Spanish parents not realising they can already ban their children from having cell phones at any time they want and on whatever terms they want
this post was submitted on 15 Dec 2023
99 points (97.1% liked)
Europe
8485 readers
1 users here now
News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe 🇪🇺
(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, 🇩🇪 ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures
Rules
(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)
- Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
- No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
- No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.
Also check out [email protected]
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It's not simple, and the fact that you are trying to make it sound simple is confusing at best.
Even if a very small percentage of teens has a phone, the social pressure for all to have it becomes unbearable.
Plus things like marketing phones to children and teens would also be banned if a law like that were to come into effect.
One of the best things you can teach you children is to ignore social pressure.
Exactly , look what happens in the US some people fall for social pressure to have an iPhone because everyone use iMessage
I remember wanting some nike shoes because of social pressure and my mom was like: no, lol.
I somehow survived it just fine.
You didn't get traumatized by not being able to have what ever you wanted? You should write a book about it!
And every single kid will be fine , this parents nowadays want the government to do all their job. If you dont want your kid with a phone , dont buy him a phone. Punish them and teach them to read a book or go outside to play.
It's amazing that you're such an illuminated parent, and no doubt a blessed human being who doesn't suffer social pressure, but your point is meaningless/harmful as it ignores the reality that most humans and parents suffer from social pressure.
Therefore it's important to teach children to deal with it.
So basically ban cellphones for every other kid so mine doesn't feel pressured to have one?
How would that even work?
Not sure you're arguing in good faith, as the answer to this is apparent. Of the long list of harm cellphones and social media bring to children, having a few children with cellphones within a social context (school, etc) would bring the harm anyway.
the social pressure for all to have it becomes unbearable.
So what? Humans are social animals. We live in societies. Having to adapt fit int is part of our nature. Obviously ignoring your peers preferred method of communication doesn't work and it's a good thing it doesn't because communication is the fabric of society. You could as well decide to make up your own language.
That said, individuality needs to be protected and peer pressure needs to kept in check. But you do that via parenting, teaching and maybe banning advertising aimed at minors. Not by fighting windmills.
Just because these people can't vote yet doesn't mean they shouldn't have rights or be treated with dignity and respect like the rest of society.
I'm disappointed with people arguing that literally banning smartphones would somehow improve the social situation for anyone.
Just because you cannot see bullying or collect statistics about it quite as easily, does not mean it disappears. I'd argue the opposite: blocking others online is trivial compared to doing the same in-person.
We also have to acknowledge that some children simply are more introverted, and will want to stay more secluded than others. Forcing them to behave in other ways seems counterproductive.
Just because some parents (understandably) struggle with raising their kids shouldn't mean that they're all doomed to what amounts to nationwide collective punishment.
I for one support children's rights, at least on this one point.
Edit:
Exact circumstances can, and will very, as every child is unique. Therefore, we should allow for case by case decisions. Luckily, the de facto situation already has the parents deciding, which makes sense in most cases IMO.
And taking away the phones of other people won't stop online bullying either (e.g. spreading rumors without the victim's knowledge).
Of all the points on which I support children's rights, their right to own a cell phone is not exactly a priority. I'd say it should be up to the parnts to decide whether their kids should have cell phones - at which point it's the right of the parents, not the children.
That said I think there might be something broken about how it is solved now - I would probably be in favour of a law banning certain types of software on the phones of children, such as abusive social media or games with microtransactions.
I would probably be in favour of a law banning certain types of software on the phones of children, such as abusive social media or games with microtransactions.
Maybe doing the same for adults wouldn't hurt.
I'd say it should be up to the parents to decide whether their kids should have cell phones
Yes, but not when the kid is 14 or 15. I think at that age it should be up to them and not their parents.
Right? Let's find even more ways to restrict, alienate, and socially isolate young people. That can't possibly backfire horribly...
you can still be bullied online, if you arent online yourself. People can still spread rumors or damage your image with real world repercussions in the hellhole that is teenage social circles.
And this is little that parents of affected children can do about, and it is certainly no parental shortcoming that their child has become the victim of bullying. It can hit anyone and any family.
So while i also dontthink this is the best measure, the motivation is valid.
I think it's a problem they don't get vote in the first place. If 90-year-olds can, so can 15-year olds. My money is on the average 14-year-old to make better decisions (40% of 90-year-olds have dementia, so that's a safe bet).
I'd say the age of criminal responsibility - between 12 and 15 in most of Europe - seems like a reasonable cut-off. If you're too immature to vote on a law, you're too young to go to prison for breaking it. We could however leave passive suffrage to the actual age of maturity (and full criminal responsibility).
Just because these people can't vote yet doesn't mean they shouldn't have rights or be treated with dignity and respect like the rest of society.
The problem is mostly not the people, but the social media services, that take advantage of them for as much profits as inhumanly possible, and in the process affect their personality in a wrong way.
Sometimes I too feel that they shouldn't have a smartphone, but in reality it's a problem with these corps and their motives, who affect everyone else too but has deeper effects for young people.
But the solution also involves parents raising their kids, instead of youtube, facebook, tiktok and whatever else. To some extent it also means having some oversight on what their kids see online.
I am especially interested in your stance on technology and introversion. In which way do introverted children benefit from technology, and technology exclusively? And how would the inability to access technology force them to behave differently?
I'm an introvert. And was as a child too. Talking to friends via msn messenger was my preference. If my mum had of removed my technology I'd of had no way of talking to my friends that was comfortable for me, it basically forces face to face social interaction if you want to talk to people.
Which triggered an anxiety response and made me very tired.
So I imagine banning tech from children will result in introverted children having to be in situations they don't enjoy and not being able to feel comfortable communicating in ways they are comfortable.
It could result in children just shutting themselves away because they dont enjoy the face to face. Which can result in depression. But forcing them to be uncomfortable in social situations can result in serious anxiety and even more discomfort in social situations, if you're forced into something it can create more of a distaste for that situation/ thing.
The times I was dragged to things with my mum, it made me hate parties etc all the more and my anxiety about them got worse.
Whereas if it's something I chose to do for myself, it had less of a negative effect on me than if it's something I was forced into.
So if introverted children prefer texting, messaging etc then you take that away from them, it can result in them having to do things they aren't comfortable with, which can have an effect on mental health. As it's forcing them into different things they don't really want to be doing.
This was me, too. Being able to communicate in writing was a godsend for me.
My first instinct was to decry this as a reactionary move.
But anyone that has been a teenager knows that a significant portion of teenagers are absolute sociopathic assholes. That's how it is, and how it's been for a long time. And while I wouldn't blame the teenagers for this, we should not pretend otherwise.
Limiting the way they can project this onto each other seems like a reasonable thing to do for the sake of mental and physical health.
Although I don't think banning the devices would work at all, that's way too easy to circumvent.
I don't know how old are y'all but I wasn't 16 that long ago. Teens can be stupid and everything but if it wasn't for me having a personal device with no parental oversight I would have had a very very hard time figuring out my bisexuality and stepping away from toxic Christian dogma
It's spain, there's a non zero chance that that's the entire point
Good for them. If it works, it will have to be widely adopted. I can say that phones have taken a degree of the joy out of parenting when there are no societal boundaries.
lmao it's not going to work
They mean at schools?... right? 🙄
Should ban smartphones but not your basic telephone-sms-only brickphone. Takes some load from parents
Why should they?
Tldr: it is necessary because social media amplified, or created, big social issues that are still unaddressed; it will pointless because it doesn’t fix the problem, only the symptom
Internet is a wild place, more so for teenagers which can get bullied very easily, develop self esteem issues (Instagram anyone) and whatnot.
For adults it is a wild place too, but adults generally are less gullible than teenagers.
In the end though banning a smartphone doesn’t address the problem but its consequences: smartphones for teenagers wouldn’t be a problem if social media weren’t a Pandora’s box of echo chambers, grooming and deception. This isn’t a teenager exclusive though, everyone suffers from it… and if you think it’s not that big of a deal, look at all the elections outside the US that have been dominated by a shitty, easy, rhetoric spread mainly through social media; for Instagram there is no justification, open it and you will see people whose body and face are so perfect that Da Vinci’s Gioconda looks like trash
So they'll access social media sites from tablets and laptops?
Absolute idiots.
I have no idea where I would be without a phone. Having a phone and being able to access the internet has allowed me to do so many things. Without it, I wouldn't have discovered my sexuality, vent about my mental health, pursue my interests and hobbies, or most importantly, have access to a vast amount of information.
The problem is not that people of my age have phones, but instead that that their parents don't raise their own kids. The right age to get your own phone varies from person to person. People should educate their kids on internet safety and make sure that their kids can come to them if they see something they shouldn't have instead of expecting their government(s) to do all the parenting for them. Parents, raise your own fucking kids.