
| from that.
|
| If that's the result then you are failing as a parent.
| ben_w wrote:
| Network effects: your kids don't get to hang out IRL if
| _everyone else's_ parents let their kids meet all their
| social needs from social media.
|
| Don't get me wrong, I think the world would be a much
| better place if the big players in social media ceased to
| exist, but no single person can act as an island, and you
| need to understand the problem well enough to give your
| kids alternatives rather than just put your foot down and
| say "no" -- even us adults have trouble staying off
| whichever social network our friends and family use.
| austincheney wrote:
| How is it an island if they socialize in the real world?
| They text their friends from the real world and share
| memes with each other all day. They don't need a social
| media account to do any of that.
| iamstupidsimple wrote:
| Here on this website, we spend an awful lot of time
| discussing how one person remote working on a team who
| are in-person can easily lead to being forgotten. This is
| similar. When somebody is putting an event together and
| goes through their contact list on FB, you not being
| there puts you at a small disadvantage. If you're
| socially awkward in-person, it can really set you back.
| lupire wrote:
| I suspect you may be in for a rude awakening in your
| relationship with your kids, and probably your kids are
| doing things behind your back.
| austincheney wrote:
| Why would you suspect that?
| trulyme wrote:
| Not GP, but agree with them. In my opinion: because you
| don't show respect for them. What would your reaction be
| if someone said that to you and you were powerless to do
| much about it?
|
| Of course, this is all judging just by the tone of your
| posts, so it might not be (and I hope it isn't) a true
| reflection of reality. Kids are smart, they just lack
| experience. But they still deserve respect from day 1,
| and if they have it then most of the usual parenting
| problems never surface.
| austincheney wrote:
| If I didn't respect them I would let them do anything
| they wanted.
|
| > Of course, this is all judging just by the tone of your
| posts
|
| That is quite the assumption. Perhaps I communicate less
| delicately than you are accustomed.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| A lot of folks addicted to social media think it's
| important that kids get addicted too, like smoking in the
| old days.
|
| Truth is they'd be better off without it, for as long as
| possible. Focusing on media instead of school is a great
| way to end up working at a gas station later in life.
| Nullabillity wrote:
| Anecdotally, focusing on school and "your future" 24/7 is
| a great way to end up alone, sad, and directionless in
| some apartment later in life.
|
| Or in a ditch somewhere, when the pressure gets too much.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Those types typically land in the corner office in a
| skyscraper, or riding a dick into space. A problem few of
| us will have, with a simple solution.
| jokab wrote:
| If its that simple, why arent you riding a dick towards
| space?
| imhoguy wrote:
| What is wrong with working at gas station?
|
| Here at my times kids were told they would be shoveling
| dirt if they had neglected school. It may be anegdotal
| but I know many of such school low performers who today
| own excavators, dumper trucks fleet, construction
| businesses. The point is they do much better than some of
| their now blue collar school peers burned out after years
| of studying and "career" often pushed to impress parents
| and social circle.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Nothing wrong, but you'll probably be happier achieving a
| little more.
| tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
| > they can pay for their own damn phone.
|
| What do you do when they mow some lawns and do just that?
| austincheney wrote:
| Reward them for their hard work and responsibility.
| yowlingcat wrote:
| When it comes to parenting, I think the soonest you can
| healthily get your children to functioning with the
| independence and maturity of an adult (or at least the
| upper end of their age group), the better. And by
| contrast, the further you hold them back, so much the
| worse.
|
| What you're describing sounds like it would hold back
| your child's social development. I wouldn't recommend it.
| austincheney wrote:
| Freeing children from nonsense like drugs and social
| media isn't holding them back. My children's social
| development occurs in the real world where they
| participate in sports and educational activities and
| spend time with friends offline. Social media isn't real
| socializing.
| lupire wrote:
| Why are you on HN, instead of in the real world?
| austincheney wrote:
| So that you can stalk me and downvote me.
| yowlingcat wrote:
| > Freeing children from nonsense like drugs and social
| media isn't holding them back
|
| But surveilling on them will. You're using your own
| active involvement as a crutch to compensate for the fact
| that you can't leave them to their own devices and know
| they'll do the right thing.
|
| But how can they do that if you don't teach them and you
| don't give them the right chance to show they can do it?
| You're not teaching them to independently use the
| technology responsibly (or not at all), but rather you're
| forcing a behavior into place.
|
| It's a very short-term solution that will backfire when
| they're put out there on their own and you're not there
| to push them in the right direction. Sooner or later
| they'll need to figure out how to do things
| independently. Maybe some active handling is okay for a
| while, but eventually, you've got to take off the
| training wheels, no?
| austincheney wrote:
| I am not allowing them to grow and learn right from
| wrong... only because social media? Seriously? They
| aren't locked away from people and sunlight.
|
| They engage socially in the real world. They don't need
| social media to fail and learn from failure. They have
| every opportunity to fail for real among real people.
|
| When they get out on their own hopefully they learned
| they don't need social media to be happy or drugs or
| alcohol. At that point they are free to make their own
| decisions and face all the consequences without the help
| of a parent.
| MisterBastahrd wrote:
| Because you're not a parent, here's a tip: kids are
| tougher than you give them credit for and they're tougher
| than they understand. Your responsibility as a parent is
| to figure out how to toughen them up without crushing
| their self-esteem.
|
| Instagram is not an essential part of any of this. If the
| worst thing your kid can say about you when they hit
| adulthood is "daddy didn't let me on Instagram," then you
| did a phenomenal job.
| lupire wrote:
| You're missing the point. It's not "Dad didn't let me on
| Instagram". It's "Dad didn't let me have shared
| experiences to build relationships with my peers."
| MisterBastahrd wrote:
| If a shared experience is toxic to the mental well-being
| of my kids, then they're not going to share in the
| experience. I'd rather my kid hate me for a couple years
| as a teenager for not letting them engage in harmful
| things than never getting out of their teenage years.
| austincheney wrote:
| Dad didn't let me get drunk and do drugs. It's dad
| allowed me to explore my emotions and expand my horizons.
|
| If you want children to have valid and engaging social
| experiences then encourage them to do so without a
| screen.
| BeFlatXIII wrote:
| To be fair, it's a 50/50 shot whether your high school
| peers turn out worthless or not. For the children of the
| HN crowd, I give better than even odds that their real
| lifelong friendships won't be formed until college.
| johnchristopher wrote:
| I think a friend of mine handled it well. He nurtured a
| trust based relationship with his children, trust was
| highly valued and it gave his children a lot of free way
| but he also set up clear boundaries.
|
| They could do try do things behind his back, they had
| full window to do it but trust was so ingrained that I
| don't recall him ever finding out huge problems.
|
| Which doesn't mean they wouldn't plead and beg and try to
| cajole to get something.
|
| At some point he would explain the rationale behind a
| decision but in the the end when push came to shove if a
| "no" was spoken it was a final "no". He isn't forced to
| justify his decisions and it's accepted as is and I think
| somehow trust plays a part here. Because his children
| knows that it's not the thing to get (smartphone, movie
| time, etc.) that is at play but trust (edit_begin)
| ultimately trust and the only way to get that thing would
| be by breaking trust (edit_end). They have to keep their
| parent's trust and parents know they can only get that
| trust by actually trusting. So, it works out. YMMV.
| throwawayboise wrote:
| If you had kids, you would know that you can control what
| they do up until about middle-school age, at which point
| your ability to control them begins to decline. They're
| starting to grow into independent adults.
| voisin wrote:
| Best not to try to control them before that age either.
| Best to try to develop a relationship where you can
| express your concerns in a straightforward manner and
| hear their concerns and get their buy-in on some solution
| that safeguards them from your concerns but let's them
| have some semblance of what they want.
| ianai wrote:
| Agree. Those tend to be the most functional
| relationships/young adults that I remember interacting
| with in the past. Social media though is clearly a thing
| to approach carefully. I personally just block it all at
| the firewall and watch for the day society gets through
| this phase.
| patrickdavey wrote:
| Terribly basic question, but, can they not just use a VPN
| to tunnel through? I've heard kids are doing that kind of
| thing now.
| gijsnijholt1980 wrote:
| Indeed. The best thing you can do is to teach them how to
| think for themselves, how to think freely, what is really
| important in life etc. Takes a lot of time and effort but
| it gives them the best defense against peer pressure and
| 'social media'
| pengaru wrote:
| > I think if I had kids I wouldn't let them on such sites
| until 16/17 or never. Granted, I have a strong opinion
| against social media before this data.
|
| I can't imagine how impossible it would be to shield them
| from all these toxic technologies like smartphones and
| social media while still being in the continental USA. Even
| if you managed it, they'd be in constant exposure on the
| periphery, and incessantly reminded of their otherness vs.
| the masses. It just doesn't seem healthy to me.
|
| If I had kids today, I'd buy an undeveloped island
| somewhere like coastal Panama and raise an army of them
| off-grid while homesteading on it.
|
| But I've opted to just go childless instead. Humans are
| like a wildfire raging across the planet, it doesn't need
| me to throw more fuel on it...
| klyrs wrote:
| Just like nobody lets their kids do drugs or have sex? (Do
| you remember being a teen?) Kids are sneaky and
| resourceful. Harm-reduction works better than abolition;
| authoritarian parenting erodes the trust you need to effect
| durable change in your kids' behavior.
| danuker wrote:
| > authoritarian parenting erodes the trust you need to
| effect durable change in your kids' behavior.
|
| authoritarian governing erodes the trust you need to
| effect durable change in your citizens' behavior.
| tessierashpool wrote:
| OK, but if you're stuck at home, you're probably using
| Instagram more, not less. And when you're back in school,
| your Instagram usage probably declines.
|
| Very unlikely that Instagram has a net psychological
| benefit, but being in school seems to have had a more
| direct effect.
| l33t2328 wrote:
| > I think if I had kids I wouldn't let them on such sites
| until 16/17 or never
|
| Social media is damaging, but not having social media is
| also damaging since you may as well be the kid coming to
| school in a potato sack
| neatze wrote:
| Seems like instead of educating your kids, you prefer to
| control them.
| xwdv wrote:
| This is the wrong approach.
|
| You must realize that _every_ generation of youth from here
| on will face some unique challenges of their own, and the
| only way to overcome them is to help them tackle it head on
| and not let them become defeated by it. Attempting to time
| travel back to some simpler time is not an option. The
| simpler time is gone, and will never return. _This_ is
| their life now.
| lupire wrote:
| Do your kids do meth? It's very popular now.
| l33t2328 wrote:
| This seems disingenuous.
|
| Meth is extremely unpopular in the 13-18 demographic, and
| in particular it's far less popular than social media.
| tzs wrote:
| South Park, season 3 episode 11, "Chinpokomon", covered how
| this really works:
|
| Kyle: [enters] Mom, Dad, can I have money to buy
| Chinpokomon?
|
| Sheila: What's a Chinpokomon?
|
| Kyle: I'm not sure.
|
| Sheila: Well, why do you need one?
|
| Kyle: I don't know.
|
| Sheila: ...Well then, the answer is no, Kyle. You just got
| money to buy your Cyborg Bill doll.
|
| Kyle: Yeah, but Cyborg Bill is totally gay now. Please Mom?
| Everybody else has Chinpokomon.
|
| Gerald: Well, Kyle, that's not a reason to buy something.
|
| Ike: Neah Kyle doh.
|
| Gerald: You see, son, fads come and go. And this "Chin-po-
| ko-mon" is obviously nothing more than a fad. You don't
| have to be a part of it. In fact, you can make an even
| stronger statement by saying to your peers, "I'm not going
| to be a part of this fad, because I'm an individual." Do
| you understand?
|
| Kyle: Yes. Yes, I do, Dad. Now let me tell you how it works
| in the real world. In the real world, I can either get a
| Chinpokomon, or I can be the only kid without one, which
| singles me out, and causes the other kids to make fun of me
| and kick my ass.
|
| Gerald: Hm... Good point; here's $10. [hands it to him]
|
| Kyle: Thanks.
|
| Gerald: Wait, here's 20. Get one for your brother, too.
| [Kyle receives the other $10 and walks out]
|
| Ike: Hey, Chih-paw-ko.
| krisoft wrote:
| When I was young I really, really wanted a tamagotchi. My
| parents wouldn't buy one for me with the same reasoning
| as in that South Park episode. So I wrote one for myself
| in Quick Basic. Several years later I become a
| professional software developer. :D I guess thanks mum
| thanks dad. :)
|
| (Because I never really played with a real tamagotchi I
| had to figure out for myself what a tamagotchi should do.
| So mine was a pig. And I had this "game design" problem
| that every time you feed it it got just a bit heavier.
| And of course unbounded weight gain is not good, so I
| added a menu point to slaughter the pig. I even went to
| the library to research how many kgs of sausage and bacon
| it should generate per 100kg of raw pig. Turns out real
| tamagotchis don't work this way.)
| sp332 wrote:
| You might be interested in "Many Tamogatchis were harmed
| in the making of this presentation"
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=c4PkcZScBV8
|
| And more the next year
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbTgDfB0cao
| base698 wrote:
| Instagram kills, from Coddling:
|
| > U.S. hospitals going back to 2001 and were able to estimate
| self-harm rates for the entire country. They found that the
| rate for boys held steady at roughly 200 per hundred thousand
| boys in the age range of fifteen to nineteen. The rate for
| girls in that age range was much higher, but had also been
| relatively steady from 2001 to 2009, at around 420 per hundred
| thousand girls. Beginning in 2010, however, the girls' rate
| began to rise steadily, reaching 630 per hundred thousand in
| 2015. The rate for younger girls (ages ten to fourteen) rose
| even more quickly, nearly tripling from roughly 110 per hundred
| thousand in 2009 to 318 per hundred thousand in 2015. (The
| corresponding rate for boys in that age range was around 40
| throughout the period studied.) The years since 2010 have been
| very hard on girls.
| lupire wrote:
| Has anyone checked Instagram use among those girls and
| others?
| magicalhippo wrote:
| Our national broadcaster NRK had a series[1] specifically
| about suicide amongst teenage girls and their use of
| Instagram. From what they found[2], one suicide would
| trigger other attempts, often copying the method used.
|
| It seems clear to me this isn't random.
|
| [1]: https://www.nrk.no/emne/trigger-warning-1.14739155
|
| [2]: https://www.nrk.no/spesial/det-skjulte-
| nettverket-1.14739159
| retrac wrote:
| Yes. Social media use is correlated with anxiety,
| depression and suicidal thoughts, particularly in girls, in
| a growing number of studies. And in the studies that
| compare different social networks, Instagram usually ranks
| the most negatively. https://www.theguardian.com/society/20
| 19/jan/04/depression-i...
|
| https://journals.lww.com/co-
| psychiatry/fulltext/2019/11000/s...
|
| But of course, an isolated, depressed, anxious child is
| likely to withdraw and spend a great deal of time online.
| Whether it's a symptom or a cause, or both and to which
| degree, seems unclear.
|
| That said, just anecdotally, as a man in my 30s, I cannot
| look at the typical popular Instagram profile targeted at
| my demographic. It evokes horrible feelings. Jealousy,
| image insecurity, sexual insecurity, sexual frustration,
| FOMO, social status insecurity... all bundled up in a nasty
| ball. And quite reliably induced after ten seconds and
| three photos of inhumanely sexy men in implausibly
| photogenic homes that cost 10x as much as I'll ever make.
| No thanks. I believe that walling that whole thing off
| mentally, has been good for me.
| vilts wrote:
| Can you give some exaples of a typical popular profile
| targeted at your demographic? My Insta feed is currently
| filled with only machining and related topics, but I also
| don't check the "what's hot" or things like that.
| retrac wrote:
| Well, disclaimer -- I'm gay so that's a bit of a
| confound. The object of desire is also who you want to
| be. Some studies suggest we are particularly susceptible
| to this kind of image-relational problem, and maybe for
| that reason. (I can believe it.)
|
| Anyway in the name of research, I pulled some Instagram
| URLs from a Telegram chat with some friends. To their
| credit they mostly seem to post memes and jokes from
| Instagram, not Instagram models. But the first non-meme
| account I pulled up is a good example, actually:
| https://www.instagram.com/benjaminbenz/ (somewhat NSFW?)
|
| Exotic vacations, mountain-top kisses, ATVs, cute dogs,
| fast cars, jet-setting, gym gains, beautiful mansions,
| fishing trips, big muscles, sports, a too-sexy boyfriend,
| and a good dose of almost-tasteful butts and some sexual
| suggestiveness. No cares. All happy. In love. Damn, I
| want all that. Why isn't my life like that? Sure, it's
| mostly fake. But good luck convincing my amygdala of
| that.
| zeteo wrote:
| As a parent of girls this is deeply worrying to me. With the
| spread of Trumpism the war on women has reached a complete new
| high across the country but especially in the south. I'd be
| interested to know how much of this growth is related to
| developments in red and purple states.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| In my abnormal psychology class, we learned that men had a much
| higher success rate in suicide, except in places where women
| had ready access to highly lethal poison.
| vfclists wrote:
| Do you guys mind not providing links to website that insist that
| you they allow you to every damn data collection agency to track
| you before you enter?
| markovbot wrote:
| site does not load with javascript disabled. But does show me a
| <title> tag that implies it's a Facebook product, so I'm
| definitely not going to enable javascript.
| alpaca128 wrote:
| The way they handle cookies is very questionable to put it
| mildly. Their popup asks if I want to accept cookies but then
| there is literally no other button than the one saying "accept
| all".
| Animats wrote:
| _" When schools closed, suspected suicide attempts actually
| decreased. When schools reopened, suspected suicide attempts
| skyrocketed in lockstep."_
|
| From the way the data is presented, it's not clear that there was
| a net change either way. Maybe this just concentrated suicides
| around school reopening times.
| waynesonfire wrote:
| reddit removed this link due to not passing media bias..
| interesting.
|
| https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaCoronavirus/comments/oqawe5/s...
| [deleted]
| geofft wrote:
| "Reddit" didn't remove the link, an individual volunteer
| moderator of the specific subreddit removed it. Saying that
| Reddit removed it is like saying that GitHub rejected my pull
| request to Docker.
| waynesonfire wrote:
| reddit is a community made up of the moderators,
| contributors, editors, lurkers, and also the company that
| finances it. Without them reddit doesn't exist. so reddit did
| remove the link, for if such behavior wasn't tolerated it
| would be cancelled, just as this post is being down-voted. if
| you want to get more specific about it, that's great. thanks
| for pointing it out. it's irrelevant to my intentions.
|
| and don't worry, github removes PRs too,
| https://torrentfreak.com/dmca-notice-wipes-reverse-
| engineere...
| malwarebytess wrote:
| They're hinting to you that complaining that a moderator of
| a small forum somewhere on the internet removing your
| article is not particularly interesting or valuable.
| MathYouF wrote:
| The website the mod linked to is Mediabiasfactcheck.com
|
| The article is from Inside Medicine published via Bulletin.com
| by author Jeremy Faust.
|
| I can't find any of the above sources listed on the site
| provided. If we want to have a conversation about the mods
| decision and if it should give us pause, we'll first have to
| understand the reasoning (or verify if it's even credible) of
| the mod.
| jorams wrote:
| > I can't find any of the above sources listed on the site
| provided.
|
| The relevant rule is "Use Reliable Sources" and the subreddit
| seems focused on facts and statistics. I think it makes sense
| to default to disallowing random websites not reviewed by the
| source they've chosen for bias review.
| throwawaysea wrote:
| As an aside: Media Bias/Fact Check is not a reputable source
| for measurements of media bias. They might get some ratings
| correct, but I also see them regularly basing ratings off of
| a few cherry-picked articles rather than a broader body of
| articles, in a way that suggests to me that they are
| purposeful in painting a selective picture of bias. They
| don't have a systematic methodology to determine bias. The
| Columbia Journalism Review wrote about this a few years ago
| as they were gaining popularity
| (https://www.cjr.org/innovations/measure-media-bias-
| partisan....), noting that their ratings are basically the
| opinions of a small group of people. All Sides has a better
| bias ratings database (https://www.allsides.com/media-
| bias/media-bias-ratings) and is more honest about what their
| methodology is and what the limitations are
| (https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-rating-
| method...).
| throwawaysea wrote:
| A number of the biggest coronavirus subreddits also openly
| censor articles and ban users for the slightest violation of
| their biases. For example if you share articles or studies that
| suggest lockdowns are illogical, or that the virus may have
| originated from a lab leak, or that the infection fatality rate
| is low, you would see your discussions closed and potentially
| get a permanent ban from those subreddits. Perhaps the mods of
| some of these subreddits have relaxed things over time, but the
| rampant censorship practiced by mods on Reddit often creates
| echo chambers and prevents society from seeking the truth more
| efficiently.
| rob_c wrote:
| Did they attempt to take the analysis back in time to use the
| larger dataset of schools being closed.
|
| I.e. Has teen suicide in America always been higher when schools
| were open always, or is this somehow unique to the extra
| closures?
| loeg wrote:
| > That's not unexpected. Suicide death rates (for which we have
| decades of reliable data) among teens and young adults
| predictably fall during summer months, and also in December--
| that is, times when schools are the least in session. So, what
| our graphs above show, an apparent inverse correlation between
| school closings and suicidal behavior, is not unique to the
| Covid-19 pandemic.
| rob_c wrote:
| Thanks!
|
| Ah hadn't noticed that and was struggling to paste the info
| graphic. Would love to see the decorrolation displayed
| graphically but that's just the way I read data
| isthisreality wrote:
| Not a fan of "skyrocketed" in this headline. Just tell us the
| statistic.
| isthisreality wrote:
| > During February 21-March 20, 2021, suspected suicide attempt
| ED visits were 50.6% higher among girls aged 12-17 years than
| during the same period in 2019; among boys aged 12-17 years,
| suspected suicide attempt ED visits increased 3.7%.
|
| https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7024e1.htm
| isthisreality wrote:
| Comparatively speaking, at least gender-wise, this data
| should be taken with a grain of salt.
|
| Males are historically more effective at killing themselves.
| This data only looks at ED visits and you don't go to the
| hospital when you're clearly dead. And if you assume "suicide
| attempt" is using the technical definition [1], they're only
| looking at ED visits where the patient did not die.
|
| Males aged 15 to 24 were 4x as likely to succeed in killing
| themselves in 2019. [2]
|
| [1]: https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/suicide (see
| Definitions)
|
| [2]: https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/suicide (see
| Figure 2)
| SavantIdiot wrote:
| EDIT: I find it gross that some people always want to take
| over a discussion about women and make it about men.
| isthisreality wrote:
| Not quite. I'm saying that the Male % and Female % should
| not be compared as-is.
| prepend wrote:
| Yet did the successful suicide rate in males increase to
| compensate? It seems like you have a duty, out of
| politeness, to at least address whether you attempted to
| address this.
|
| Bringing up makes suicide rates vs female without trying to
| address if that explains a 50v3% increase in attempts isn't
| very helpful, or interesting.
| isthisreality wrote:
| Maybe instead of complaining, you can look it up yourself
| and contribute the data to this thread.
| brohee wrote:
| Do they have split stats for girls attending all girls school?
| Bullying is often the root cause of teenage suicide, and I wonder
| wether a mixed environment makes it better or worse...
| throwawayboise wrote:
| I would think worse. The underlying driver of the social
| posturing and inter-clique battling by adolescent girls is
| trying to be more visible/popular with boys.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| All-girls schools are pretty rare in the US aren't they?
| damnedspot wrote:
| They're uncommon outside of pricey prep schools. Interesting
| question, but the data would be tough to speculate with since
| there would be such an income difference between those girls
| and the statistically average American girl.
| SavantIdiot wrote:
| They are mostly catholic schools. E.g.,
|
| https://www.sacredhearthamden.org/
| corndoge wrote:
| "We found the correlation to be very strong, which is the highest
| category statistically possible"
|
| What?
| rob_c wrote:
| Not exactly an n-sigma statement with the result of double
| blind, or look elsewhere...
|
| Disappointingly that does read a little close to "I found what
| I was looking for so stopped looking" which makes me want to
| grab the author and interrogate them over zoom into they hang
| up.
| Solstinox wrote:
| I can see the Far Side Comic that never was.
|
| "Having been burned one too many times by putting lines through
| shotgun blasts, scientists switched to correlation categories."
| neonnoodle wrote:
| Divide study results into tranches with AAA, AA, and B
| ratings.
| voisin wrote:
| Meta analyses as collateralized bonds that let scientists
| argue whatever they want!
| somehnacct3757 wrote:
| Get a former journal reviewer to claim the tranch of B
| papers contains, in sum, the same amount of good science as
| an AAA paper.
|
| I like where this is going
| nullc wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta-analysis
| idanman wrote:
| This reminds me of the documentary Race to Nowhere. They talk
| about the high suicide rate amongst teens due to burn out from
| school and how some were brought back from the brink.
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_to_Nowhere
| aaron695 wrote:
| This is exactly as expected? I don't understand?
|
| They have lost resilience and are back under stress again. We
| damaged them, now we'll see the results. Exactly to narrative.
|
| Is the article something about girls and not boys? Boys will take
| a little longer before we see any jump if it's as expected.
|
| The death of a child can have less immediate stress than a
| overseas beach holiday.
|
| Are we confusing emotions that are not stress, like grief or
| loneliness or boredom
| TaupeRanger wrote:
| Not sure why the hyperbolic headline, when the article itself
| just says, paraphrasing, "there might not be any causal
| relationship between schools being open and suicide attempts, and
| that goes against the prevailing anti-closing narrative".
| endisneigh wrote:
| There's no contradiction between your quote and the headline:
| schools opened and suicide attempts in girls skyrocketed, but
| the relationship isn't necessarily causal.
| TaupeRanger wrote:
| Kind of a silly reply. The headline could've just avoided the
| implication. Imagine the headline: "women started eating more
| beans, and birth defects skyrocketed". What will people
| assume, regardless of the content of the article? It's
| clickbaity, that's the problem.
| endisneigh wrote:
| What's clickbaity about it though? Schools opened and
| suicide attempts in girls skyrocketed. I didn't necessarily
| think it was causal, but rather a correlation. I mean if
| you read the article then what they're trying to say is
| clear in any case. YMMV.
| I_cape_runts wrote:
| Oof
| techlaw wrote:
| Could not access the article but it appears to reference this CDC
| MMWR from June 18, 2021:
| https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/pdfs/mm7024e1-H.pdf
|
| [I've included the link to the CDC report above and the summary
| below because this information is important and should be
| accessible (i.e. should not require allowing fbcdn.net trackers).
| I also prefer the source to somebody's interpretation. If the
| original article provides additional insight I'd like to see a
| non-FB link to it, my admittedly quick scan of the comments did
| not spot one.]
|
| From the SUMMARY of that report:
|
| _What is already known about this topic?_ During 2020, the
| proportion of mental health-related emergency department (ED)
| visits among adolescents aged 12-17 years increased 31% compared
| with that during 2019.
|
| _What is added by this report?_ In May 2020, during the COVID-19
| pandemic, ED visits for suspected suicide attempts began to
| increase among adolescents aged 12-17 years, especially girls.
| During February 21-March 20, 2021, suspected suicide attempt ED
| visits were 50.6% higher among girls aged 12-17 years than during
| the same period in 2019; among boys aged 12-17 years, suspected
| suicide attempt ED visits increased 3.7%.
|
| _What are the implications for public health practice?_ Suicide
| prevention requires a comprehensive approach that is adapted
| during times of infrastructure disruption, involves multisectoral
| partnerships and implements evidence-based strategies to address
| the range of factors influencing suicide risk.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-07-24 23:01 UTC)