Want to buy or sell something? Check the classifieds
  • The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

Adult Boys

Status
Not open for further replies.

sheeplady

I'll Lock Up
Bartender
Messages
4,477
Location
Shenandoah Valley, Virginia, USA
Haha, reading this is so weird to me, cause where I'm from, which is an Eastern European country, students in public - that is to say free, daytime universities - have about 40 hours a week of classes, plus all the other stuff you mentioned... I'm not trying to criticize, Lord knows I think they're given too much work, it's just so strange seeing someone complain about 15 hours.. If only I had that schedule in my uni days.. :p

I can't imagine spending that much time in class... when do you have time for labs or sections... the things taught by teaching assistants and therefore not "classes"? Or for a full time professional job... or do most of the students only work 20 hours a week?

I took about 22 hours of classes per week and had about 30 hours of lab. Trying to fit that around my full-time job of 40 hours or more a week has horrific enough.
 

PoppyHeart

New in Town
I can't imagine spending that much time in class... when do you have time for labs or sections... the things taught by teaching assistants and therefore not "classes"? Or for a full time professional job... or do most of the students only work 20 hours a week?

I took about 22 hours of classes per week and had about 30 hours of lab. Trying to fit that around my full-time job of 40 hours or more a week has horrific enough.
Alas, like I said before, the overall attitude seems to be 'you're studying for free... therefore you don't need to have a job and all your time belongs to us'. Nevermind that you have to survive as well, and not everyone has parents willing or able to support them financially way into their twenties. But that's 'free' education for you. Keeping any kind of job with that setup is nigh impossible, and actually actively discouraged by lecturers, imagine that... :eek:
 

Two Types

I'll Lock Up
Messages
5,456
Location
London, UK
All this talk of the hours put in by students made me recall the final term of my first year at university. I had to write five essays and attend one and a half hours lectures per week. I wrote all five essays during the Easter holiday meaning all I had to do was roll out on bed for one and a half hours on a Monday afternoon, the rest of the time was my own.

Looking back, I regret I wasted so much time lazing around - I wish I had wasted it elsewhere.
 

sheeplady

I'll Lock Up
Bartender
Messages
4,477
Location
Shenandoah Valley, Virginia, USA
Alas, like I said before, the overall attitude seems to be 'you're studying for free... therefore you don't need to have a job and all your time belongs to us'. Nevermind that you have to survive as well, and not everyone has parents willing or able to support them financially way into their twenties. But that's 'free' education for you. Keeping any kind of job with that setup is nigh impossible, and actually actively discouraged by lecturers, imagine that... :eek:

Yeah... that is a free education to us. Most people are actively discouraged from working here too. They fail to understand that not everybody is middle class and has parents who pay for everything.

Still I'm boggled that you had 30 hours of lab on top of 40 hours of classes. I'm surprised people worked that kind of schedule teaching... you must have spent 7 days a week in class with 12 hour days! And still have three hours of work for each hour of class time- that's another 120 hours a week!
 

JonnyO

A-List Customer
Messages
463
Location
Troy, NY
I've always found the idea of Spring Break ludicrous. The idea that parents willingly pay for their children (young adult, whatever) to fly off to another state/country for a week long drinking binge is absurd.

Please tell me I'm not alone in thinking like this..
I'm 23 and I find this insane. I have worked every spring break since I got my first job at the age of 16. I sickens me the way a lot of my peers act and dress. I am guilty of wearing shorts, sleeveless shirts, and flip flops, but that is usually at the gym or on my way to or from a hockey game.

I usually work the night shift at my job, so I get a few weird looks when I dress in nice clothes, but its somewhat understandable because its just myself and one other person in the whole building. I worked the day shift for a week or so a few months ago and I wore dress pants, button downs, and bow ties. You should have heard the comments I got, it drove me nuts. Apparently only our Commissioner and Director can dress nicely.
 
Used to be true, certainly. With the new regime of repayment locking you into 25-30 years of guaranteed debt, however (whoever said this mob didn't like bankers?), this is no longer the case. I repaid all my student loans - on the old regime - in 3 years, having ramped up my repayments to ensure this was the case. AND our interest rate was set at a maximum of 0.5% below the rate of inflation, meaning that for the final year of my repayments, money was coming OFF the amount due, inflation being 0.25%.

Here, you can work part-time or borrow money, on extremely favourable terms, to pay your way through University
 
Funny how it seems I had so much more drinking time then then I have now with merely a 9 to 5 job... :rolleyes:

We drank beer in class. I had one grad school professor who told us the only way we would fail the class is if we failed to bring the beer on our designated days.

And when I started working 9-5, we could drink (and smoke) at work and at lunch. It wasn't quite Mad Men, but it wasn't so frowned upon as it is now.
 
All this talk of the hours put in by students made me recall the final term of my first year at university. I had to write five essays and attend one and a half hours lectures per week. I wrote all five essays during the Easter holiday meaning all I had to do was roll out on bed for one and a half hours on a Monday afternoon, the rest of the time was my own.

Looking back, I regret I wasted so much time lazing around - I wish I had wasted it elsewhere.

I took one class at university where I was the only student. I met the professor once. I had to write one paper. That was my entire grade. But it was a LONG paper.
 
Messages
13,473
Location
Orange County, CA
Of course, in the '30s only a tiny fraction of Americans were college students, most of them representing the moneyed elite. All the honest people were either working thru the spring or looking for work.

A culture that bases itself on the habits of the degenerate upper classes is only hastening its own doom.

And sadly, you now need a college degree for jobs that used to be considered working class jobs. As somebody said either here or somewhere else, a college degree is the new high school diploma.
 

DesertDan

One Too Many
Messages
1,583
Location
Arizona
I grew up in a very agricultural area. Spring Break originally started as a time children were out of school to help prepare for spring planting season on family farms. That died out with the increased mechanization and corporatization of farming, but the tradition remained.
 

jlee562

I'll Lock Up
Messages
5,108
Location
San Francisco, CA
Some random thoughts....

On the "modern culture of intoxication," this is looking back at history through rosy glasses. Beyond the general sentiment that it's not hard to see how the vast majority of cultures throughout history have imbibed some mind altering substance, it's not even that hard to find examples from our recent history. Meprobromate, marketed from the late 50's-60's as "Miltown," was a mild tranquilizer that was widely prescribed during the time. In 1957, over 36mil prescriptions had been filled, accounting for about 21% of the population at the time.

See, for example: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/h...html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink&_r=1&
Within months, the drug had become the best-selling drug ever marketed in the United States, and pharmacies could not keep it on their shelves. Signs reading “Out of Miltown” and “Miltown Available Tomorrow” became familiar sights on drugstore windows.

Time magazine ran a story about “pills for the mind,” foreshadowing its later coverage of the Prozac phenomenon. The comedian Milton Berle started calling himself “Miltown Berle.”

For many people struggling with disabling anxiety and depression, Miltown brought almost instant, though typically short-lived, relief. The drug was also sold under the name Equanil by the drug maker Wyeth.

Andrea Tone, a professor of history in the department of medicine at McGill University and author of the forthcoming book “The Age of Anxiety: A History of America’s Turbulent Affair With Tranquilizers” (Basic Books), said that Miltown was the first psychiatric drug to have wide cultural impact.

“This was a period, after the war, the 1950s, when Americans were working hard and felt entitled to something that could get them through the day,” Dr. Tone said in an interview. “And what was so attractive about this drug was, many people taking it did not think they had anything seriously wrong and did not refer to themselves as psychiatric patients. For many it was emotional aspirin, a peace pill.”

Now, if you look at the National Drug Use survey today, one would see that this rivals the levels of marijuana use today (about 15% say that they have used in the past year, about 9% in the past month).

So it strains credulity to argue that there's anything "modern" about a supposed "culture of intoxication." Pre-prohibition, ciders and "near beers" were actually the drink of choice, as the safety of the water supply could not be guaranteed. Different metrics produce different results, but there's no metric which indicates that the US population as whole is drinking more today than yesteryear. One 2010 Gallup poll, for example, which the then-current spike to 67% actually matched the high point in 1946. Others have found that as a general trend, alcohol consumption is down.

Simply, the world of 2013 is not the world of the 1940's. Yes, there are a lot of folks moving back in with their parents. You really think any kid really, truly wants to move back in with their parents? It's not this generation's fault that manufacturing has been outsourced since before most of us were born. Nor is it our fault that the globalization of the world economy (and technological change) has simply changed the economic needs of today's society creating less blue collar jobs and more jobs which require a college education. Nor is it our fault that the cost of education has gotten to point where most folks cannot afford this on their own. Neither the institutions of government, economics, or education, have been directed by the whims of the current 30 and under crowd. We're getting by in the world we inherited. And yes, to answer Foxer55's point, those institutions are run by rich, white, men.

As far as deliberately trying to look "unsuccessful," I can't agree that's the case. If you look at a pop culture figure like say, Jay Z, although he can be found in a suit every once in a while, by in large he wears very casual clothing. Guy's also got millions flowing out of his pockets. Say what you will about hip hop (I'm not particularly a fan myself), but the focus of mainstream hip hop isn't about portraying oneself as unsuccessful. Quite to the contrary. There's been a trend in hip hop to celebrate luxury. Turning back to JayZ, for years, he basically promoted Cristal champagne. In his own words:
From the first time I rapped the line "You like Dom, maybe this Cristal will change your life" on my first album, hip-hop has raised the profile of Cristal. No one denies that. But we were unpaid endorsers of the brand — which we thought was okay, because it was a two-way street. We used their brand as a signifier of luxury and they got free advertising and credibility every time we mentioned it. We were trading cachet. But they didn't see it that way.

A journalist at The Economist asked Frederic Rouzaud, the managing director of the company that makes Cristal: "Do you think your brand is hurt by its association with the 'bling lifestyle'?" This was Rouzaud's reply: "That's a good question, but what can we do? We can't forbid people from buying it." He also said that he looked on the association between Cristal and hip-hop with "curiosity and serenity." The Economist printed the quote under the heading "Unwelcome Attention." That was like a slap in the face. You can argue all you want about Rouzaud's statements and try to justify them or whatever, but the tone is clear. When asked about an influential segment of his market, his response was, essentially, well, we can't stop them from drinking it. That was it for me.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,2032217,00.html#ixzz2cYmruIdS

While you may perceive a more casual style of dress as trying to put off an "unsuccessful" vibe, I would vehemently disagree that is true as a general statement. Per the example of Jay Z, the template for "success" is not defined by high waisted trousers and a dapper fedora.

None of which is to argue that I don't agree with certain points made in this thread. But I've also experienced much different things. I went to SF State, and by far, most of my classmates worked full or part time jobs while attending full time classes. Things are probably different at the UC level (although even then, most of the people I know at UC Berkeley were working as well), so it's not as if there aren't working college students out there.
 

LizzieMaine

Bartender
Messages
33,835
Location
Where The Tourists Meet The Sea
On the "modern culture of intoxication," this is looking back at history through rosy glasses. Beyond the general sentiment that it's not hard to see how the vast majority of cultures throughout history have imbibed some mind altering substance, it's not even that hard to find examples from our recent history. Meprobromate, marketed from the late 50's-60's as "Miltown," was a mild tranquilizer that was widely prescribed during the time. In 1957, over 36mil prescriptions had been filled, accounting for about 21% of the population at the time.

But somehow I was raised in a culture which used none of these things. The only members of my family who drank alcohol -- at all -- were my grandfather and one of his brothers. And they weren't allowed to have it in the house. None of the rest of us drank -- we were raised to believe that the idea of drunkeness of any kind, whether by liquor or by drugs, was shameful and disgraceful. And I still find it so. And I find the modern exaltation of it, the whole "look at me puking all over the floor on Facebook acting like a drunken idiot" phenomenon, the idea that not only is it understandable for people to drink or dope themselves into a stupor but that this is something to be celebrated to be, as I said before, disgusting, as is any attempt to rationalize it. No rosy glasses at all.

(And lest you think I was raised in some kind of extreme fundamentalist cult, I wasn't. We were ordinary mid-twentieth-century New England Methodists.)

I know a girl about to turn twenty-one, a reasonably intelligent, responsible young woman. But her big ambition for her 21st birthday is to "go out and get smashed." Not "go out and enjoy a glass of wine or beer in moderation for the pleasant feeling of relaxation it induces." She wants to "go out and get smashed."

That's utterly inconceivable to me, that anyone would aspire to that as any kind of a worthwhile goal or consider it any kind of adult rite of passage. This is a girl who's had to drag her own boyfriend out of a puddle of his own vomited beer binge. You'd think she'd know better. But that's what she learns from today's Culture of Intoxication -- Get drunk and stupid! It's what Grown-Ups Do! -- and it makes me sick to the stomach to think of it. It's repulsive.
 
Last edited:

jlee562

I'll Lock Up
Messages
5,108
Location
San Francisco, CA
But somehow I was raised in a culture which used none of these things. The only members of my family who drank alcohol -- at all -- were my grandfather and one of his brothers. And they weren't allowed to have it in the house. None of the rest of us drank -- we were raised to believe that the idea of drunkeness of any kind, whether by liquor or by drugs, was shameful and disgraceful. And I still find it so. And I find the modern exaltation of it, the whole "look at me puking all over the floor on Facebook acting like a drunken idiot" phenomenon, the idea that not only is it understandable for people to drink or dope themselves into a stupor but that this is something to be celebrated to be, as I said before, disgusting, as is any attempt to rationalize it. No rosy glasses at all.

(And lest you think I was raised in some kind of extreme fundamentalist cult, I wasn't. We were ordinary mid-twentieth-century New England Methodists.)

I know a girl about to turn twenty-one, a reasonably intelligent, responsible young woman. But her big ambition for her 21st birthday is to "go out and get smashed." Not "go out and enjoy a glass of wine or beer in moderation for the pleasant feeling of relaxation it induces." She wants to "go out and get smashed."

That's utterly inconceivable to me, that anyone would aspire to that as any kind of a worthwhile goal or consider it any kind of adult rite of passage. This is a girl who's had to drag her own boyfriend out of a puddle of his own vomited beer binge. You'd think she'd know better. But that's what she learns from today's Culture of Intoxication -- Get drunk and stupid! It's what Grown-Ups Do! -- and it makes me sick to the stomach to think of it. It's repulsive.

I'm not discounting your experience. I'm merely pointing out that the idea that modern society has a fundamentally different relationship to drugs/alcohol isn't backed up by the evidence. Drug and alcohol use has ebbed and flowed, but we are not today at a severely different point with it than this country has been in the past.

You do make a good point about binge drinking, which is a rather modern phenomena. I would not say that this delineates into a "modern culture of intoxication," however.
 

VintageBee

One of the Regulars
Messages
105
Location
Northern California
I grew up in a very agricultural area. Spring Break originally started as a time children were out of school to help prepare for spring planting season on family farms. That died out with the increased mechanization and corporatization of farming, but the tradition remained.

Today, I was surprised and pleased to hear there are 18 year olds working in the hot summer sun to harvest our neighbors prune plum orchard. Years ago we could still do this while under the age of 16...it was our summer job. Not anymore. Some 'child' might learn 'hard work'...I realize years ago there were child labor violations of the worst sort, but today? It's the rare 18 year old that has an idea of what that is!
 

VintageBee

One of the Regulars
Messages
105
Location
Northern California
We had three children under the age of 6 years old once and until they all left the house, we abstained fromhaving anything other than red wine (for cooking) in the house. They all got smashed a few times when they first left..that subsided after a bit. They also once a year, maybe, as children, got fast food to eat because it was so expensive and we didn't have that money to waste. When they left home they each inhaled fast food at first... (2 out of 3 are first responders) but that got old... And pretty soon guess who came back home to eat/learn how to cook??!!
I think regardless of the sex, they seem to try whatever we parents say 'no' to just to see we are telling the truth! LOL!!
Just ask my sons and daughter how crazy they thought being taught 'courting' was...they appreciate it now 
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
109,667
Messages
3,086,319
Members
54,480
Latest member
PISoftware
Top