Talk:Adolescence/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

a couple passages from WP:NPOV for article improvement

Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#A_simple_formulation says

We sometimes give an alternative formulation of the non-bias policy: assert facts, including facts about opinions — but do not assert opinions themselves. There is a difference between facts and opinions. By "fact" we mean "a piece of information about which there is no serious dispute." For example, that a survey produced a certain published result would be a fact. That there is a planet called Mars is a fact. That Plato was a philosopher is a fact. No one seriously disputes any of these things. So we can feel free to assert as many of them as we can.

Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Undue_weight says

NPOV says that the article should fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by a verifiable source, and should do so in proportion to the prominence of each. Now an important qualification: Articles that compare views need not give minority views as much or as detailed a description as more popular views, and may not include tiny-minority views at all (by example, the article on the Earth only very briefly refers to the Flat Earth theory, a view of a distinct minority).

Jecowa 06:12, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, and I don't know how it is in the Christian-extremist USA, but here in Europe sex by adolescents is perfectly normal and nothing to worry about, so these opinions have way too much (even serious) text in the article about them compared to the general POV. Salaskan 16:08, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

• I agree that this doesn't represent a worldwide viewpoint, but to be honest, I'm not even sure that this represents a US viewpoint. Since when is it abnormal and horrible for adolescents to explore their sexuality? It seems that many on this talk page raised their eyebrows a bit while reading this section. It moralizes too much and really ought to focus more on facts about adolescent sexuality rather than opining on whether or not adolescent sexuality creates psychologically-scarred people. --Strangerer (Talk | Contribs) 22:37, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

re: Adolescent psychology

This is an awkward sentence:

Due to the adolescents' experiencing various cognitive and physical changes, it is frequently notable that they start giving more importance to their peer group and less to their parents, due to the aggregated influence of whom they might go on to indulge in activities not deemed as socially acceptable, although this may be more of a social phenomenon than a psychological one.[2]

Brian Pearson 13:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Does this make sense for the introduction?

Adolescence (Latin adolescentia, from adolescere, to grow up) is the period or process of growing from puberty to adulthood. It is also the state or condition of being adolescent. Teenagers (ages 13-19) are usually adolescent, though in some individuals, puberty may extend a few years beyond the teenage years, and in some individuals, puberty begins in the pre-teen years. --167.206.128.33 16:18, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

WP:DICDEF additions (i.e. "it is also...") are no good. Also, "from puberty to adulthood" is not correct; puberty is a long process, it is not a point "from" which another process begins. I don't understand the purpose of your changes; would you explain? Photouploaded 16:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I thought puberty was just the age when a person becomes physically capable of reproducing offspring. I didn't know it was a long process. I thought when a girl reaches her period...one year from that...that's when puberty starts for them...and then she becomes an adolescent...and when she attained maturity...that's when she is an adult. For a boy, I guess it would be when they start to ejaculate. That's when puberty starts for them...and when he attained maturity...that is when he is an adult. I hope I'm making sense to you. --167.206.128.33 22:41, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Google thinks we're both right; here, "puberty" is referred to both as the time at which reproduction first becomes possible and the entire time period of sexual maturation. Do you have any problems with the current version? I think it is fine. Photouploaded 04:40, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

If we'll both right, then why can't we use my version? Or even better, why can't we use both of them? --167.206.128.33 13:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Because you are banned User:Jessica Liao. Your contributions will always be removed on sight. --Fire Star 火星 14:23, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Introduction makes no sense. Well, it makes some sense but is awkward sounding.24.218.121.21 (talk) 05:11, 21 August 2009 (UTC) Lillian 0.2.34456.12.90 ...

The introduction has changed since this section was started. What part of the introduction do you find awkward? The first part, which has essentially remained the same? Where it says "Adolescence (lat adolescere, (to) grow)"? Flyer22 (talk) 07:17, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Images

Some of these pictures just don't seem to bring anything to this article.

• First off, 4 out of 5 images are exclusively male
• Image:Teen girls.jpg, the one picture that contains girls is a rather poor shot from behind. You can't even see their faces!
• Why are there two pictures of a 'candid male teen'?

--Is this fact...? 07:01, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree. This article needs more international flavor. These images predominantly depict white, middle class males (from English speaking countries no less). I'll see if I can't get some pictures of Japanese teens since I'm here. Brian Adler (talk) 04:27, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, agree with the both of you, of course. Flyer22 (talk) 05:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

That's nice, but I'm curious why you specifically wanted to find pictures of Japanese teens? Heh... --70.142.54.69 (talk) 14:07, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm guessing that BrianAdler, as wanting more diversity in this article image-wise and simply thinking about different ethnicities/cultures, thought of Japanese culture, among others. He set out to obtain images of Japanese adolescents first. You have to start somewhere, and maybe he did not have the time to look for images of other ethnicities. Flyer22 (talk) 00:53, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I though that the image of the Emo boy and the boy in the hat are very appropiate as it visually shows the fashions of teenagers, as they set street fashion and are very fashionable!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.159.107.81 (talk) 22:13, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

I got rid of the picture, 'Teenagers in a Colorado Classroom as it contained young men with beards. Teenagers don't have beards, these men must have been around 20. Anyway, there faces were very small in the photo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.192.80 (talk) 18:55, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I changed the photo to a teenager that seems very suitable for this article, you can see on [[File:Rendy.jpg]]. 118.136.39.221 (talk) 12:51, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

this Rendy kid is showing a obsene hand gesture. Do you think this does teenagers any favours making adults hate them more? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.253.244.209 (talk) 18:22, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

The picture of the "emo" guy doesn't make sense, because no one can decide on what emo actually is, and it isn't really a characteristic of adolescence anyway. Championpork (talk) 03:52, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

The picture makes sense to me. While "emo" is not one thing, we certainly know that it does not mean cheery, LOL. (That's not to say that an emo person cannot be cheery at times.) In any case, the picture is not meant to serve as a characteristic of adolescence/teenage life. It serves as being a part of teenage culture, which is why it is in the Culture section. Flyer22 (talk) 23:15, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

• Images being exclusively male is unfair and biased. Add pictures of girls please, that is just ridiculous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.21.58 (talk) 08:22, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

This article has pictures of girls now, the main image and the couples image. Flyer22 (talk) 21:13, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Military Service

"The age at which teens are allowed to serve in the military is generally younger than the legal drinking age, for obvious reasons."

What obvious reasons? This actually seems to be a bit counter-intuitive to me, but since I have negative feelings on both alcohol and military service I might not be the best to judge. At the very least it's needlessly vague. 69.181.55.239 (talk) 06:13, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I removed it, it does not even seem true, let alone have an obvious reason.--Patrick (talk) 07:01, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Regarding section "Collective Noun of Teenagers"

This section seems unencyclopedic to me. It refers to a question (http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080926120826AAx8byC) someone posted on "yahoo [sic] Answers". There were only 16 answers to this question, and the selected answer appears to me to be intended to be 'clever' or 'humorous', and provides no citation. I feel this is akin to making a section about a conversation you had with a couple of friends about a subject; one of your friends provides a dryly humorous answer, your friends have a few chuckles over it. Will someone with more WP experience please review and possible delete this section? Thanks. 4.79.81.4 (talk) 20:37, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree. I have removed the section.WotherspoonSmith (talk) 03:34, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

What?

"In recent years, however, the start of puberty has seen an increase in preadolescence and extension beyond the teenage years, making adolescence less simple to discern.[1][5][2]"

Hmm, I don't think I quite agree completely. However, I think they are right about it over all. I think ages 10 is when it starts (puberty) and then ends around 20-22. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Punkymonkey987 (talk • contribs) 05:40, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

The above quote is correct. Puberty has been starting earlier and earlier for each generation. But, no, puberty does not typically end at 20-22 (puberty ending that late would be an abnormal case, such as the result of delayed puberty). I mean, yes, human males may not get facial hair until their 20s, but I wouldn't necessarily say they are still going through puberty. Puberty may end at 20 for a small number of males, but I wouldn't say it's still going on at age 22. Flyer22 (talk) 00:05, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Coming back to say that I meant the above quote is mostly correct. I am certain that there are not too many cases where puberty has extended beyond the teenage years (and I certainly cannot think of any documented case in which that has happened), even in the case of delayed puberty. Though I need to read up on that more, because the Delayed puberty article says that puberty can be delayed for several years. If you think of several as meaning 7 or more, like I do, then that could mean puberty not happening until as late as age 17 or even 19. However, the original source for that part about "extension beyond the teenage years" actually means adolescence as extending beyond the teenage years, not puberty (particularly for males). I have changed that part of the lead (intro) to: "In recent years, however, the start of puberty has had somewhat of an increase in preadolescence (particularly females), and adolescence has had an occasional extension beyond the teenage years (typically males). This has made adolescence less simple to discern." Flyer22 (talk) 23:39, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Contrary

The construct of Adolescence has not gone without criticism. There should be some good quotes from [1]. EmilianaMartín (talk) 16:27, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Teen age vs adolescence culture

According to James May's 20th Century 24 - Episode 5 - Inventing The Teenager [2] he say's "In 1900, there were... no teenagers." Shouldn't this be noted or discussed as the term is pretty recent? Faro0485 (talk) 12:27, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. If it is expanded upon with valid sources, yes. If we use that James May source, we, of course, should not include that link to Veoh (per Wikipedia and its thoughts about sourcing through videos), but there should be more than one or two sentences about it if it is added. Flyer22 (talk) 19:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree entirely. It's pretty clear that the concept of "teenager" is an outcome of the growth of (primarily American) consumer culture - a period of freedom with spending power but without responsibility. It's been actively encouraged within that culture as a supposed universal, but there are still planty of places wordwide where no such concept exists. In such cultures, the transition from child/cultural learner to adult/cultural supporter is frequently via a specific initiatory event, there being no "transition period" beyond the specific preparation for initiation. This article should bring these points to the fore if it is to be considered authoritative and unbaised. 212.159.59.5 (talk) 09:03, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Update in age of marriage

The article states that "the age at which people are allowed to marry also varies, from 9 in Yemen to 22 for males and 20 for females in China..."

However, the new age of marriage is 17 in Yemen, according to http://yementimes.com/article.shtml?i=1233&p=front&a=1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.79.233.227 (talk) 12:27, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Taken care of, though I need to do more research on that. Flyer22 (talk) 02:43, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Statutory Rape

"Sexual intercourse with a person below the local age of consent is treated as the crime of statutory rape."

The above statement is not universally true. In the UK the age of consent is 16, yet it is only statutory rape if one of the people is 12 or under. It is still against the law to have sex with someone 13-15 years old but it is not rape, it is a much lesser offence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.218.188.24 (talk) 19:55, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Taken care of. I inserted the word "usually" into the above quoted sentence. It now reads as: "Sexual intercourse with a person below the local age of consent is usually treated as the crime of statutory rape."

I will probably later add in that example about the UK that you mention. Flyer22 (talk) 02:43, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Just wondering

Why teenagers are treated bad by police and children 12 and under are treated nicer, i feel like its discrmination. Mickman1234 (talk) 02:19, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Image debate: Image:A_boy_in_the_mirror.jpg vs. Image:Adolescentboy.jpg.

I insist that the first image is the better of two. Why? As I stated to the IP who has argued with me about it, the second picture has been reverted before (more than once) in the past,[3][4][5][6][7] in favor of the long-standing Image:WingsHaircut.jpg and does not show the very definition of puberty; puberty is mainly about a body changing into adult form. The first image shows a well-built teenage male who has achieved adult form. Additionally, it is the IP's opinion that the boy in the first image has gone through all the physical changes of puberty. I point out that some 16-year-old males are still going through puberty and may have that body type. The IP wants the second image because it shows an acne-faced teenager, and because eighth graders are likely to have acne. I point out that this article is not even mostly focusing on eighth graders; I have read most of the sources. My revert is about the best picture. The one of the well-built teenage male who has achieved an adult body, which is what puberty is mainly about, who may still be going through puberty, is obviously the better image (in my opinion, of course). Not some image of an acne-faced teenage boy just to demonstrate that some teenagers get acne and teenage males may or may not have facial hair. The first image shows what the body morphs into, structure-wise, as well as that teenage males may or may not have facial hair. If the first image is not used, then I strongly feel that the long-standing image should be there instead of the one the IP has chosen; in addition, the image the IP has chosen is very likely of the IP's own son (as suggested by editors before). Why is that relevant? Well, it shows that the IP has another (or rather main) motive for wanting the second image added. And both images being in the article is not the best route to go; it makes readers ask the question of why there isn't a female teenager also in the section. I do want a picture of a female teenager in that section, though. Flyer22 (talk) 05:41, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the two male images in debate, here is "my version" and here is the IP's version. Flyer22 (talk) 06:09, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Hmm well I'm seeing these two for the first time. I'm not certain yet if I want to support either, but here are impressions: I think that a more "overall" photo should be favored, that is, one that shows more of the person's stature and build. Adolescentboy.jpg only shows the face, which is only a small part. I think it lacks enough illustrative ability due to this. A_boy_in_the_mirror.jpg shows more of the body, though I must admit the photo is lower quality, due to it being a camera phone and the flash being reflected. Also, the male appears to be a bit more "idealized" including an almost complete lack of body hair (not certain if it has not grown in or has been deliberately removed). It looks like the subject took the photo to show himself off. I guess what I'm getting at is I think a new photo altogether would be better. In books on human development and related, the subject in the photos tends to be visible at least from the knees up, usually facing forward, sometimes with the face obscured or looking away. If I had to pick though, I'd say A_boy_in_the_mirror.jpg.Legitimus (talk) 12:30, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for weighing in on this, Legitimus. I get your point about the first image seeming "idealized" due to the boy having a six pack physique; in fact, I was initially going to revert it because I felt/feel that it is only about self-promotion on the part of the teenage male (I assume he is still a teenager) who uploaded it and that it added nothing to the article. But then I saw the value in it, how it captures the overall morphing of a boy's body into an adult body (though we are not seeing it live and he may still be going through puberty); we are seeing the effect puberty has had on him. And while his body is too "idealized," a lot of athleic teenage males (such as football players) have that type of physique as well. I am one of five children, with two brothers. I'm one of the females, as you know; my mother had three girls (and I am the oldest sibling). My 16-year-old (soon to be 17 in October) brother, who is athletic, basically has the same type of build as the boy in the first image; yes, even a six pack that he likes to show to girls, LOL. My point is that while some boys cannot relate to having this "ideal" body, some others can. The image shows the great contrast of these teenagers morphing into these adult physical states while still often being regarded as children; it serves its purpose of showing what puberty does, in my eyes, and is of decent quality. It captures the build, with or without the abs. I doubt that the boy has shaved his chest/stomach; plenty of teenage males do not yet have much, if any, hair on their chests/stomachs. Heck, as the article states, plenty of them do not yet have much, if any, facial hair. I did ask the uploader if he could tell me how old he is, though, so that I could state the picture as being of a mid or late teenage boy (though I doubted the boy is a mid teenager, as in age 15). He has not gotten back to me on that yet.

If we can find a different image showing the male adolescent physique, preferably an adolescent who is actually a teenager and where the effects of puberty are somewhat, if not very, obvious, I will be okay with that. Right now, out of these three images linked to above in this section, I prefer A_boy_in_the_mirror.jpg for the reasons I stated. Flyer22 (talk) 13:29, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Legitimus--up until their last statement. The image quality of the boy in the mirror is simply poor, and in content and presentation it's really out of whack with the factual tone of the article. (And that a lot of football players have that kind of physique is irrelevant--most adolescents are not football players, and this is a rather US-centric remark.) In short, it's not an encyclopedic image and it ought to be removed--it's a picture of a kid showing off his perfect body, and very little about the image, except for the loneliness, is reflective of real adolescence. Drmies (talk) 14:48, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I disagree that the image of the boy in the mirror is poor. It clearly shows the boy's face and body. I also am not seeing how it is "out of whack" with the factual tone of this article. This article is partly about a child's body morphing into an adult's body, and that image shows what the effect is (abs or not). The fact that a lot of teenagers are football players is not irrelevant; my point was that a lot of athletic teenage males have this body type. Are we going to say that most teenage males are not athletic? Some develop a six pack without even being athletic. This article is mostly focusing on teenagers, not 11 or 12-year-old adolescents (seeing as they are sometimes called adolescent as well). This article is not about preadolescence. On your talk page, you state the image of the boy in the mirror is unencyclopedic and close to "soft porn." As I stated there, just because the boy has his shirt off and is well-built...it is "soft-porn"? Are we not suppose to use shirtless and well-built people in Wikipedia articles? Having his shirt on hardly shows the same effect of what puberty has done to his body. And, yes, I say that the image serves its purpose -- showing how a child's body has morphed into an adult body. You want to talk "soft porn," then look at the pictures in the Non-penetrative sex article and the complaints about them (one in particular)...even though they are not of real people. Flyer22 (talk) 00:43, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not a fan of any of the three photo – they're all too "Myspace"-like – but the one that shows the torso instead of just the face is better if it's a choice between these three. A photo of just the face is too obviously about a specific individual, while the head and torso picture is less jarring since it isn't some random face suddenly staring out of the computer screen. Additionally, if part of the point is the the face has taken on a more adult-like morphology, the boy in the mirror illustrates that best in my opinion – the other two look more child-like, or at least distinctly adolescent rather than adult-like, to make that point. Regarding the one with acne, I don't know if this is legit grounds to not use it, but I personally don't like the idea of "rewarding" the uncooperative behavior of someone who repeatedly tried to force personal photos into multiple articles a while back by allowing one to stand (unless it is obviously a superior choice compared to the others – and this one is not). Even if that's not a legit reason, though, I think it's the wrong pic to use for the other reasons I stated. I agree that an "idealized" form is not the most encyclopedic example, but for now it's better than the other two. My true preference would be to have a picture more akin to what one would find in a medical textbook or such. --Icarus ^(Hi!) 22:42, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, so far, that is three people we have here preferring the image of the boy in the mirror. I would like more thoughts from others before reinstating that image. But if anyone can get an image of a male torso, preferably a picture that also show's the male's face, which demonstrates the same idea we are trying to convey with the boy in the mirror image but is considered more encyclopedic by all of us, I am all for it. Flyer22 (talk) 00:43, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

I may have found a potential contender, in wikimedia commons no less: File:Cubes teenager.jpg In this photo, the quality is better, most of the subject's face is not visible, and the body is not quite as muscled.Legitimus (talk) 02:05, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Looks good, Legitimus. I would prefer the face to be shown instead of only the chin and lip, as I stated above, but it is a good option. Instead of also focusing on the lack of facial hair, we will simply have to focus on the body structure with this image. But, yeah, the puberty section is mostly about how the body morphs anyway. What do you think of this image, Icarus3? Flyer22 (talk) 02:12, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I have added the image suggested by Legitimus. I would have liked more thoughts about the other images from other editors, but very much appreciate that at least two of the people I asked to weigh in on this matter did. The image Legitimus suggested seems like a really great fit, and I may now even prefer it to the boy in the mirror image...despite the fact that the face is not in any way identifiable. It focuses on how the upper body of the teenage male now resembles an adult form and gets across the purpose of the section. Flyer22 (talk) 21:59, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Bad Grammar?

My English certainly isn't perfect, but there are two sentences that I'm pretty sure are grammatically wrong in the "Puberty" section.

"Every person's individual timetable for puberty is influenced primarily by heredity, although environmental factors, such as diet and exercise, also exert some influence."

"The age of menarche is influenced by heredity, but a girl's diet and lifestyle contribute as well."

Shouldn't that be hereditary factors? If anyone else thinks this, could they change it? I'm hesitant to change it if I just don't know how to use hereditary correctly... thanks.

IP, I was going to respond earlier, but the different ways that people use the words "heredity" and "hereditary" confuse me. When you Google the phrase "Influenced by heredity," though, a lot of reliable sources have also used that wording. Flyer22 (talk) 00:02, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Pituitary gland secretion?

This is wrong:

"This is triggered by the pituitary gland, which secretes a surge of hormones, such as testosterone (boys) or estrogen and progesterone (girls) into the blood stream and begins the rapid maturation of the gonads: the girl's ovaries and the boy's testicles."

The pituitary gland does indeed secrete a surge of hormones. However, the hormonal agents that are released from the pituitary gland are responsible for activating the sex organs, which in turn, release the necessary chemicals.

Somebody want to correct it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.240.77.60 (talk) 05:38, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Note: Just noting that the above IP went ahead and made the changes on February 11, 2010 as 89.241.6.146. Flyer22 (talk) 00:45, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

What is TeenEvangelist doing on a page about adolenscence?

This seems to me to be more of a "spam" nature, than adding anything to the knowledge about adolescence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.18.27.136 (talk) 12:24, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

History of the concept

I came here looking for a history of the concept of adolescence. The authors of this article seem unaware that it even has a history. JKeck (talk) 21:33, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

LOL, I'm aware that it has a history. I just have not gotten around to adding a History section, JKeck. I am all for you starting one. Flyer22 (talk) 19:45, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

We now have a History section. Flyer22 (talk) 20:18, 24 September 2010 (UTC)