They do things that are expected of them and never do what they want to do. They marry men for convience and not for love. I feel sorry for these people. They will never truly discover who they truly are because they are too wrapped up on what others think of them.
My momma loved me but she died
Hud Bannon
I think this generation's youth is so intensely trained from the very start to follow instead of find their own path. From day one at school you are trained that what you want does not matter, because you have to go to school and do work for a hundred meaningless classes anyway. In high school, you are taught how to decide what you will do for the rest of your life, and practically dragged through that process. The system offers little room for your own freedom of choice.
shareExcellent observation! I've noticed that with the young folks at work. They will do as they're told and not think on their own. Companies don't like hiring people over 50 because we have a mind and might try to use it at work.
shareUh, no. They hire young graduates over the older ones because they're cheaper and more equipped with skills for the modern workplace. If you want to blame the young kids for all of today's ills, look to yourselves first-- you're their parents and mentors.
shareSo not true about the young generation. I'm in the middle being 30 and sure schools teach you many things that is the "right path " for you and also it's very demanding at a young age on kids that are only 17-18 to decide what you will become the rest of your life.
That being said, nowadays it is harder for the younger generation to get by and pay for things as well as in the work place. Sure companies want younger than 50 but for many reasons and not just because they listen to what's told of them and don't think for themselves. That thinking is really stupid. They are more equipped for jobs that fit the times as well as are forced to grow up a whole lot faster than there parents generation. The battle for the "good" jobs is so much more competitive and the days of just hopping into a job on say Wall Street withought having college and such are way gone. The younger generation gets a bad wrap because it's easier to blame them but the older generation needs to look back at what they were doing at their adolescence and compare what's so damn different?
THERES NO ROOM IN MY CIRCUS TENT FOR YOU !!!!
I had to chuckle at this one because when I was just graduating from college (a few decades ago), we said the same thing -- that nowadays it is harder for the younger generation to get jobs, there are more qualifications, etc. I think it's a matter of perspective. I think every generation of young people think it feels hard to get started, prove themselves, and begin to make a living -- that others had it easier.
As for growing up faster, I think that many people in previous generations had to grow up much faster than they do now. At one point an 8th grade education was the max for many in the U.S. and then they HAD to go out to get jobs and make their living because that was the expectation. Not many had the choice/money to continue their education and go to college (let alone get a PhD). These new employees usually started at the bottom (e.g. stock boy) and then worked their way up through many years hard work and learning more on the job, and then it's true that some of them became company presidents.
I'D SAY IT WAS WORSE IN THE PAST. For example the pre-WW2 generations it was expected to graduate high school, and then get married, especially if you were a woman. (Men had the option of college, but then also got married.)
Today's youth are far more independent, and oftentimes don't get married until their 30s.
Watch Mona Lisa Smile which shows how things USED to be, and contrast it to how things are now.
That and the massive student loan debts. My baby sister owes more for college than I did on my first house.
shareThat being said, nowadays it is harder for the younger generation to get by and pay for things as well as in the work place.
You know what? My great-great-grandfather and his family traveled hundreds of miles every year by horseback and on foot to find buffalo so he could feed his family. His son worked about 100 hours a year on his farm to feed his family, and my grandparents did the same. My parents lived through the depression.
There is NO tradition in my family where whiney little brats cried and whimpered about how difficult it is to live with their parents, eat their parents' food, and borrow their parents' car.
And those are the people that you claim "are more equipped for jobs that fit the times as well as are forced to grow up a whole lot faster than there parents generation."
Yours is probably the stupidest statement made on the whole internet.
Based on the movie, Natalie was extremely bright (top of her class). She came into this new company and immediately had innovative ideas and was able to use her persuasive skills to sell those ideas. It's possible that she had been intensely trained in her classes and that she wanted to merely implement the processes she learned when she started a job. On the other hand, she may have demonstrated innovation in those classes, which led her to being highly recognized.
What I also saw in this movie is that Natalie did not follow her career dreams. Her path was to follow a boy. She settled for a job in a city where he lived and that job was about firing people. That was not her career choice.
Finally, I hope that no one feels locked into a career that they entered when they left high school or college. People can change careers many times during a lifetime -- it's becoming very commonplace. In high school there is a lot of emphasis on determining a career path, because this has implications for whether you go to technical school or a particular college where a specialty is offered. However, after several years if you decide you want a new career (even if you really LIKED what you were doing), go for it. This is not really starting over because you draw on many of the skill sets and ability to make work relationships etc that are important in other kinds of careers.
The "system" is designed for the majority of this species that needs that kind of direction, being told what to do etc. It's the individuals that will rise above that that decide their own way. And every once in awhile there are teachers that see these individuals and hopefully encourage them in a good way!
Stereotyping always lead to missing the point.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
Isn't this all ur generation's fault. U guys designed everything, how we get educated. Everything related to our education and our upbringing got designed by ur generation, so if u hate us then u shouldn't atleast blame us for being us.
Everyone hates the thing they create.
Why repeat it three times?
"'Extremely High Voltage.' Well, I don't need safety gloves, because I'm Homer Simpson--" - Frank Grimes
Uh, it's a movie, it's fiction. Yer upset with someone who doesn't exist. Let me axe you something else. Do you like string?
shareHaven't seen the Get a Job movie yet, but I'm sure that movie is pretty much a portrayal of your whole post.
sharePretty sick of the anti-millennial sentiments that people of generations-past seem to have.
This film in no way demonizes Natalie. In fact, she's painted in a positive light. She's an incredibly hard worker, trying to get her life together.
The film more so demonizes people like Ryan and Alex.
I don't feel enough for you to cry.
Oh well.
Hm.
I think all the characters in the film have flaws to a varied extent. While Natalie is a hard worker and does have a certain level of self awareness, she also suffers from the common problem of younger people whatever the generation. And that is not knowing what she doesn't know. The problem then becomes what attitude people have to that problem, meaning do they acknowledge it and try to learn, or to ignore that there is a problem.
Natalie's growth in the story comes when she is smart enough to recognize that there are some things she doesn't know. And she sets about to learn how to overcome that lack of knowledge. In short she learns from experience.
The extent to which the film by contrast demonizes Alex is a very complex question. Many people conclude and take for granted that others should that Alex is virtually, or in fact, evil. While I certainly do not approve of her choices and actions, I can't quite bring myself to conclude she is that bad. She in fact takes Ryan as she first finds him and assumes that is who he is. It's hard to blame her entirely for the resulting mash up. I will say she should have probably been more aware what was happening between them, especially by the point they go to Ryan's sister's wedding. But we don't really see her going over her thoughts or taking any action on her own after that prior to when Ryan goes to her townhome. after that her coldness to him suggests that she was NOT aware of how she was in effect encouraging Ryan, and was being unfair with him. But I think she was also angry at that point, that as she saw it Ryan had broken the rules. Not defending her, but I found this a somewhat plausible take on her part. (t be clear I not only do not approve of Alex - I find her to be a character it must be very difficult to live in her skin. In a way she is pathetic. But on a moral plane the film, rightly or wrongly compared to real life, does offer reasons to make a wholesale condemnation a bit much.)
As for Ryan, I am not sure it makes sense to see him as demonic, either. His life choices are certainly problematic as many people would see them, and he does misread what is going on with Alex. But there are people out there who find that his way of coping with the world works for them, and I am not sure I can condemn such people.