So, is this panic warranted?  Are youth in more danger now than they were when rock music first took over?  Yes, the world is a different place today.  We know that sexual predators exist, and that bullies are taking their work online, you can connect with people at the touch of a button and arrange to meet. We also know that youth feel more alienated than ever, spend more time at home alone, and have incredible technology available to help them reach out and connect with others.  We created the tools, and now they are using them to their advantage.

And then there is also the problem of relationships and the concern that this group will not be able to form successful relationships offline.  This is a tricky one, if for no other reason than the youth who are most affected are still growing up, so we are going to have to wait and see. 

Personally, I am optimistic  that the relationships with be fine.  As human beings we feel the desire to form relationships with people, and I think once these kids graduate high school and move out of their parents’ homes (whether for university or work) and there is less parental pressure to be careful and monitored all the time, they will have the time and ability to get offline more.  I think that’s what you see with Facebook – which is targeted at an older demographic – there is communication, sharing of photos and clips, friending, but there is also invitations to events to meet up offline.  I am on Facebook with many of my friends, I don’t accept invitations from people I don’t care to be friends with, and we mostly share pictures and invite each other to do things.  We are at work all day so we crave meeting up with our friends when the day is done.  It is similar to what was discussed in the Hodkinson article about goth online communication – they would communicate online, but mostly to plan an activity that was offline.

Of course we are older, we already know the joy of forming personal relationships, but I suspect as this group matures they will feel the same need, and many will outgrow myspace (just as some have already outgrown Xanga) as their primary method of forming relationships. 

That was helpful, at this point I shall answer in response to Nussbaum’s question I know which side of the fence I am on now – power on, myspace, and whatever may come next . . .

As Nussbaum says in her closing sentence, “But the real question is, as with any revolution, which side are you on?”

I am having a really hard time deciding my opinion on the whole myspace/Facebook phenomenon.  And the more I research it for this project, the harder it is for me to form a solid opinion.  Is it because I myself am on the edge of Gen X and Y, so have the cynical side of Gen X combined with the optimistic views of Gen Y?  Whatever the reason, it is harder and harder for me to form an opinion – and I better get my head around it soon in order to write a decent paper! 

My current strategy is to write it out until I have some clarity . . .

My initial thoughts are that while sexual predators were once a real threat online in chat rooms, that ship has sailed.  Yes, people should be cautious, but I suspect today’s youth are quite prepared to identify and/or ignore sexual predators online.  (There are many quotes from teens saying just that in Generation MYSPACE by Candice Kelsey – it is written to teach/warn parents about myspace, but has great quotes from teens, too.)

On the other hand, the popular media still screams at me to beware!  And while I am out of personal danger myself, does a 12 year old girl really have enough life experience to be able to judge if the person who ‘friends’ her and tells her she’s hot has reasonable intentions?  Or is in fact the 14 year old boy he says he is?

But then I come back to the idea that surely this 12 year old girl knows not to give her address or phone number out.  And then I read some random myspace pages and see that actually, some people do give out their numbers on their myspace page – what?!?

To be continued . . .

In the Crawford reading On Work a point that really resonates with me is that while older generations are pointing a finger at younger generations for their “restless” behaviour regarding work, perhaps we should consider that the younger generation is just reacting to the environment in which they find themselves.  It is very easy to call this group of workers restless, relaxed, disobedient, power-hungry – but to be fair they have grown up in a time when no one can expect to have the same job their entire lives, travel and communication technology make it possible to work globally, more work is of contract basis, etc.  They have simply learned from the experiences of previous generations – try not to burn out, your job is not your entire life, there is nothing wrong with having some fun at work.

Something else that really affected me was her point that young workers were not represented in the ads against the Workplace reforms in 2006/2007; the government regularly speaks to hetero-normative families in their communication, sending the message that adults (and parents) are the most important people in society.  I find the same thing in many ads and commentary on television – one car commercial in particular makes me angry every time I see it, it is for some luxury SUV and it shows the happy family driving along and they pass their neighbour, a seemingly single wealthy (and tasteless) man and the ad ‘punishes’ him for having a fancy sports car and huge house – again emphasising values of family over that of someone without a wife and kids.  This ad is not the best example of youth being marginalised, but it is another example of how Australian culture values the traditional family over all else, and all others need to look out for themselves.

Something that I wanted to question in this reading was on page 73 where she discusses that age is the new way to explain uncertainties in employment, in the 1980s it was gender because more women were in the workplace.  We know that as a result of more women in the workplace, more jobs were created in other sectors (childcare, house cleaning, wedding planning, laundrettes, and other traditional women’s roles).  I think I have just answered my own question – we know NOW that as a result of more women in the workplace more opportunities have become available.  And I suppose that was an easy target back then for employment concerns, just as it is easy to point to youth as the scapegoat for the changing work environment now.  

Something else that is interesting relating to that idea is that places where I have worked have implemented flexible working schedules for the employees who were parents (again rewarding a hetero-normative family life) - and if a non-parent asked for some flexibility they were being unreasonable, it's not like they had anything else important to get home to if they did not have children.  So it goes back to the point that yes, younger generations expect a flexible workplace, but you hear story after story of flexible workplaces (put in place to attract families), so why shouldn't they expect it?

I think part of the online revolution is an act of rebellion against previous generations’ tendency to keep everything private.  If you are a sexual person, why hide it?  Secretly love playing the accordion – celebrate it!  Online life makes it okay to just be yourself, because eventually you will find someone else online who also loves the same ‘uncool’ things you do.  And really, doesn’t everyone have an interest or habit that is dominantly uncool?   Come out of your ‘uncool’ closet and be yourself!  This seems to be something the younger generation is able to embrace more than any other previous generation, and they really put themselves out there.  Listing favourite bands, movies, books, and posting photos of themselves they find attractive or artistic, regardless of what others may think – this is who they are.

Older generations may use the internet for email, banking and the news highlights, but the idea of their kids being online and having their own MySpace or Facebook is still frightening for many parents.  Look at how Facebook was put in a negative light because of the Corey Worthington incident, and how many times have we seen the news warn parents about perverts and pornography on the internet?  I want to focus this post on this second point – adults fear over sex and the internet as a Folk Devil.

The youth of today have grown up with the internet, and have learned what sites to avoid, or more likely, to laugh off (Nussbaum).  While growing up in previous generations, your first glimpse of pornography may have been a secret stash of Playboy someone’s father had, today that first glimpse will no doubt be online.  Has the availability given youth a more relaxed perception about sex? Perhaps, but I don’t think that is such a bad thing.  From Ben-Amos article (and biology!) we know that adolescence has always been a time centred around sex, whether parents want to admit it or not.  And the more hidden a topic is the more likely teens will want to explore it.  Is a teen more likely to start having sex because they are on Facebook?  I doubt it.  Will a teen post sexy pictures of themselves on Facebook to gauge how attractive they are to others?  Probably.  Is this worse (or fundamentally different) than sneaking out of the house in a mini skirt, stilettos and revealing top to go to a party?  Not really.   

Teens want to experiment, regardless of the internet’s presence, and most likely will not share details with their parents.  This is nothing new, but the internet is an easy target for parents who are scared of their children growing up too soon.

The movie Mean Girls was so brilliant because it was so accurate.  The story captured female adolescent life (at least in America) perfectly.  After reading the Foucault article about Discipline and Punishment, I was thinking about the ‘Norm’ and how that can be so important to youths.

On the one hand, in order to fit in with a clique, you must conform to the Norm of that group.  Taking an example from the movie, if the clique wear pink on Mondays, and you don’t wear pink one Monday, you can expect to be punished by the group - probably by exclusion.  If you do not wish to conform to any group, you can expect to spend a few lonely years in high school.

At the same time, youth style (whether subculture or not) is about not looking like their parents; youth are attracted to irreverence (alluded to in Hebdige relating to the punk subculture, but I find it is prevalent in most youth), playfulness, standing out from the crowd, making their mark – they want to vary from the adult Norm. 

Members of the current youth generation do not want to just match what they see in a magazine, or what everyone else on the street wearing, but they pick certain items they like and make it their own (bricolage as mentioned in Hebdige).  Ironically, by doing this they are creating a youth look (a new Norm!) of 'non-conforming', when the whole point was to look like an individual.  And youth must conform to this ‘non-conforming’ look or else be punished, through non-acceptance of the groups wearing the ‘non-conforming’ style.

I have been thinking a lot about whether I think of youth as male or female, and I must admit that most of the time I am associating youth subcultures and styles with males (except Goth and Emo subcultures).  If I reflect back to my own teen years, I recall the females having cliques, but I am not certain I would go so far as to say they were subcultures or necessarily had varying styles.

I’m thinking of focusing my project on how female youth communicate trends online, and if this is different to males.  One specific area I will focus on for this project is fashion trends, and this idea of youth equalling male has really made me think of this in a different light.  If we are constantly generalising youth to mean male youths, does that mean online use is stronger with males?  Certainly all young people are more comfortable and reliant on the internet than previous generations have been, but do the genders vary in the use of the internet?  And can something like fashion be communicated primarily online, when it has such a strong history based in print magazines? 

It is all tied up in consumerism as well, since fashion, youth, style and subcultures are all directly related to consuming goods. We read in the Savage article about teens and consumerism being linked together, and we read in Hebdige that the relationship with consumption is even stronger in subcultures in order to strengthen the style of the group.  Historically we also know that women are seen as the main consumers in society.  So who really is creating the idea/images of youth if we think primarily of males but females make up the most consumers?  And are magazines or the internet more valuable for communicating the trends of this group?

I feel like I’ve got a billion ideas running through my mind, and am hoping for that ‘ah-ha!’ moment to come soon to help me solidify this project . . .

I will have to research the current online trends taking a critical look at any differences between male and female youth.  I am also going to look up the books/articles Glen mentioned in class about whether youth means boys (Driscoll and McRobbie & Gerber) – off to the library this afternoon for some work on this!

My dissertation has to do with youth communicating trends online, so I want to focus my project in this same area.  It’s hard to know specifically what I’ll focus on at this stage, but some thoughts to date:

• What role does the internet have on authentic styles becoming mainstream (relating to what we learned about Hebdige the other night).  Growing up in SLC I witnessed firsthand authentic snow style being picked up until eventually it became mainstream – not only were there unauthentic brands starting up to target non-snow scene kids, but also some authentic brands extending their ranges to encourage non-snow kids to buy.  So I guess I’m saying I completely aggress with Hebdige that it happens, and so looking at how important the internet is in the cycle.

• The role the internet has on perpetuating the celebrity status goal of many youth. 

• Are there any youth subcultures that communicate solely online?  And if they just communicate online and their style isn’t visible outside (perhaps to adults not online) is it really a subculture?

• Has the internet made it more likely for people in different subcultures to form connections with one another that they would not have otherwise?  Particularly if the subcultures are reacting to the same dominant culture.

• What things do youth communicate not online – are there specific areas/trends that are still only word of mouth or magazines, or is it all online?

• I thought the point raised in class about youth meaning just male was really interesting.  So maybe something about whether the internet has allowed females more of a voice, or less, or neither.

Okay, more thinking to be done over the weekend about this!