'cool' mom that bought the keg

I noticed a LOT of things that would not fly these days in this movie! Jeannie's mom moving out leaving her 16 yr old daughter to live alone, the mom that bought the keg, the late 20's early 30's guy dating a 16 yr old, etc.

I'm not a fan of sequels but I would love to see a sequel to this with the surviving three women as mothers of teenage daughters dealing with the same issues (sex, drugs & boys) and how they would deal with them these days as opposed to what was acceptable when they were the same age because although the issues have remained basically the same - the consequences and the way we deal with things now compared to then have changed drastically.

I remember it being mentioned that Annie had a sister that was pregnant that the dad handcuffed to keep her from getting an abortion. That child could be the Annie reference in the sequel. She'd be a bit older than the other girl's daughters but all the better - she could be the "bad influence" old enough to buy alcohol and introduce the younger ones to the older crowd.

Yeah, I think too much.

[deleted]

[deleted]

Myteefine^

Thanks :)

I guess we always have to be a bit careful that we aren't nostalgizing too much, but I do believe we were essentially more *free* back then, as a country and as a generation, compared to what I see happen today.

People today are more 'criminalized' because 1) More actions are now considered 'criminal', and 2) There is greater motivation these days to jail and fine people for what sometimes are nothing more than youthful mistakes. I am not talking about drive-by's or extreme behaviors like that -- I am talking about a minor being found with a beer OR a guy who is 20 being labeled a child molester for dating a girl who is 17 OR even in the case of someone who is caught smoking a cigarette in a nonsmoking area.

There were good and bad things about *our* times, as there are about all times. I think it's all about the 'middle'.

People weren't all 'evil', nor was the partying scene. A lot of it was about learning how to socialize with peers. Other peoples have ways to do that built right into their cultures -- they treat that time of life as yet another rite of passage and actually structure ways for young people to 'whoop it up' and celebrate during that window of time between being kids and full-fledged adults. Even the Amish have their 'Rumspringa'.

Unfortunately, we don't have that kind of cohesive, structured way of launching young people built into our culture. Many times, parents are on their own to try to get their kids through what can be a very tumultuous period of life, and the 'kids', too, are often on their own, often left to depend on peers, especially older peers, to 'teach them the ropes' -- sometimes these 'guides' are relatively harmless and other times not. Even kids who come from cultural backgrounds that have rites of passage built in are not immune from larger influences as they are part of a larger cultural milieu that can exert influence and offer other behavioral opportunities and peer expectations.

I remember how days, months and years seemed to pass so slowly back then. To think of being two years older when you were 18 or 19 or even 21 was just forecasting too far in the future (30 was OLD and so far away!), especially when you are learning how to 'work' and about 'love' and about 'fiesta' and about how to navigate socially in the world, etc.

All the nanny state rules and laws in the world are not going to prevent the actions of young people trying to find their places with each other and in the world, and will just force these behaviors to go more and more underground.

This, in turn, can result in the adults and society feeling less and less in control, and if they don't 'learn', can result in them just applying the same restrictive 'remedies' but with more force, which then in turn just keeps the negative spiral going down.

People remember how movies like 'Reefer Madness' and other public announcement type of 'don't do (x)' films, actually increased harder drug use in some teens because when they discover that people don't become maniacal monsters from a few tokes, they aren't going to believe what society says about other substances. Young people in that age group think too much in black-and-white, they desensitize quickly, and they just won't take other 'warnings' seriously, even if they are valid, if society loses their trust regarding other issues of concern. A consequence of all this is that some learn hard lessons the hard way.

A simple analogy: It's like trying to keep Acne down in young people. Try as you might, some young people, due to hormonal changes, will suffer Acne, most temporarily. If you try to apply a restrictive remedy that is NOT a remedy, such as outlawing teens with Acne from eating chocolate, you will end up with: people feeling their freedom to eat chocolate impinged upon; people trying to hide their 'Acne' so they can eat chocolate; teens buying 'illegal chocolate', -- all due to illogical restrictions being placed on something that is going to happen anyway.

This is not to advocate a no-holds-barred attitude -- this goes back to what I called the 'middle'. There has to be a middle between total restriction and total decadence. I think that people of *our* time had more of a 'middle', despite the creeping restrictions that were just around the corner.

Difference between middling measures and extreme ones are kind of like the difference between a police officer making you pour out your beer and telling you to go home as opposed to tazing you, slapping the cuffs on, arresting you, making you go to court, charging you outrageous fines, maybe taking your car, restricting your right to drive for a lengthy period of time, etc., etc., etc.

What does society expect to get when it treats young people acting like young people as the enemy??






"I can't stand a naked light bulb, any more than..a rude remark or a vulgar action" Blanche DuBois