General Chat

I always thought a Snowflake was someone who melted away at the first sign of hard graft which is why we have many unemployed young people.

They have made themselves unemployable because they refuse to do what they consider to be mundane jobs such as loo cleaning, office and shop cleaning, field and factory work etc. without the salary of, say, a doctor. They refuse to start at the bottom and work their way up as many of us had to do when leaving education. All in all, they have a sense of entitlement without a sense of responsibility for their own maintenance.

I blame the parents who should have 'knocked them into shape' from day one - please don't take that literally - instead of treating them like royalty.

We didn't debate much at Uni, but one day a lecturer suggested one.
Most of the class muttered - they didn't want one.
I'm afraid I then suggested a debate where we had to argue FOR a position we were against.
Yes, 'muggins' was chosen as one of the candidates, and a young 'whipper-snapper' - mouthy, opinionated ex public school lad called Mikey was chosen as my opposition.
Within 5 minutes, he started referring to me as 'Mother Theresa' - I had to remind him that I was arguing FOR HIS views :-D
I then referred to him as 'Boy', just to even up the name-calling. :-D :-D

About 3 years after we'd left, I was walking past a pub, when I heard someone shout 'Mother Theresa!' - I turned - and it was 'Boy'. .
He bought me a pint, and we started reminiscing. He said he found the debate very frustrating, as his views were what had been instilled in him in his childhood, and arguing FOR opposite views was difficult, as he found himself agreeing with them - and thought it was wrong!
BUT he said the debate made him realise things in life aren't black and white, and, with experience, opinions can change.

I realise I've done the 'reverse position' with my children a lot!
If they came home from school saying something they'd picked up from a 'friend', like, a misogynistic phrase (yes, girls pick them up - and start believing them
:-|) or a rumour about a child, I put them in the position of the female/child and ask how they would feel.
As they got older, through school, they would very politely question the perpetrator of unsound 'sayings' - this would, occasionally, include a teacher :-(

The more experienced teachers would discuss why they'd said what they'd said, the immature ones would dismiss them - or, in one case, try and put them in detention, for questioning their 'authority' :-| :-|

Secondary Schools don’t encourage discussion/questioning.

A telling conversation with an experienced teacher after supporting a student in an observed lesson. A student teacher had been ‘practicing’. One of the students had asked, what I’d thought, a relevant question. Afterwards the experienced teacher said he should have brought the group ‘back on topic’.
The same happened after 9/11. It was definitely off-topic but the DH preferred to totally ignore it. It could have been such a worthwhile exercise. The young people could have expressed their fears, been reassured or given a different point of view to what they’d picked up at home or via the media.

As they got older, all they’ve been taught is My way or not at all.

I'm a great believer that everyone, regardless of age or beliefs, should see as much of the 'real world' as is possible, and what they can't witness first hand should try and find out about as much as possible, even if that's only through whatever is available via google...if you can't DO, then read, read it all, question it and then see what YOU think. :-D

I couldn't post as I wanted too last night as not well, so my reply was the short version with some deleted so perhaps not as clear as it might have been.

Don't you think though that 'teaching to the test' which has become more prevalent ( results guarantee a better place in league tables) is inevitably narrowing the focus rather than encouraging a broader interest/experience?

After all if you are told constantly that you have to pass exams to succeed, to get to uni, to get a degree, to get a 'proper' job. WHY would you then ask the questions, debate the issues? you know the right answers are 'tick box A B or C' that's what you learn, that's what you do. This doesn't of course apply to everyone...none of us here KNOW everyone do we?? Just small groups of mixed people lol.

Also, and I hate to point this out, a number of these so called "snowflake" incidents are fake news, it gets in the Sun gets in the mail, and becomes accepted 'wisdom' by older people who have forgotten ( some of them) that when they were that age their elders thought they were 'off' a bit also, and the young people themselves having looking at the mess the older generation had made, decided to have something different.

In ref to Allan's last line, It IS hard to listen to another point of view that is so much opposed to what you believe. It's a natural reaction when you think you're "right" ( perhaps especially when your religion has always told you one thing only) not to want to debate it. "When I'm right , I'm right" ;-)

I don't particularly want to debate certain issues with friends, (or foes come to that) these days, because it so often seems a waste of time and I am too tired to do it lol. In most cases and we've all seen it on here!...it can lead to nastiness that goes way beyond the topic at hand. The debates on here now are few and far between, get too personal, and with due respect to all here, many of the people best at it ( ie able to put their case well and 'reasonably', without getting nasty ) have left the building.

Good points from everyone!

A good dose of the real world can work wonders.

In other words, Tawny, Mr Owl and his fellow students doing that particular degree have spent time out of University and in the big wide world where issues aren't black and white?

Snowflake generation is according to the powers that be are those born between 1984-2002.

Mr Owl (1982) went back to university in 2016 to get a second degree as he wanted a career change. This year he graduates. He has found that a lot of his fellow students lack the ability to question what they are told and instead choose to parrot what they've been told. Mr Owl likes sometimes playing devils advocate and will argue the opposing view whether he really agrees with it or not for the love of debate. Rather than argue back snowflakes take on the guise of a petulant child and they can't say why they're right they just are.

However Mr Owl is studying to become a building surveyor and all the students on his course both young and mature have a bit more backbone and an ability to argue.

I should explain further so it doesn't sound like I'm contradicting myself. Some of the classes that Mr Owl and his fellow building surveyors (Of which there are 6 including him) go to are also attended by architectural technologists, project managers and quantity surveyors.

When I was at University, 20 years ago, as a mature student, I have to admit to being shocked by the naivety of many of the BEd students - those training to be teachers.
We shared some of the same lectures.
The first instance was very early on. We were given quotations from politicians from both Labour and Conservative MP's, ad were asked to turn them around, so the Labour quotations sounded like they were Tory quotations, and vice-versa.
I was asked by a couple of students what 'Tory' meant :-S

Another time, the lecturer asked us what we thought more important to education - a love of learning, or an ability to teach the National Curriculum.
Every BA student said a love of learning.
Every BEd student said an ability to teach the National Curriculum.

It appeared they had no wish to question - just teach what they were taught to teach.
They went on to teach today's Milleniums.

I absolutely agree with your point about parental responsibility, Rose, and very may do try to instil that healthy ability to question into their children.

Unfortunately there are other parents, the minority I would hope, who are quite content to put their children into the system an extremely early age and then expect child care workers and teachers to basically raise the child.

I realise that my previous post contained some generalisations, and I didn't mean to convey that all students were unable to debate or to see both sides of an issue, but it does appear that even those students who are prepared to discuss issues face the same problem with the naysayers.

This was particularly borne out with the recent 'discussion' regarding same sex marriage here in Australia. Many in both camps (no pun intended) basically resorted to violence and shouting down, and shutting down, their opponents.

Tawny, you're about 10 years too old to be a snowflake? :-)

I know a number of people ( people not labels) who are of the so called "snowflake" generation who are thoughtful, open to ideas and prepared to debate them very fluently, interested in politics and their own futures, but mindful of the needs of others. That's no bad thing is it?

Surely it' s a generalisation to suppose that ALL students are the same? about as much as it would be a generalisation to suggest all female posters on here of a similar age share the same upbringing or points of view.

To pick up on Allan's point "I'm not sure when the change took place but it seems to me that there is now a cycle of children going through the education system, through University and then many of them return to the education system as teachers or academics with no exposure to 'real life."

I was talking with my son about something similar earlier today, tutors who are basically only tutors because teaching what they were taught is their only, or maybe easiest, option following uni, (in this instance regurgitating business studies).

I was brought up to question ( some might consider it a flaw lol) but I hope ( know) that my son has followed the family pattern ;-) I think parents must take some responsibility too? For not letting or encouraging their children to question things, to ask why a parent thinks so and so, politically or socially and giving them the alternative views if at all possible.

Teachers should endeavour to broaden the minds of students of all ages not just focus them in on getting through exams... but now I digress lol

I see the issue as a vicious circle. Whilst the debate seems to centre on students, older generations must also share the blame.

I'm not sure when the change took place but it seems to me that there is now a cycle of children going through the education system, through University and then many of them return to the education system as teachers or academics with no exposure to 'real life.

So the current generation are being 'taught' by previous generations who have had a cloistered life.

If the teachers weren't taught to debate, how can they teach others, and so it goes on.

The younger generation learn from the previous generation that discussion and reason is not an option, it's either my way or no way.

It's far easier to put labels on people who disagree with you, or who hold opposite views than to talk with them rationally.

And so the circle continues

I think it is where they've been brought up in the so-called me generation. They've been taught that their views are the only ones that matter regardless of the consequences.

Is this where maybe today children have been bought up the so-called me generation, no one saying no to them so they expect only one result whatever they want?

I was born in 1984 and so am part of the so called snowflake generation. One of my earliest memories is of Margaret Thatcher losing power and John Major taking over. I remember asking my mother how that could happen. I was aware that there was more than one political party (Although I had no comprehension of how many there were) and that the adults voted to decide which party would run the country. I couldn't understand how John Major could take over as he and Margaret Thatcher were in the same party.

Is it that the young people at university now were too wrapped up in cotton wool and never taught to question or exposed to different points of view. Or is it just that they were never taught to listen to more than one point of view and run with it no matter what the consequences.

Maggie read that article again mad world we're in right now!

I think the problem is many people can't debate, not just students though they tend to be vocal in their views. They have their mantra but can't back it up in many cases. A Uni should take these young minds and have them question all views, otherwise, all that happens is you force-fed them with information for them to regurgitate in future.

There seems in many cases to be a need to be offended for the sake of being offended.

I am not particularly a fan of the term snowflakes as it's usually applied, to the younger generation which we've all been at some time, and who in general ( not a fan of generalisations either lol) are trying to deal with some of the prejudices they see in the older generation.

Students, again a generalisation, have always been the group who 'revolt' about something be it uni fees, or bigotry against one group of people or another, or events ( wars/nuclear armaments etc).

Some young people are still at a very impressionable age ( they have never known anything but being with their own age group for example). Should they be 'protected' until they have a little more experience? Or should they be exposed equally to extremes of views and be left to decide for themselves?

The latter requires I think some pro-activity on the part of those who organise the events where speakers of one shade or the other are likely to cause someone offence. Thinking here of the incident Dermot posted about a while ago where 'pro-lifers' were speaking, but it was in effect NOT a balanced event...if I remember rightly.

I think it hardly needs saying that nonsense like eugenics should have no place in anyone's 'education' except to highlight that there are morons out there who believe in it and who need to be kept out of any area of influence.

Quote from the article

"If you don’t like his views, you challenge them, engage with them, and figure [out] how a smart person can have views like that. Work out how you can persuade him to change his mind.’

That's probably how I feel about it, BUT that presupposes the other person is
a) smart enough to understand
b) informed
c) willing to listen

ie you can beat your head against the brick wall of racism, but if the racist believes he is right you will get nowhere fast.

*typed before other posts were put on thread, so not in response to them in any way lol

An offspring, from the Millennial Generation, was asked her opinion of the 'Safe Place' movement.

With a few exceptions, she thought they should 'Grow a backbone'. And she's in a Caring profession!

Students, in general, need to be challenged and challenging. That can't happen if everyone with a different (legally permitted) opinion is silenced.

It certainly makes one wonder at the ability of today's alleged 'elite' to survive in the 'real' world, and whether they think, because they consider themselves the 'elite', that they should have such a say over others'.

I agree with the article. By their actions, they are no more than fascists - 'I don't like it, so you shan't do/see/experience it'.

Another Snowlfake tantrum here:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/feb/06/safe-space-or-free-speech-crisis-debate-uk-universities