Justine Larbalestier

reading, writing, eating, drinking, sport

«

»

Teenagers: less irresponsible than crumblies

A most enjoyable opinion piece in yesterday’s New York Times by Mike Males concludes:

What experts label “adolescent risk taking” is really baby boomer risk taking. It’s true that 30 years ago, the riskiest age group for violent death was 15 to 24. But those same boomers continue to suffer high rates of addiction and other ills throughout middle age, while later generations of teenagers are better behaved. Today, the age group most at risk for violent death is 40 to 49, including illegal-drug death rates five times higher than for teenagers.

Hah! So I move that we start looking closely at what baby boomers are reading. Time to start banning Tom Clancy, John Grisham and Ken Follett books. Clearly those books are leading the most vulnerable and impressionable age group—the baby boomers—into further irresponsibility.

Posted by Justine at 10:45, 18 September 2007 under Praising, State of the World | 10 Comments »

Comments

  1. Robin L Says:

    I loved that article! Did you happen to check out his website, youthfacts.org? It had all sorts of reports and articles and statistics refuting the “wild, depraved youth of today” stereotype. Very interesting stuff.

    September 18th, 2007 at 12:32 PM

  2. haddy Says:

    wow so many babies and ha im not going to die in3 to 13 years

    Rebecca do you realy live in orlando or near it i have a stange suspicion you dont do you by chance live in altamont springs florida email me at haddybutterfly@hotmail.com

    September 18th, 2007 at 5:22 PM

  3. Dawn Says:

    That’s hilarious!! YES!!! hehe

    September 18th, 2007 at 5:24 PM

  4. Kenina-chan Says:

    THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU JUSTINE!!! I’m going to use this article for my health current events project and it’s due tomorrow. You saved me! I finally have a really good article! *Does a happy dance*

    September 18th, 2007 at 6:45 PM

  5. 5. Justine Says:

    Kenina-chan: You’re welcome. You should check out his website too.

    September 18th, 2007 at 6:50 PM

  6. Katie Says:

    That’s great! I love it!

    September 18th, 2007 at 7:05 PM

  7. hillary! Says:

    YES! FINALLY! SOMEONE THINKS LIKE I DO! About those authors I mean, if I am understanding you correctly, but I think I am not.

    September 18th, 2007 at 9:09 PM

  8. Rebecca Says:

    haha, take that, all ye banners of ya books. this is fantastic. amusingly enough, it seems like those baby boomers are often the ones doing the banning. and yet they’re really the ones screwing up. hahahahaha! ;)

    haddy, i assume you are referring to the other rebecca. i dunno where she’s from, but i am from texas. :P

    September 18th, 2007 at 10:25 PM

  9. marrije Says:

    Oh dear. Will have to start policing myself more closely, rapidly approaching the dangerous cohort. I have already given up reading Clancy, thank god.

    September 19th, 2007 at 5:22 PM

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. [...] books should we ban? Posted on September 21, 2007 by bookboy Justine Larbalestier makes a wonderful observation ...

    Pingback from Which books should we ban? « BookBoy on 21 September, 2007 at 12:24 AM

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

<-- -->