Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_jad6fco wrote

[removed]

34

yugosaki t1_jadgq8g wrote

It sounds like these studies are a complete mess and are likely heavily biased by the researchers own opinions.

Things like tattoos, piercings, being very open minded and unique, taking risks, etc are considered rebellious by the older generation, but increasingly the younger generations encourage these traits in their own children so in that context they are definitionally not rebellious.

Any study into rebellion is going to be difficult to gauge because what constitutes 'rebellion' in the context of family and upbringing is going to vary wildly between families and even individuals. Nearly every trait that could be described as 'rebellious' could also be regarded as a positive trait by some parents.

6

PJHFortyTwo t1_jadsxun wrote

>Any study into rebellion is going to be difficult to gauge because what constitutes 'rebellion' in the context of family and upbringing is going to vary wildly between families and even individuals.

There probably are some straightforward ways of getting at this. I wonder why you can't just ask the participant to rank on a Likert Scale how much they agree with statements like "my personal values contrast with my parents" or "my actions contrast with those of my nuclear family". As long as you don't code it in charged language, people, in Western countries at least, are open about this stuff.

Real issue I take is, I can't help but feel like birth order effects would vary, and be moderated by things like sibling closeness, age, or perceived sibling social status. Like, I can see an opposite effect to tje rebel hypothesis for people particularly close to their siblings, while those who are less close would be more likely to strive to be unique.

3

phdoofus t1_jadphzx wrote

Well it shows your auto-blame feature is working.

3

tornpentacle t1_jadf8w2 wrote

It demonstrates undue prejudice, that's for sure. Is that weird? No, unfortunately, but it's wrong.

The world was different at the time Born to Rebel was written, and even moreso when the author was being brought up. At that time, tattoos were practically anathema.

To dismiss the history of the world like that and how much it impacts today is a bit silly. That generation had their own living ancestors who were just as old-fashioned to them. And if you have grandkids, you'll experience the same prejudice as you are exhibiting toward older people now.

It's just kind of how it goes. There are even 17th- and 18th-century media that demonstrate just how long this has been going on. I'd wager it's as old as civilization itself.

1