h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Neither did the beats or the punks, if I remember correctly from my readings...

Actually, I think some of them would like to be more 'anti-cultural' than 'counter-cultural'. Whatever, they are certainly a group born out of modern teenage apathy.

That group is not a culture at all, it's just the mainstream 'alternative'. Like townies and mockGoths, there is no trace of individual thought. There are still proper Goths and political punks etc. but categories are not so easy to attribute anymore.
However much scorn they deserve, however, they are not as selfish as you seem to like to think. That generalisation gets levelled at every generation, and has it been true for any of them yet?

As a real metaller, not some fashion pop-metaller or mockgoth, I can say that metal is now mainstream.

Funny, when you say metal and alternative rock is mainstream, and j-pop and rock are an even more cotton-candy mainstream, what is today's counter culture? I myself don't know, and I'm asking around...

in nz i would say the counter culture is happening in parts of the dance scene. and lots of young people with ethics around the environment, organics, peace, community etc. a big part of the vegan movement seems to be based in youth culture.

one of the very cool things happening here is the organising of dance parties on the solstices, equinoxes and cross quarter dates. its connecting back to pakeha (white) ancestry and growing it in a contemporary context. creating new culture actually.

another one is the hiphop scene in nz - very pro love, family and respect, indigenous and polynesian.

and there are still lots of old hippies around raising their kids with 'alternative' values

like I said, the real counterculture is difficult to define. Mostly it does not fit into any of the recognised categories although it might take bits from both, because mainly we are not bothered about being in one.

What on earth is j-pop?

I wasn't so much thinking about problems I ffelt we were actually going to do anything about, just stuff we were going to get stuck with. See at the moment, being out of the country, I look back at Britain and see a bit of a tendencyy lately for rather worrying parochialism. I'm not nieve enough to think that racism and the like hasn't alwayys been a problem, but the way 'everybody' seems to be going after immigrants, and shutting themselves up in the island away from Europe seems to me to be something which'll only end in tears, and a problem that young people are going to get landed with (and shaped by). That sort of thing.

have you read 'bold as love' by Gwyneth Jones ?

its a novel set in the near future where 'youth culture' especially music becomes central in a takeover of english society. a significant part of the book looks at immigration as well as the english non-anglosaxon populations, particularly what happens when the muslim population gets big enough to start to be self determining.

i've always wondered what the english and/or other brits thought of the themes in that book.

j-pop: Japanese pop, which sounds not unlike someone trying to play hip hop with a clarinet...

And what do you mean, stuck with? What problems could one conceivably be stuck with that they weren't actually going to do anything about? And the UK's certainly more connected to Europe and the rest of the world than, say, the US is.

Mmmm? But I thought we were agreeing that everybody thinks they are going to change the world when they get older, but then can't (be bothered)?

Haven't read the book: might have to look that one up, sounds interesting.

But the US is huge and isolated (comparatively. Some of which it brings on itself, but anyway.) whereas Britain may be geographically close to Europe but there still seems to be some pride attached to dissing it as just a load of mardy French and humourless Germans. A lot of what gets published in the mainstream press about Germany and its people is really disturbing, like they're fair game. One columnist stated 'It's only by reminding the Germans of their inglorious past that we prevent them from doing it again' which is nothing but racism, and unabashed at that. (Apparently he can say that, because he's Jewish... ) I don't feel any particular European-ness, but no distance either.
There is a lot of stupidity about immigrants. For one thing, the *fact* that they bring in more money than they take out is ignored, and whilst I don't blame people personally for being ignorant or uninformed I don't like it when they are given a platform and applause for doing so. We learn from those with knowledge, right? (but then I disagree with letting people talk in schools when their only qualifications are they lost a child to drugs etc. this somehow make them more relevent and informed than chemists and doctors.) Every day there are headlines assuring us that asylum seekers are causing all the world's problems, and suddenly they turn round and act surprised and horrified at the success of the BNP. And the scores of people going, "I'm not a racist, but..." "If more people had listened to Enoch Powell, we wouldn't be in this mess."
Well, from real-life observation rather than through newsprinted goggles, I don't see any mess.

Well Sol, I won't say that there aren't people who get jaded and just look for ways to get ahead (I'm surrounded by them), but I do believe that some people manage to keep it up well through their life (for an easy example, try Ralph Nader), tho their success rate is based on their ability to fight the most intrenched constituency of rich, bloated people who "aren't racists," but vote that way. If you can't fight city hall, try wall street. =p

I'm trying to figure out how you would make a video of all this. It seems a rather odd medium to have chosen.

One point that was made above I feel should be looked at more closely. The fact that metal and other things that are so outrageous that I don't think my parents even have much idea that they exist, are now "mainstream". On a bigger scale, this means that it is difficult for younger people today, anywhere, to do what younger generations have always done (since biblical times) and that is - to revolt. Parents who grew up in the 60s let their kids do anything and then applaud it.

So what are this generation going to revolt against? As Bob says, the last 50 years people, mostly young, have tried to do something about improving the world. Where has it got us? On the brink of a war in the Middle East? So why bother? Interest in politics is dampened by the whole pointless situation and example has shown us - and the young generation - that there's not much point trying to do anything about it.

OK to get back to the video train of thought. I put myself in the position of my 14-year-old and came to the conclusion that he has few material problems, no problems with friends or anything, so he is looking for another area of his life to cause trouble. At the moment it is school. He has turned into one of these bright kids who just don't bother and make a sport out of getting bad marks. How can you demonstrate this on film? I dunno - film a scene in a classroom, picture him slumped in front of telly/screen at home. ASk him what he thinks can be done to help the starving millions in Africa/whether a war in Iraq is necessary/how the school system ought to be run.

Please do that! see if YOU can get any sense out of him!

Sounds like a rather cynical look at suburban life - police need teens to justify their ridiculously large budget, and the teens need the police as a semi-authority to "rebel" against. I propose showing kids smoking in the back of a 7-11. Ooh, that reminds me of a scene from my own AP American History class in high school, where a kid was asked - senior year - to point out Jerusalem on the world map. And couldn't. =p

I think that is a good point, actually, Trillian's C. It is very frustrating to have no windmills to tilt at which haven't been utterly overrun and colonised by the previous generation. Mindd you, we do seem to be enterring into a period where there is going to be a large issue at which to get satisfyingly irritated, although not so much as a teen/adult conflict. I wonder if that's why there's a tendency for people to have a gop at America all the time: can't revolt against parents but can attack Macky D's sort of thing.

Chappie has to do video interviews. So far he's got various freinds, classmates, teachers and so on lined up. So there may be the opportunity for your 14 year old to do his star turn after all. Wanna ship him to Siberia?

The whereabouts of Jerusalem on a world map is by far not the simplest fact that kids (and lots of "adults") don't know. The thing is, they don't care that they don't know. Despite the chance of becoming a millionaire through knowing lots of useful stuff like that!

ARe you really in Siberia, Sol? I had pictured you somewhere nearer Moscow.

Mandragora - Peter Tatchell is running a campaign to have the age of sexual consent lowered to 12 for both hetro and homo sexual relations.

Is 2 12 year olds having sex Paedophillia ? - quite definately !

The problems facing youth today are that their leaders are corrupt and driven by self-interest disguised as public good. That there is an over emphasis on protection of the rights of the individual over the rights of society. And that there is a belief that legislation can cure problems.

Making something illegal does not 'cure' it.

My answer is to persuade children that they can be loved for who they are - not what they can do or what they can be. If they believe themselves lovable, they will be more prepared to see other people as loved by someone. I'd better stop.

Don't see why. Think you might have a point about the need for people to see other people as real human beings.

Yes, I am in Mocow, actually. Not nearly dramatic enough 'Sides. I got conneectioins...

Well, that's him. I admire his conviction but don't always agree with him. However, I don't see the problem if consenting 12 year olds, properly informed, want to have sex with each other- the problem is when the age difference is huge. I do not think that most 12 year olds could give informed consent, some could but for the moment 16 seems as reasonable as you can get in putting an age on things.

Paedophilia is attraction (literally, love for) to children. Although not specific this usually applies to adults being attracted to children. It's not the same as men going after teenage nymphos a la Humbert, that is nymphophilia. It is adults (of either sex) being (usually exclusively) attracted to children. If 12 year olds are at it, they aren't attracted to each other *because they are 12*, but for the same reason similar-age couples usually get together. It is not paedophilia because the attraction is not based on the young age of either participant.
True paedophiles often do not involve any other focus of attraction rather than the child's age. 12 year olds, although I do not consider them 'fully-formed' are going to be noticeably developed sexually and true paedophiles are interested in *children*, who show none. They are unformed, which makes them attractive. For this reason paedophiles often do not distinguish between genders (which is why most people think of it as a homosexual deviation ) because it simply isn't as important as the child's youth, and is less obvious at that age.
Children have sexual feelings, they are not 'innocent' in that sense. However it is inappropriate for adults to get involved, of course. 12 year old sex may be distasteful, and I think it is ill-advised due to the average ignorance of that age group, but if they're doing it with each other it's not paedophilia. It is normal sex.
Also paedophilia is hardly recognisable as 'sex'; mostly non-penetrative, a lot of what actually goes on has little analogy to 'normal' sex. Also hence the confusion over 'child porn' which most people consider to be simply adult porn situations but done with kids.

You think Peter Tatchell wants to get off with 12 year olds? (implied by 'corrupt self interest etc.')
Rights of society... perhaps, but I will not stand for having my personal rights taken away because of a *perceived* public good, unsupported by a shred of independent evidence and relying on 'common sense'. Peoples' rights have to be in conjunction with responsibilities, but some people refuse to believe certain individuals (usually those doing something they disapprove of) are capable of exercising responsibility.

Making something illegal makes it much harder to cure because you immediately have the problem of crime and social stigma. Please, nobody take this to mean I think paedophilia/child porn for instance, should be legal. If it's abusive it should be illegal, however I don't see anything abusive about two consenting 12 year olds. I wouldn't prosecute them but neither would I change the law. For those committing abuse I would like better treatment (something which at the moment is difficult to obtain before an offence has been committed, sadly often due to public outcry and NIMBYism.) and less general hysteria (and less media-led ignorance).
don't stop posting, that last comment was spot-on.