Generational Dynamics Forum - New Site

John, you really need to take a break and get some rest. You're working too hard. I'm afraid it's starting to effect you. You should consider a vacation. What I see here http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi ... iskcache=0 is a a man who's taking the conflicts & chaos of life way too personal.

From: http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi ... iskcache=0

One thing that I keep coming back to is that I find the Gen-X culture very hard to believe. In 2008, Alan Greenspan expressed "shocked disbelief" about how widespread the dishonesty and fraud had been in banks in the early 2000s, leading up to the financial crisis.

John, you keep harping back to this. I don't see it. I work for a US Department of Justice component law enforcement agency. All employees are required by law to retire, at the latest, on the last day of the month in which they turn 57. But, Boomers are still in charge. They still run the agency even with the early retirement requirement. Perhaps banking is different. Perhaps bankers in their 30s and early 40s were the shot-callers in the early 2000s, which begs the question, what were the mid to late 40 year olds, 50 year olds, and 60 year olds doing? Playing golf?

If all it affected were a few hurt feelings on the part of some supermodel, it wouldn't really make much difference. But it's exactly this appalling behavior that's caused the financial crisis, and is lurching us into world war.

John, have you forgotten the first book you wrote? Financial crisis and crisis war are inevitable. Every 80 years or so. That cycle is what makes advanced, progressive societies possible. Without them we in North America would still be following the Bison's annual migration. Stop whining.

John, I really believe that much of what you've experienced in the workplace is regional & cultural as much as it is generational. I've experienced much of the same myself while working in the Midwest among Midwesterners and transplanted Northerners--Yankees. I always felt that it was cultural. People my age don't act that way down South. My stepdaughter is married to a Gen X lawyer from Connecticut and he's just the kind of POS you describe in your draft.

Have you read American Nations? http://www.colinwoodard.com/americannations You should take your skills West where there are warm & civilized people John. People are warm & accommodating in Oklahoma City. No doubt Dell, Devon Energy, or Chesapeak Energy could use your skills.

Dear Trevor,

Trevor wrote: > The workplace experience you describe sounds to me a lot like the
> Dilbert cartoons I frequently look at. I'm wondering if there's a
> generational angle in these cartoons. Scott Adams is a late-wave
> Boomer and worked in the corporate world through the 1980's and
> 1990's, so he's got to have at least some experience with X-er
> employees. I'll use some of his characters as examples.

> Pointy Haired Boss- he's unethical, uncaring, and completely
> oblivious to even the simplest facts of running a business. He
> doesn't know how the employees are scamming others, but doesn't
> care, as long as he's making lots of money, so I would say he's an
> example of a Boomer.

> Catbert- he's of a similar type, but actually has some
> competence. However, he's far more vicious and his policies are
> designed to screw over employees, in large part because it amuses
> him. He has no respect for anyone, even the PHB, so I would mark
> him as an X-er boss.

> Wally- he'd be the X-er employee. He's lazy and uncaring about all
> the unethical behavior going on around him. In addition, he
> realizes that hard work is not going to get him anywhere in the
> company, so he doesn't bother trying and just drinks coffee all
> day.

> Dilbert- he'd be a Boomer employee. He likely knows that working
> hard isn't going to get him anything, but he continues to do so
> anyway because he still hopes that his work will be rewarded. He
> also talks about the odds of a project failing, which they usually
> do, only nobody listens or cares.

This is a very interesting analysis. I haven't read Dilbert much
since the 90s, before I was very aware of generational issues, so a
lot of this is new to me. I wonder if Scott Adams sees his characters
in generational terms.

Trevor wrote: > What I still can't believe is how all these criminals were
> excused, that either they were too inexperienced to know what
> they're doing or that they were forced to do this by their Boomer
> managers. That's a giant load of crap, but the people saying this
> are either liars themselves or they're willfully blind;
> personally, I'd bet on both of the above.

I agree. It is absolutely infuriating that all these people are
continuing to do the same fraudulent things and the Justice
Dept. won't even do a frigging investigation. When I write about all
of these things, I'm in a constant state of fury. Perhaps our friend
CrosstimbersOkie can give us some insight into why the Justice
Dept. is letting all these criminals go free without even an
investigation.

Trevor wrote: > Just one suggestion: perhaps you can mention what investigations
> were attempted before the housing bubble fully burst and how they
> were silenced. There were some people, both in the private sector
> and in Congress who tried to blow the whistle on Credit
> derivatives and Subprime housing, or at least were concerned about
> what was going on.

I don't believe that there were any investigations. There were
warnings, including warnings from Alan Greenspan, but they weren't
investigated -- they were simply ignored.

John

CrosstimbersOkie wrote: > John, Generation X is the most incarcerated generation in human
> history.

I guess that's the reason why the Justice Dept. and other prosecutors
refuse to investigate the financial crisis fraud. The poor Gen-Xers
have been in jail enough, thanks to the evil Boomers putting them
there in the 1980s, and now it's only fair that they should be able to
commit a few crimes for free, without being investigated.

CrosstimbersOkie wrote: > John, you really need to take a break and get some rest. You're
> working too hard. I'm afraid it's starting to effect you. You
> should consider a vacation. What I see here
> http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi ... iskcache=0 is a a man
> who's taking the conflicts & chaos of life way too
> personal.

A condescending remark by a Gen-Xer who wants to blame Boomers for
everything. "Now, John, be a nice little Boomer, and act like the
buffoon that we expect all Boomers to be, so that we can f--k you over
as much as we want. And don't complain, John, because that spoils
some of the fun we have f--king you over!"

I've provided a couple of dozen stories about what's going on, and you
want to just excuse them because you don't want to blame Gen-Xers for
anything, but I can assure you that they're quite "personal."

Take a vacation? Is that the same attitude as Gen-Xers who say,
"Let's screw the Boomer and get him fired!"?

CrosstimbersOkie wrote: > John, you keep harping back to this. I don't see it. I work for a
> US Department of Justice component law enforcement agency. All
> employees are required by law to retire, at the latest, on the
> last day of the month in which they turn 57. But, Boomers are
> still in charge. They still run the agency even with the early
> retirement requirement. Perhaps banking is different. Perhaps
> bankers in their 30s and early 40s were the shot-callers in the
> early 2000s, which begs the question, what were the mid to late 40
> year olds, 50 year olds, and 60 year olds doing? Playing
> golf?

Retire at age 57? Are you kidding? Did you say the US Dept. of
Justice, or do you mean DOJ in France, or the DOJ in Greece? I've
never heard of anyone having to retire at age 57 in the U.S., and if
what you're saying is true, that's a scandal by itself.

I've explained in the book I wrote the interaction between Gen-Xer
employees and Boomer bosses. The Boomers aren't good managers, and
they're very gullible, so that dishonest Gen-Xers can easily take
advantage of them. In the financial industry, I was able to prove
that the Boomer bosses could not possibly have been the perpetrators
of the massive fraud that caused the financial crisis. I can't
provide a similar proof for the Dept. of Justice, but there's no doubt
in my mind that something similar is going on.

But you're exhibiting exactly the Gen-X mind frame that keeps anyone
from being investigated. Gen-Xer employees can't commit any crimes
because there are Boomer bosses. Gen-Xer bosses can't commit any
crimes because anyone who complains is taking them "personally" or
should take a vacation - or should get fired. And even if Gen-Xers do
commit crimes, they should be allowed to go free because they're
already the most incarcerated generation in history.

Your remarks seem to epitomize all the Gen-X thinking that's caused
the current crisis and is causing additional crises.

CrosstimbersOkie wrote: > John, have you forgotten the first book you wrote? Financial
> crisis and crisis war are inevitable. Every 80 years or so. That
> cycle is what makes advanced, progressive societies
> possible. Without them we in North America would still be
> following the Bison's annual migration. Stop whining.

This is really getting hilarious. Gen-Xers are doing the world a
favor by committing fraud, because that's what makes advanced,
progressive societies possible. Germany's Lost Generation did the
world a favor, according to your reasoning, with the Holocaust. Come
to think of it, that's what the Nazis said.

Instead of telling me to take a vacation and stop whining, you really
ought to stop and think of some of the consequences of what you're
saying. You work for the Dept. of Justice, and the reasoning that
you're displaying here is on the edge of something very dangerous.

CrosstimbersOkie wrote: > John, I really believe that much of what you've experienced in the
> workplace is regional & cultural as much as it is
> generational. I've experienced much of the same myself while
> working in the Midwest among Midwesterners and transplanted
> Northerners--Yankees. I always felt that it was cultural. People
> my age don't act that way down South. My stepdaughter is married
> to a Gen X lawyer from Connecticut and he's just the kind of POS
> you describe in your draft.

You seem to have a limitless supply of excuses. I'll agree that there
are cultural differences between the Midwest and the east coast --
I've been hearing that all my life -- but I'm not aware that there was
any less fraud committed in the Midwest in the financial crisis.
Also, to judge by your attitude, I doubt that Boomers are treated any
less like garbage in the Midwest than they are on the east coast.

Also, several of the people I wrote about came from other places,
including the Midwest. There may be some cultural differences, but
the bottom lines are the same.

CrosstimbersOkie wrote: > Have you read American Nations?
> http://www.colinwoodard.com/americannations You should take your
> skills West where there are warm & civilized people John. People
> are warm & accommodating in Oklahoma City. No doubt Dell, Devon
> Energy, or Chesapeake Energy could use your skills.

My skills are needed just as much in Massachusetts as in the Midwest.

This has been very educational.

John

Okay, this is probably going to be a long post, considering my feelings towards the subject.

I've read the story dozens of times, but in spite of that, I have never understood why there has been so much sympathy towards Andrea Yates. Not only did she kill her five children, but this was not a spur of the moment, blind rage decision; this was a planned, calculated murder. She even admitted as much, so i can't believe how so many would simply excuse her actions. It's not just feminists; people I know that I've spoken on this subject on have told me that they considered the husband "morally guilty". Are you kidding me?! She kills her children and he's somehow responsible? Being mentally ill doesn't mean that you don't know right from wrong.

I did some research and realized that in most cases, both partners were violent. One story that stands out in particular is Erin Pizzey. In the 1970's, she opened one of the first women's shelters in Britain, because at the time, while hitting a woman was considered despicable socially, in all but the worst of circles, it generally wasn't prosecuted criminally. After she opened it and began hearing the woman's stories, she realized that many of them were just as violent as their partners.

However, when she pointed this out, she was derided and ultimately thrown out of the shelter that she began. She's also mentioned that she's been on the receiving end of boycotts and even death threats for saying as much. It gives a big clue as to just what kind of mentality the feminists have. It might not have started out that way, but like many revolutions, the people who start it aren't the ones who ultimately end up in positions of power.

While on that subject, I have a few personal stories as well.

As for domestic violence, there's a woman I know who's been in a couple of abusive relationships. She's been hit and threatened, but what I also noticed was that she was every bit as violent as he was. On most occasions, she was the one who threw the first punch. Neither of them ever got in trouble with the law, but it got me to thinking that maybe this victim-oppressor mentality wasn't as simple as it seemed.

You're not the only one who's taken note of this. An old article by Michael Crichton was written on this very subject. Here's an excerpt of it.

At a conference in Aspen, Betty Friedan argues that women are more moral than men. She receives a standing ovation from men and women alike. I refuse to stand. And seeing the men applauding and smiling, I think: If a man came to this conference and gave a speech in which he said that men were inherently more moral than women, the women would stone him to death.
So why are these men standing and applauding?
What's happened to men, anyway?
There is no question that men feel under attack, and psychologically beaten down. All sorts of horrible qualities are attributed to us: we are unemotional, we are brutal, we are violent, we are uncaring. We're lousy lays. We don't know how to do it. We don't know how to find that clit. We don't know how to satisfy our mates.
We've been hearing this for more than twenty years. There are young men who have grown up in America who have heard nothing else.

One personal story I have on this is when I walked towards and attempted to comfort a woman I knew. She was obviously upset, maybe crying, although I wasn't sure about that part. She was having relationship problems and I did my best to reassure her, one of the things I said was that she was an attractive woman. Afterwards, I left, not thinking anything of it.

A couple days later, I was confronted by one of the people in charge. He informed me that she was accusing me of sexual harassment, saying that I was coming on to her. To say I was shocked at this would be an understatement; I was floored at this revelation. This was somebody I knew. Granted, we weren't real close, but I thought she knew me better than that.

Based on how he was talking, the idea that this might be a misunderstanding never once crossed his mind. I was considered guilty and not even capable of trying to tell my side of this story; he had already made up his mind. Other people I knew and I thought were friends came to the same conclusion, all without even taking the time to hear me out. There were two things I learned that day. One is how easy it is to be accused, especially if you appear weird to people, which I do. The second is that trying to protest your innocence is utter futility.

Over the years I've realized just how common male hatred as become. This is not restricted to Boomers; it's in every single generation. I was taught in school a statistic that "One out of four men will commit rape", that it's normal to abuse women, that one of the main reasons is a belief in male superiority and male power. The pamphlets that I saw in college... well, the message was basically: "Be on your guard with every man."

Not only that, but it's affected men as well. Many of the decent ones I know believe a lot of this stuff, that we're naturally violent and taught to disrespect and abuse women, I could go on and on about this. I suppose it's hard not to think that way; you're bombarded with it from the time you're a child. Until a couple years ago, I believed it myself until I started looking beneath the surface of everything. What do you do when great numbers of both genders believe that women are victims of a brutal culture?

In what Strauss & Howe have termed the Consciousness Revolution which blossomed in the mid-1960s, I feel that the militant feminism and radical sense in many quarters of being brutally subjugated largely evolved due to Western societies entering a "late-late-industrial" or "post-industrial" society — an era in which never before had so many people had it so good, and in which never before were so many people exposed to so much education and information (e.g., high school for most; college for many; images broadcast around the world via television; as well as: superhighways, universal water and electric service, high-speed computers, jet travel, the Pill, etc.). Any remaining vestiges of "being kept down" demanded to not only be cast off post haste, but the level of living that had been achieved also made it fashionable for many of those who had indeed been kept down to take an unprecedented radical philosophical/political stance regarding it.

Obviously, the feelings of victimization heavily came from legitimate historical happenings: centuries of chattel slavery; women not being allowed to vote and being "kept in the home"; etc. But, the Consciousness Revolution was not only highly liberating to so many of those who had indeed been historically kept down, but ushered in a kind of "liberation theology" in which it became fashionable and cathartic to look at oneself (or others) as a brutalized victim beyond what may have been moral or healthy for themselves and for others to carry around. (This may well relate to Trevor's experience of a woman in the workplace quickly accusing him of sexual harassment over what was surely an innocent comment that was meant to be benign and kind; couple this with some people's middle-schoolish inner revulsion and fear over what are seen as "bohemian and intelligent" people [perhaps amplified by so much of the news focusing on predators of some sort], and I can especially see how it happened.) The recent Unraveling era of "me-me-first" no doubt put much of all this on steroids, while also ushering in some backlashes against it (e.g., campaigns to reverse affirmative-action programs).

It may take society quite a while to tamp down the excessive feelings of victimization that have arisen, and to make, in some quarters, an excessive feeling of victimization less edgy and chic. The rise of the Millennial Generation, however, may help in this regard. —Best regards, Marc

From what I do remember researching, the feminist movement didn't start out that way. There were legitimate problems that needed to be dealt with. I would imagine the women in the hero generation may have overlooked it because it was still far better than the kind of suffering they endured during the Great Depression and WWII.

However, once they got most of what they wanted, the feminist movement quickly became militant, with the radical faction taking complete control, which continues even today. I've noticed a similar pattern among other advocacy groups as well.