Eastwood rants at "soft" generation.

Puddleduck

Biggins wrote: »

Cobblers.
When they reach seventeen at the very least mammy and daddy has to let go of their friggin' hands for gods sake! By that stage of joining a conscription army, they will or should have learned all they can expect from their parents that they are going to ingest.
Parents will never stop being parents but your doing them no favours wrapping them up in cotton wool till they are married or move out!

I agree, but if, as a parent, they have raised their kid properly they arent going to be a waste of space that just hangs around all day harrasing people. Their would be no need for conscription, the jobs been done. Honestly Id give younger people the option of learning skills, like carpentry or welding or something. That or make em build our roads :pac:
I never said wrap kids up in cotton wool, exposing them to extremes isnt going to make them 'man up' either.

30txsbzmcu2k9w

Dunno bout my generation but those kids who grew up watching Barney and Teletubbies are most definitely f'ucked.

Biggins

Puddleduck wrote: »

...I never said wrap kids up in cotton wool, exposing them to extremes isnt going to make them 'man up' either.

Good to hear. Extremes are not allowed in basic training. They learn about a range of skills they can diversify in or out of the army later. They sleep rough, eat rough and work rough in conditions that while warm or cold, will never see them going through the wilds of the Arctic or heat of the Sahara.

They lean about others as in a group society, they learn about themselves, strengths/limits and they learn how to deal at physical level and emotional level better.
They learn to appreciate things more, such as the finer things in life, be it food, money or goods and the value of being able to do so.

If there was a conscription option to vote for at a referendum I'd vote "yes"

K'NEDZ

Today's world is a lot more intellectually demanding than the world Clint Eastwood grew up in. A young person today needs to be very comfortable with technology and needs to know an awful lot about information, where to source it, and how to use it. The ability to swing a pick, or chop down a tree is pretty vestigial.

Imagine a young person of even average intelligence wasting two of their most formative years polishing their shoes and marching around in one of the least effective and most irrelevant fighting forces in the world!! Or driving around in their ten year old jeeps while everyone points at them and laughs.

The same people advocating this will be giving out from the other side of their mouths about how the goverment aren't creating a knowledge economy.

Degsy

Dudess wrote: »

Well it is when you say "a bit of sunburn" (to suit your argument) but the poster in question described her daughter as "roasted" - and we've no proof she wasn't. Those taking care of her daughter that day were in loco parentis and duty-bound to apply suncream to the child's skin throughout the day.
Being concerned about sunburn (which is quite dangerous - especially for children) d:o

Balls.
If the parent had seen one of the "in loco Parentis" applying suncream to the child she'd be whinging about them touching her child and she'd probably seek legal action on the basis that they were feeling her kids up.
When i was a kid people got sunburned all the time and it didnt do anybody any major harm aside form a bit of discomfort.
Whingers and wimps thats all some people are.

javaboy

Degsy wrote: »

Balls.
If the parent had seen one of the "in loco Parentis" applying suncream to the child she'd be whinging about them touching her child and she'd probably seek legal action on the basis that they were feeling her kids up.

You don't know that so stop jumping to conclusions.

When i was a kid people got sunburned all the time and it didnt do anybody any major harm aside form a bit of discomfort.
Whingers and wimps thats all some people are.

How do you know it didn't do anybody any harm? Did you ever hear of skin cancer?

Degsy

javaboy wrote: »

How do you know it didn't do anybody any harm? Did you ever hear of skin cancer?

Yes i've heard of it,i dont know anybody who ever got it though,a typical example of modern scaremongering to sell suncare products.

Mingey

Degsy wrote: »

Yes i've heard of it,i dont know anybody who ever got it though,a typical example of modern scaremongering to sell suncare products.

I never met anyone who has lung cancer either. It must be another typical scare mongering ploy by the cigarette companies to.....eh...

Wagon

Degsy wrote: »

Yes i've heard of it,i dont know anybody who ever got it though,a typical example of modern scaremongering to sell suncare products.

Look and learn:

Guido

Don't make me bring the link back up again! You know, that's the second time that picture has borne relevence to this thread! Maybe be Clint fella knows what he's talking about after all.

Degsy

Mingey wrote: »

I never met anyone who has lung cancer either. It must be another typical scare mongering ploy by the cigarette companies to.....eh...

Why would cigarette companies capitalise on the fact that thier product can cause cancer?

Sun cream companies can sell thier product on the basis that the sun may cause cancer.
And getting a dose of sunburn as a child certainly doesnt justify self-rightous hysteria on the part of any normal parent.

Biggins

Mingey

Degsy wrote: »

Why would cigarette companies capitalise on the fact that thier product can cause cancer?

Sun cream companies can sell thier product on the basis that the sun may cause cancer.
And getting a dose of sunburn as a child certainly doesnt justify self-rightous hysteria on the part of any normal parent.

Mmm. But my point was that just because you or I don't know of people with skin or lung cancer, does that mean it's not dangerous to smoke or not be protected from the sun?

Dudess

Degsy wrote: »

Yes i've heard of it,i dont know anybody who ever got it though,a typical example of modern scaremongering to sell suncare products.

LOL - and the funniest thing of all is you're actually serious.

Mingey wrote: »

I never met anyone who has lung cancer either. It must be another typical scare mongering ploy by the cigarette companies to.....eh...

K'NEDZ

Degsy wrote: »

Yes i've heard of it,i dont know anybody who ever got it though.

That's cause the people who got it are all DEAD!

Degsy

Mingey wrote: »

Mmm. But my point was that just because you or I don't know of people with skin or lung cancer, does that mean it's not dangerous to smoke or not be protected from the sun?

I didnt say i didnt know anybody with lung cancer..one of my uncles died from it..he didnt smoke btw.
Anyway,my point was that people are getting so wimpy and poncy these days that somebody would even contemplate taking legal action because a kid got some sunburn.
It wasnt like they dropped the child in a bath of carcinogenic chemicals and did so on purpose.

Degsy

Dudess wrote: »

LOL - and the funniest thing of all is you're actually serious.

Oh i forgot..you know everything dont you?

:rolleyes:

thelordofcheese

Degsy wrote: »

Whingers and wimps thats all some people are.

aye, aren't you just.

Mingey

Degsy wrote: »

I didnt say i didnt know anybody with lung cancer..one of my uncles died from it..he didnt smoke btw.

I knew a woman with skin cancer. She was from Australia, I am pretty certain it was from sun exposure.

I do agree that maybe this woman is a bit of a dick for wanting to sue the daycare centre or whatever it was though. If her kid got cancer from that one day in the sun, then maybe she should have gotten pissed. but I highly doubt her kid did.

Dudess

Degsy wrote: »

Oh i forgot..you know everything dont you?

:rolleyes:

Hardly a case of know-it-all-ism. You're actually, without ANY back-up whatsoever, deciding that skin cancer is a fabrication of the cosmetics industry. And your basis? You don't know anyone who got it. And when you were a kid, sunburn didn't do anyone any harm. And you want to have a go at the woman who started that thread so it suits your argument.

Loomis

Sure why don't we just start a Battle Royale and throw them all in. Should sort it out pretty fast. :rolleyes:

Degsy

Dudess wrote: »

Hardly a case of know-it-all-ism. You're actually, without ANY back-up whatsoever, deciding that skin cancer is a fabrication of the cosmetics industry. And your basis? You don't know anyone who got it. And when you were a kid, sunburn didn't do anyone any harm. And you want to have a go at the woman who started that thread so it suits your argument.

Ah so you're an oncologist now?

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4161/is_/ai_n14466804

I was having a go at that woman because she was reacting hystericly to somethingthats perfectly normal in childhood..ie getting sunburned.To contemp[late legal action over sunburn is a stupid,over-the top and downright wimpy thing to do.
The theme of this thread is people turning into wimps and all YOU can do,as usual is pick holes in other people's opinions...trolling,i believe it called.

Dudess

/Sigh... It's a tad more trollish to discredit science and its findings on skin cancer. Are you an oncologist now?

Degsy

Dudess wrote: »

/Sigh... It's a tad more trollish to discredit science and its findings on skin cancer. Are you an oncologist now?

Well it seems to me this northern hemisphere hysteria about the possible dangers of sunlight is no more than 15 years old.
If people have been sunbathing,walking around in the sun or,like yer womans child-getting sunburnt,where are all these legions of skin cancer cases?
Since when has skin cancer been a major probelem in these latitudes?

javaboy

Degsy wrote: »

Well it seems to me this northern hemisphere hysteria about the possible dangers of sunlight is no more than 15 years old.
If people have been sunbathing,walking around in the sun or,like yer womans child-getting sunburnt,where are all these legions of skin cancer cases?
Since when has skin cancer been a major probelem in these latitudes?

What the hell are you talking about Degsy? It's one of the most common cancers if not the most common cancer.

http://www.ncri.ie/cancerinfo/faq.shtml wrote:

What types of cancer are most common?
Looking at incidence figures for 2005, the commonest cancer is skin (non-melanoma) followed by prostate, breast, colorectal and lung. In 2005 the largest number of cancer deaths overall was from lung cancer. One in three will develop cancer by the age of 75.

madmik

i think clint has a point

todays generation has became too used to getting the asses wiped for them that they dont even comprehend what hard work is

they literally have never seen it

i dont care what anyone says

they are ridiculously over-spoiled

young children today have ipods,mobile phones,laptops,not just clothes-designer clothes,plasma tvs ,cable,sky,internet,gym memberships,underage discos/niteclubs ,get driven everywhere and refuse to walk etc,enough pocket money to regularly eat out in restauarants and get drunk or smoke hash with their mates


they do nothing for all this stuff but have the cheek to whinge and make their parents lives miserable if they dont get it

tallaght01

I can see both sides of it.

Pussiness is one of my pet hates. You see it everywhere now.Even on boards, people report others who tell them to "cop on" and stuff like that. There's a generation of people who are just soft.

I work in a kids hospital where 25 year old dads are literally in tears watching their kids getting an injection.

I was out with my 93 year old grandad yesterday, who used to work 8am-midnight 6 days a week as a panel beater, and was glad to have a job.


But there's another side to it. You have the Degsys of this world thinking that EVERYONE is a pussy, especially students.

Now, I remember uni well. I remember living in a kip of a gaff with no functioning heating in the middle of winter. I remmeber live wires hanging from the roof. I remember having a part time job and studying all the hours under the sun. I remember the gas safety inspector coming round on a random inspection and telling me it wasn't safe to stay in my bedroom, but I did because it was cheap. We lived on balls-all money for years and years. That was tougher than a lot of my mates had it in "real jobs".

Things are a bit easier now for my little sister, who's just finishing uni. She lives at home, but works her socks off. She's definitely working harder than lots of her mates who didn't go to uni. She's been working crazy hours in front of the books and doing part time jobs in her holidays since she was at school. In 5 or 6 years she might start to see some reward for that.

So, while I agree that there's pussies everywhere, I don't think this artificial divide between the "I didn't go to college so I can work hard" and the "You went to college, so you haven't a clue" groups is realistic or helpful.

Terry

thelordofcheese wrote: »

aye, aren't you just.

Infraction given.

Degsy has a point.
One instance of sunburn has yet to be proven to cause skin cancer.

tallaght01

Re: skin cancer.

I guess the worry is now that the ozone layer is knackered. So, there's more UV light getting through.

Skin cancer can take donkeys years to develop after a bad burn. I mean it can literally develop in middle age, after a burn as a kid.

Now, it's not true to say sin cancer isn't a problem in Ireland. I know a girl on my street who had it. But it's not as common as lung cancer etc.

Having said that, I'd be pissed off if one of my kids got badly burned in the current ozone deficient environment. We don't really understand the effects of depleted ozone in a country like hours at the moment.

You also have to bear in mind, too, that sunburn is extremely painful. Now I know this is a thread about pussying up. But it's pretty senseless to make a toddler go through that, for want of a bit of sun lotion.

unburn can also cause the same complications as any other burn.

4zn76tysfajdxp

I agree with Biggins, sign those lil monsters up to the army right away. I tell ya, there's nothing better for a child than to mould them into trained killers. Sure look at everyone over thirty here, if they weren't frolicking in the forests as kids they were out in the firing range working on their 200-yard mortar targetting. It all went wrong for this country when Playstations and iPods and the internet was invented and it's in no way hypocritical for me to say that.

Dudess

Degsy wrote: »

The theme of this thread is people turning into wimps and all YOU can do,as usual is pick holes in other people's opinions...trolling,i believe it called.

Look Degsy, and can you just take this post as a constructive comment instead of attacking me... if you backed up your posts, which are often ludicrous generalisations based on virtually nothing - sometimes only on what you WANT to believe - maybe then I and others wouldn't pick holes. This is a discussion board - if you're gonna post unsubstantiated, unsupported sweeping statements and it's problematic for you when people find fault with them... then why are you here?

Degsy wrote: »

Well it seems to me this northern hemisphere hysteria about the possible dangers of sunlight is no more than 15 years old.

1993/94 - you're honestly saying you reckon concern over UV damage to skin originated in 1993/94? And "it seems to you" - fine. Doesn't make it a fact though just because it seems to you...
And "possible dangers" - skin cancer is a reality whether you know people who have had it or not. I don't know anyone who has AIDS.
If anything, there is out-and-out idiocy in the northern hemisphere when it comes to strong sunlight - e.g. muppets not using skin protection and using baby oil under the midday sun.
White skin, unlike brown or black skin, is not "designed" for blazing heat. Apparently there is a massive skincare awareness movement in Australia.

If people have been sunbathing,walking around in the sun or,like yer womans child-getting sunburnt,where are all these legions of skin cancer cases?
Since when has skin cancer been a major probelem in these latitudes?

Well fair enough, you're focusing specifically on Ireland now - I thought you were just applying it to everywhere. You didn't say otherwise, and in fairness, you do generalise.
The sun is the sun wherever you are - there is of course a risk of skin cancer here if people are over-exposed to it. We don't get very much sun though - that's bound to make a difference to the number of cases...

Now as for the case in question: I agree, there are examples of how we've gotten "softer" but I'd dispute the example you gave. While it is borderline hysterical to consider legal action, please don't tell me you wouldn't be pissed off if you had a small daughter and you left her in the care of supposed professionals and she came home sunburnt - maybe it was just a bit of sunburn but maybe it was a lot (the poster used the word "roasted"). No proof she was lying. And even if it was only a little bit, it was quite negligent of the childminders. Not even considering skin cancer here - what about the upset it could have caused the child? Severe sunburn - and I'm not even talking third degree burns here - is extremely painful, and much worse to a little kid. The person who started that thread was appallingly spoken to... by people who don't have kids of course.

madmik wrote: »

todays generation has became too used to getting the asses wiped for them that they dont even comprehend what hard work is

Who's "today's generation"? And believe me, my parents would consider my generation to have had it too easy - and I'd be one of the older posters here (30). They're right too - we've had it piss-easy and now we're in terror because of the recession. I don't know what age you are, but the average age here is about 25 so there's a good chance you fall into that age category - if so, you're no-one to talk (not meant in a nasty way). However, you could be one of the rare 50-somethings to post on Boards - and if so, my apologies.