Personality Cafe banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,600 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
"Rebellion" has long been association with "youth". What kind of relationship do young people have with authority nowadays?

Not necassarily with your parents, teachers, bosses, etc., but the idea of there being a greater power telling you what to do. Do you feel as though there is anyone or anything to rebel against?

I ask this for a few different reasons. Even though young people today don't discuss this in as blatant of terms in the past, I tend to think we are less trusting in general. My theory is that we are able to just be less direct about it thanks to our environment.

Part of this imo is because of what happened prior to us entering the world. All of the youth revolutions, anti-establishment movements. While we still feel we have much to reform today, it is hard to deny the social change brought by the (particularly the late) twentieth century. I'll refrain from boring anyone with too many examples. But anyway, those who are now the parents/adults running the show either participated in or grew up with this culture. I think these ideas have finally been "absorbed" into the mass psyche after years of toying with them. While certainly not fully engrained, they are at least are aware of it and would therefore not see "rebellious youth" as the destructive thing it was in the past. The environment has essentially been previously set for it to be okay to question things. It is not surprising for a young person to have radical ideas nowadays, without necessarily making them appear deviant in any way. And then maybe being "bad" isn't so cool anymore, after that notion having become fully engrained as well. It has rather become a social norm, something a little bit "expected". Though maybe we're just desensitized and now fully exerting certain abilities.

I also think that the atmosphere we have grown up in hasn't been particularly condusive to trusting authority. Growing up in the Bush administration for instance, you would've heard about immense distrust of the government from a young age. Fast forward to present day, where there is seemingly less faith in any presidental candidate than ever. But do we even expect anything different? We live in an age of security, but do we feel any more protected? Many of us likely have attended rather strict schools, plagued with what make headlines as "stupid" rules. How will this go on to affect us; has the belief that "the man" doesn't care finally caught up with us enough to collectively believe it? Seems that way to me, with the ease that so many people seem able to trash the system. Sure young people are whined about being entitled, being the "everybody gets a trophy" generation. And maybe there's some truth to that. But maybe it's also a means of looking out for oneself in an era filled with corruption, surveillance and debt.

Also, what authority means certainly has changed. Perhaps social media accounts represent a type of peer monitored online authority. It is arguable that following the rules of a society has always been in regards to fitting in. Maybe the traditional sense of authority has simply been replaced?

Any thoughts? Do people feel as though there is a system to fight? Is it simply expected at this point, or do you not think about it at all?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
Back when I was 12 I was that one kid that hated people belittling me just because of my age, but I handled it an a immature way. That was the peak of my angst, even if it was a family member, or a teacher, I would talk back or just didint do it, just because of how they said it. I still will not tolerate any injustice no matter what age that person will be, but I'm not going to be a little shit about it for no reason. If it's real belittling then I'm gonna stand up and say something. I still will get pissed off too no end if somebody is doing something wrong, but I handle it in a much better way then I did when I was 12-14.

I see a lot of people try to "stand up" or be angst nowadays, it's always for stupid reasons though like if a teacher tells them to do a simple thing like be quiet for a minute, it's always a whole shit fit for nothing. It's embarrassing for the rest of the class. Though angst and rebaliance is always a common thing with teens, it's just how and when you use it that matters.

Nowadays theirs not many rebeling in this decade, but when their is, somebody will stand up, espeacially on the interwebz.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,080 Posts
I guess I have a cooperative relationship with authority. I have respect for their power and I generally show respect in my efforts to do what I'm told. Inside I sometimes feel a little negative about it though. I don't like the fact that leaders in the workplace place the top importance on the efficiency of the restaurant (for example). When it comes down to it its always about what is best for business. I can be open and honest, and close to someone my elder, but I never can feel very close to authority like my former boss, my teachers, and even my dad, because I feel I'm supposed to be respectful and I'm there to serve their rules, first and foremost. Its hard not to be extremely distant.

(I wasn't necessarily supposed to use those examples but that's my only experience).

Don't really understand the question to be honest. Do I think there's a system to fight? I don't like the system and I want to live differently from it. I want to be away from the overly materialistic lifestyle and I want a job that aligns with a simpler way of life that doesn't lend itself to the big corporate economic system where everything is cheap but its produced by machines in boring ways for the workers. Everything is a little too much like giant assembly line. Its ok, not the worst thing, but my dream is just to live differently from that. I wouldn't call it fighting the system. I would live in the system if need be and be happy. Its just how our world is now.
 

·
Registered
INTJ
Joined
·
1,409 Posts
I really, really hate authority. I have huge authority issues (which may also come from being a rather independent only child). I cannot stand being told what to do, and if I am, I'll do the exact opposite. For a long time, I repressed it because it's better and more efficient to work within a bureaucracy, but now that I'm in college...being patronized is basically the biggest insult to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,600 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I guess I have a cooperative relationship with authority. I have respect for their power and I generally show respect in my efforts to do what I'm told. Inside I sometimes feel a little negative about it though. I don't like the fact that leaders in the workplace place the top importance on the efficiency of the restaurant (for example). When it comes down to it its always about what is best for business. I can be open and honest, and close to someone my elder, but I never can feel very close to authority like my former boss, my teachers, and even my dad, because I feel I'm supposed to be respectful and I'm there to serve their rules, first and foremost. Its hard not to be extremely distant.

(I wasn't necessarily supposed to use those examples but that's my only experience).

Don't really understand the question to be honest. Do I think there's a system to fight? I don't like the system and I want to live differently from it. I want to be away from the overly materialistic lifestyle and I want a job that aligns with a simpler way of life that doesn't lend itself to the big corporate economic system where everything is cheap but its produced by machines in boring ways for the workers. Everything is a little too much like giant assembly line. Its ok, not the worst thing, but my dream is just to live differently from that. I wouldn't call it fighting the system. I would live in the system if need be and be happy. Its just how our world is now.
I guess I didn't really intend to ask a direct question as much as pose a discussion topic. But thank you, you did it "answer" it quite well!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,080 Posts
I guess I didn't really intend to ask a direct question as much as pose a discussion topic. But thank you, you did it "answer" it quite well!
Cool. Well, I'm also interested to hear how other people of my generation view authority. We're called the "lazy generation". But that seems somewhat hypocritical because how could "laziness" be the fault of an entire generation? Obviously the way our society as a whole is moving, and the way we were influenced by our parents has a lot to do with the widespread laziness of youth.

Honestly, that's the main thing that occasionally ticks me off about my dad, and some other people with authority. They want to judge/blame us for all of our own issues, while at the same time having had power over the way we grew up. Its not that they are worse human beings, I don't think. But its definitely unfair and hypocritical of them.

I think anyone with authority is capable of this, as so many parents are. The thing is, I know I too am capable of it. Its hard in my own life to cope with this type of unfairness, but we have to just try to be better (more forgiving, too) because otherwise, we're just doing the exact same things that have caused us pain. Thought I'd mention that, because I didn't want to say something angry without providing something hopeful as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miss Thevious

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,627 Posts
I respect authority that has a proven superiority to me or at least makes sense to me. Teachers have to prove themselves capable to earn my respect, the same goes for my parents as well. Though it may sound harsh, the elders in my life have continually lost my respect as I see them as a collection of the most reprehensible individuals I have met, thus I do not heed what they say or do not acknowledge their 'authority'. If I find any authority wanting, then it will promptly lose my respect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,600 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Cool. Well, I'm also interested to hear how other people of my generation view authority. We're called the "lazy generation". But that seems somewhat hypocritical because how could "laziness" be the fault of an entire generation? Obviously the way our society as a whole is moving, and the way we were influenced by our parents has a lot to do with the widespread laziness of youth.

Honestly, that's the main thing that occasionally ticks me off about my dad, and some other people with authority. They want to judge/blame us for all of our own issues, while at the same time having had power over the way we grew up. Its not that they are worse human beings, I don't think. But its definitely unfair and hypocritical of them.

I think anyone with authority is capable of this, as so many parents are. The thing is, I know I too am capable of it. Its hard in my own life to cope with this type of unfairness, but we have to just try to be better (more forgiving, too) because otherwise, we're just doing the exact same things that have caused us pain. Thought I'd mention that, because I didn't want to say something angry without providing something hopeful as well.
Ahh yes the old "lazy" and "entitled" description of young people. The oldest in the book! (Btw I'm 21, so I don't mean any of this as Gen Y versus Gen Z. I feel rather caught in the middle.) Is there truth to it, yes; and is it overexaggerated; yes.

Part of it I would say is a constant, due to just generally being young and inexperienced. Of course young people are going to get out into the world and find out things are "hard", it is what it is. Don't the current crop of adults remember that? Pretty sure they were whined about by the Greatest Generation way back when. One big chunk of generational theory for me is the idea that the young will always be young, and the old will always be old. Status quo against newness will forever prevail. (Though I do think the generation gap is closing, but that is a different rant!)

And as you say, aren't we just a product of the world they created? With the way people now complain about a generation of "participation trophies", for example, with coddling and whatnot, one must ask, why did they do that then? Perhaps they found the world unecessarily rough during their own childhoods, and sought to fix it? And if they perceive it to have failed, well, who started it all then? While I hate to play the blame game, things usually are the fault of those who came prior. (Though yes, we can end the cycle!)

Direct actions aside, we also can't forget that all of us are just adapting to the time period we are thrown in to. Despite complaints of us having too grand of expectations, we must consider that nowadays young people are much less naive. With so much knowledge available at our finger tips, more people have an idea of what they want, how they should be treated, etc. There is also something to be said of a worsening economy. Debt and executive-to-worker ratios are at an all-time high; cost of living is getting out of control. People at the top don't care (well, about much other than the bottomline) so as a result, neither do those down at the actual bottom. It is not the easiest time to feel particularly motivated. Some of these complaints are very real, yet many are just met with "work harder" and "kids have it so easy nowadays with their iphones". Maybe this is a product of us moving to more of an "educated" society than a "street smart" one.

And then there's the whole dark side. Sure people do use technology to slack off. Maybe it is a giant distraction. I say bad seeds will be bad seeds; they have always been around and always will be. Clearly there's plenty of us around who enjoy thinking through these issues and wish to see societal betterment as a whole.

But again, the issue of course arises, how did is get to be that way. I started thinking up one new angle on this whole "entitlement" issue today: I think a lot of younger people have difficulty with the concept of "place". What I mean by that is an increasing number of people, from kids to young-ish parents, are disregarding how one's behavior/attitude must change from place to place. (Ironic though how people will change their personas with ease, particularly online.) For example, home and school are not the same place. You can't act the same way in a store as you can at home. You can't talk to someone waiting on you as if they were your parent. These types of incidences. Based on my observations, I do think it's a bit of a respect issue. So from these types of scenarios, I can't say that I don't believe there are still certain rules that people need to adhere to. But rather than them being blindly due to some hierarchial authority, they need to be out of basic human respect.

So what has caused this notion among so many that everything is theirs for the taking? I don't think it's necessarily narcissism, but rather just oblivion. Maybe out of being ignored, or maybe the excessive following of rules, but only where they are being patrolled. Unfortunately it seems like a segment of people have difficulty self-policing, forming an actual code of conduct as they go. So while I do think that lack of attention is becoming a problem (thank you cell phones), I also think you could argue that nit-picky intrusions by authority can actually cause people to be less abiding. Perhaps not to the literal rules, but to that which is not immediately addressed within the the rules.

So, my appologies if my thoughts are a convoluted mess. But to summarize, I have a fairly strong belief that telling people what to do, in fact makes them less able (and willing) to make their own decisions and conduct themselves properly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,080 Posts
Ahh yes the old "lazy" and "entitled" description of young people. The oldest in the book! (Btw I'm 21, so I don't mean any of this as Gen Y versus Gen Z. I feel rather caught in the middle.) Is there truth to it, yes; and is it overexaggerated; yes.

Part of it I would say is a constant, due to just generally being young and inexperienced. Of course young people are going to get out into the world and find out things are "hard", it is what it is. Don't the current crop of adults remember that? Pretty sure they were whined about by the Greatest Generation way back when. One big chunk of generational theory for me is the idea that the young will always be young, and the old will always be old. Status quo against newness will forever prevail. (Though I do think the generation gap is closing, but that is a different rant!)

And as you say, aren't we just a product of the world they created? With the way people now complain about a generation of "participation trophies", for example, with coddling and whatnot, one must ask, why did they do that then? Perhaps they found the world unecessarily rough during their own childhoods, and sought to fix it? And if they perceive it to have failed, well, who started it all then? While I hate to play the blame game, things usually are the fault of those who came prior. (Though yes, we can end the cycle!)

Direct actions aside, we also can't forget that all of us are just adapting to the time period we are thrown in to. Despite complaints of us having too grand of expectations, we must consider that nowadays young people are much less naive. With so much knowledge available at our finger tips, more people have an idea of what they want, how they should be treated, etc. There is also something to be said of a worsening economy. Debt and executive-to-worker ratios are at an all-time high; cost of living is getting out of control. People at the top don't care (well, about much other than the bottomline) so as a result, neither do those down at the actual bottom. It is not the easiest time to feel particularly motivated. Some of these complaints are very real, yet many are just met with "work harder" and "kids have it so easy nowadays with their iphones". Maybe this is a product of us moving to more of an "educated" society than a "street smart" one.

And then there's the whole dark side. Sure people do use technology to slack off. Maybe it is a giant distraction. I say bad seeds will be bad seeds; they have always been around and always will be. Clearly there's plenty of us around who enjoy thinking through these issues and wish to see societal betterment as a whole.

But again, the issue of course arises, how did is get to be that way. I started thinking up one new angle on this whole "entitlement" issue today: I think a lot of younger people have difficulty with the concept of "place". What I mean by that is an increasing number of people, from kids to young-ish parents, are disregarding how one's behavior/attitude must change from place to place. (Ironic though how people will change their personas with ease, particularly online.) For example, home and school are not the same place. You can't act the same way in a store as you can at home. You can't talk to someone waiting on you as if they were your parent. These types of incidences. Based on my observations, I do think it's a bit of a respect issue. So from these types of scenarios, I can't say that I don't believe there are still certain rules that people need to adhere to. But rather than them being blindly due to some hierarchial authority, they need to be out of basic human respect.

So what has caused this notion among so many that everything is theirs for the taking? I don't think it's necessarily narcissism, but rather just oblivion. Maybe out of being ignored, or maybe the excessive following of rules, but only where they are being patrolled. Unfortunately it seems like a segment of people have difficulty self-policing, forming an actual code of conduct as they go. So while I do think that lack of attention is becoming a problem (thank you cell phones), I also think you could argue that nit-picky intrusions by authority can actually cause people to be less abiding. Perhaps not to the literal rules, but to that which is not immediately addressed within the the rules.

So, my appologies if my thoughts are a convoluted mess. But to summarize, I have a fairly strong belief that telling people what to do, in fact makes them less able (and willing) to make their own decisions and conduct themselves properly.
Hmm...reminds me of something my dad said to me the other day. I was making some dessert for the whole family. He came in and said (perhaps somewhat jokingly), "you're not on my bad side, you don't have to do that to get on my good side". I said "I know. I'm glad I'm not on your bad side". Him: "You're never on my bad side". After a moment he was like "except for that time when you wouldn't get a job for months, and I was like, -'what the hell is that girl thinking?! I was furious.'-" That made me so angry. I realized that it was because of his assumption that: me being on his bad side would cause me to do something good!

Me being on his bad side has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not I am motivated enough to get a job!

Ahh, another example of the unjust way that authority misuses their power... I'm turning this into the "how fathers are insensitive and stifling dictators" thread. Sorry.

But it reminded me of what you said about telling people what to do making them less able to make positive decisions. My opinion is yes and no. I think there has to be a balance. I think its probably better not to over-advise and over correct children. This is also called parenting out of fear (rather than out of love).

And for authority in general to over-command and tell people what to do for the sake of efficiency or personal gain, I think its just pure selfishness. If the authority (and humanity in general) had their priorities straight, it would be more focused on doing what's best for the employee. Best for the citizens of a nation. Best for the student. etc. And that involves not just telling them what to do and molding them. But loving them and respecting them. It has to be a balance.

I think authority has a role of decision making and ordering. And everyone under authority has the role of honoring that. But that's a superficial level. Necessary, but not deep or meaningful. Just useful. On a deeper level, authority should have JUST as much respect for their children, employees, students, etc., as they should have for authorities. That doesn't mean letting them make the rules. But it does mean respecting them as a human being. Caring for them. Doing what's truly best for their ultimate good.

I don't think that anyone is really better or worse than anyone else, at least not drastically. I would probably do the same in their shoes. Maybe not now that I have this experience. But a bad experience doesn't make a good lesson, automatically. This is why there is little hope for humans to socially "evolve", in my opinion. We can only try to have as much good in us as possible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,600 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Hmm...reminds me of something my dad said to me the other day. I was making some dessert for the whole family. He came in and said (perhaps somewhat jokingly), "you're not on my bad side, you don't have to do that to get on my good side". I said "I know. I'm glad I'm not on your bad side". Him: "You're never on my bad side". After a moment he was like "except for that time when you wouldn't get a job for months, and I was like, -'what the hell is that girl thinking?! I was furious.'-" That made me so angry. I realized that it was because of his assumption that: me being on his bad side would cause me to do something good!

Me being on his bad side has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not I am motivated enough to get a job!

Ahh, another example of the unjust way that authority misuses their power... I'm turning this into the "how fathers are insensitive and stifling dictators" thread. Sorry.

But it reminded me of what you said about telling people what to do making them less able to make positive decisions. My opinion is yes and no. I think there has to be a balance. I think its probably better not to over-advise and over correct children. This is also called parenting out of fear (rather than out of love).

And for authority in general to over-command and tell people what to do for the sake of efficiency or personal gain, I think its just pure selfishness. If the authority (and humanity in general) had their priorities straight, it would be more focused on doing what's best for the employee. Best for the citizens of a nation. Best for the student. etc. And that involves not just telling them what to do and molding them. But loving them and respecting them. It has to be a balance.

I think authority has a role of decision making and ordering. And everyone under authority has the role of honoring that. But that's a superficial level. Necessary, but not deep or meaningful. Just useful. On a deeper level, authority should have JUST as much respect for their children, employees, students, etc., as they should have for authorities. That doesn't mean letting them make the rules. But it does mean respecting them as a human being. Caring for them. Doing what's truly best for their ultimate good.

I don't think that anyone is really better or worse than anyone else, at least not drastically. I would probably do the same in their shoes. Maybe not now that I have this experience. But a bad experience doesn't make a good lesson, automatically. This is why there is little hope for humans to socially "evolve", in my opinion. We can only try to have as much good in us as possible.
You know I'm sorry I meant to respond to you like...a long time ago. :tongue:

Anyway I think you drive home a great point in the little story about your dad. It really got me thinking. Perhaps there is some fallacy among the, let's just say "people in charge", that their, "underlings", "minions" :wink:, whatever we shall call them, desire their approval. Sure this may actually be true to a degree, maybe depending on the personalities involved and the situation. However, I think it simply just works out best for said person in charge, because it allows for easiest manipulation (conscious or not) and obedience. I would say that in most cases, those "not in charge" simply only wish to please enough to not stir the pot. They really just don't want to be on anyone's shit list. The authority taking a liking to them is more of a bonus than a feel-good thing.

Okay so family is a bit different. We want to get along with our family. But I think one idea remains the same: Authority positions itself as higher than the ones it governs over. Therefore, authority is not our peer. We can never be friends. So naturally, we should we care if they like us? As long as we're not directly in trouble, right?

I do see this as a thing we are societally (well except maybe in gov) moving away from, the idea of authority as this big bad unapproachable wolf in charge. A benefit to this is that a lessened hierarchy makes us more willing to participate and make changes.

I just saw this on instagram, is it not the truth?
image.jpg
There must be something in the psyche that makes us want to resist. At least for us self-pres types anyway. But yes I agree that we need balance. Especially with kids, some parents are too laissez-faire and they end up not teaching them anything. And there are good laws and rules out there, I'm not a total anarchist or anything. :wink:

Yes, respect and willingness to not be domineering, that would make good criteria for authority figures. I think sadly that such positions often attract the wrong types. When in reality, it should be a service job. Deciphering other people's needs and putting them before your own. This is where we cross the territory into what makes a "leader".

We seem to also be reaching a day-in-age where people are becoming more able to make their own decisions. With the internet, we have the prowess to become more informed than ever. From medical options to fashion styles, we don't need to go to certain figures the way we used to. This change is affecting not just people, but entire industries, such as magazines and even television. Choice is becoming increasingly feasible.

The real question goes to those in positions of authority. Shall they respond to this increased demand for autonomy, or risk relinquishing what power they have left?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,080 Posts
You know I'm sorry I meant to respond to you like...a long time ago. :tongue:
no problem!
Anyway I think you drive home a great point in the little story about your dad. It really got me thinking. Perhaps there is some fallacy among the, let's just say "people in charge", that their, "underlings", "minions" :wink:, whatever we shall call them, desire their approval. Sure this may actually be true to a degree, maybe depending on the personalities involved and the situation. However, I think it simply just works out best for said person in charge, because it allows for easiest manipulation (conscious or not) and obedience. I would say that in most cases, those "not in charge" simply only wish to please enough to not stir the pot. They really just don't want to be on anyone's shit list. The authority taking a liking to them is more of a bonus than a feel-good thing.
I find this a strange and somewhat unhealthy dynamic. And it happens on both sides. Authority figures can want it, but underlings can also want it, or derive some sort of satisfaction from it. I have been like that before. With parents, my old bosses, coworkers, and just about everyone (even people not in authority :p)

Okay so family is a bit different. We want to get along with our family. But I think one idea remains the same: Authority positions itself as higher than the ones it governs over. Therefore, authority is not our peer. We can never be friends. So naturally, we should we care if they like us? As long as we're not directly in trouble, right?
Good point. In some ways we're not peers. Peers have the role of being with each other. A good friend may give advice, but does not order around. But at the same time, I think that element of friendship exists within parent-child relationships. If the parent can give orders without manipulation and unfairness. In other words, if there is trust.

I do see this as a thing we are societally (well except maybe in gov) moving away from, the idea of authority as this big bad unapproachable wolf in charge. A benefit to this is that a lessened hierarchy makes us more willing to participate and make changes.
Yeah, I don't like the big bad wolf feeling/idea because it implies that the leader is more important/uses others for personal gain. "Authority" means someone has a different role and their rules command more respect. It should not mean that they themselves are more valuable or deserve more respect (although in some cultures that is just the way it goes. you act in a respectful, distant way towards an authority figure, and that does not have to imply unfairness).
I just saw this on instagram, is it not the truth?
View attachment 536722
There must be something in the psyche that makes us want to resist. At least for us self-pres types anyway. But yes I agree that we need balance. Especially with kids, some parents are too laissez-faire and they end up not teaching them anything. And there are good laws and rules out there, I'm not a total anarchist or anything. :wink:
Aha..unfortunately that can make it difficult. But not impossible. Its just not at all helpful :p.

Yes, respect and willingness to not be domineering, that would make good criteria for authority figures. I think sadly that such positions often attract the wrong types. When in reality, it should be a service job. Deciphering other people's needs and putting them before your own. This is where we cross the territory into what makes a "leader".
That would be ideal! Needs, not wants, though. Which is another trap parents fall into haha.
We seem to also be reaching a day-in-age where people are becoming more able to make their own decisions. With the internet, we have the prowess to become more informed than ever. From medical options to fashion styles, we don't need to go to certain figures the way we used to. This change is affecting not just people, but entire industries, such as magazines and even television. Choice is becoming increasingly feasible.

The real question goes to those in positions of authority. Shall they respond to this increased demand for autonomy, or risk relinquishing what power they have left?
I don't understand though. Whoever is in charge is just going to stay in charge. No risk of relinquishing anything, from my perspective. So please explain.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miss Thevious

·
Banned
Joined
·
17,781 Posts
even when I was younger, I didn't feel much compulsion to rebel against "authority" because
- my moral compass was always too strong
- feeling the initial sense of allegiance which is prerequisite to needing to rebel against something does not come easily to me
- rebellion plays into the frame of the supposed authority by acknowledging their impact on you. if you feel yourself reacting to their frame, ask yourself: "how would this person's peer respond to them?"

of course, this was all made possible by the first point. until you really know what your values, boundaries and desires are, it's hard to respond with anything other than compliance, rebellion or just straight up passivity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,600 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
no problem!
I find this a strange and somewhat unhealthy dynamic. And it happens on both sides. Authority figures can want it, but underlings can also want it, or derive some sort of satisfaction from it. I have been like that before. With parents, my old bosses, coworkers, and just about everyone (even people not in authority :p)

Good point. In some ways we're not peers. Peers have the role of being with each other. A good friend may give advice, but does not order around. But at the same time, I think that element of friendship exists within parent-child relationships. If the parent can give orders without manipulation and unfairness. In other words, if there is trust.

Yeah, I don't like the big bad wolf feeling/idea because it implies that the leader is more important/uses others for personal gain. "Authority" means someone has a different role and their rules command more respect. It should not mean that they themselves are more valuable or deserve more respect (although in some cultures that is just the way it goes. you act in a respectful, distant way towards an authority figure, and that does not have to imply unfairness).
Aha..unfortunately that can make it difficult. But not impossible. Its just not at all helpful :p.

That would be ideal! Needs, not wants, though. Which is another trap parents fall into haha.
I don't understand though. Whoever is in charge is just going to stay in charge. No risk of relinquishing anything, from my perspective. So please explain.
Yes absolutely about authority just taking a different role. It does not make them superior human beings. Perhaps some people in thkse positions take the term "superior" a tad literally!

So what I was referring to in your bolded statement is not about the concept of authority itself, but the individuals in such positions. It is important for them to respond to social change and meet the desires of those below. Because if they do not, they risk losing their jobs. Okay so maybe revolutions and the overthrowing of leaders don't happen everyday. But people can talk and they can leave. It does seem to happen in many organizations where if the people in charge do not get with the program, the leadership can end up completely changing. Not true everywhere, but often it will happen. It is almost always in the best interest of authority IMO to keep the masses happy, because at the end of the day, they largely outnumber you. Being fair and accessible not only makes things most pleasant, but is also a CYA mechanism!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
186 Posts
I think it really depends on the individual. Some young people are rebellious, some get along well authority. I get along with people of positions of authority just fine, and actually, my dad thinks my school's stuff likes me a lot because I don't ~misbehave~. Though, I can be rebellious, if I see that a certain ruling of authority is unjust.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stellafera

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
I just hate when I try to put my best foot forward all the time, (almost) always treat people with the respect I would like to be treated with, and am not taken seriously because of my youth. Instead of respecting me as a person I feel as most authority figures just try harder to control me. That is when I would push back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
817 Posts
Authorities are just people to me. People I should deal with more formally than my peers, but people. I tend to get along very well with authority figures for this reason (also because I'm very rule-following).
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top