Should the American drinking age be repealed and violence accepted on TV?

  • Thread starter Thread starter animalcroc
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Age
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the American drinking age and the portrayal of violence and nudity on television. Participants explore the implications of the legal drinking age of 21, the societal acceptance of violence compared to nudity, and the historical context of these norms. The conversation touches on personal experiences, societal expectations, and the perceived inconsistencies in legal age restrictions.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the drinking age of 21 is inconsistent with other adult responsibilities and freedoms granted at 18, suggesting it should be repealed.
  • Others express that the current drinking age helps mitigate irresponsible behavior among younger adults, advocating for its retention.
  • There is a contention regarding the acceptance of extreme violence on television versus the societal backlash against nudity, with some participants questioning the rationale behind these norms.
  • Some participants highlight the ease of underage drinking despite legal restrictions, suggesting that laws primarily affect law-abiding citizens.
  • A participant proposes that raising the driving age could politically support lowering the drinking age, indicating a strategic approach to the issue.
  • Personal anecdotes are shared about experiences with drinking laws and societal attitudes towards alcohol and violence.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the drinking age and the portrayal of violence and nudity, with no clear consensus reached. Some support lowering the drinking age, while others believe it should remain at 21. The discussion on media portrayal also reveals differing opinions on societal values.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference historical changes to the drinking age and societal attitudes towards alcohol and violence, indicating a complex interplay of cultural and political factors that influence current norms.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to individuals exploring legal age restrictions, societal norms regarding media content, and the implications of alcohol consumption among young adults.

  • #31
animalcroc said:
If high school students are immature it's because american society has made them so. They are simply playing out the role that has relatively recently been forced upon them.

I agree.

Putting a social role onto someone is definitely a strong influence.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
animalcroc said:
It was raised in the 80's to 21 to get political brownie points from nut-case groups like MADD.

A "nut-case" group of mothers had more clout than lobbyists from the alcohol industry?

You are partly true, but the law wouldn't have been signed just because of MADD, alone. They sure gave a triumphant, grass-roots, underdog appearance to the signing, though.
 
  • #33
If only those mothers put the same amount of effort into teaching their kids to drink responsibly?
 
  • #34
Moonbear said:
As someone who wasn't old enough to drink yet, but old enough to be aware of what others that age were doing when the legal drinking age was changed, I actually think it's good to keep it at 21. Actually, I guess any age higher than 18 would be okay. Mostly, it's because it gives people a little time to adjust to the freedoms and responsibilities of being a legal adult before adding something to the mix that is known for inspiring bad judgement.

Then make it 16. According to your logic.

I think it should be 18 though. Most of my friends and I drink almost every weekend anyway. I am 18 by the way.
 
Last edited:
  • #35
animalcroc said:
If high school students are immature it's because american society has made them so. They are simply playing out the role that has relatively recently been forced upon them.

This is an alarmingly ignorant, irresponsible and immature statement.
 
  • #36
I disagree. 100 years ago 14 was adult, you worked (in the coal mines in my ancestors), 50 years ago 16 was adult now adult is pretty much 21.
It's difficult to see how this is good for society - telling 14 year olds that they have to pretend to be children for another 7 years.
 
  • #37
Cyrus said:
If only those mothers put the same amount of effort into teaching their kids to drink responsibly?
Cyrus, I'm sure they would love to, except their children are already dead
 
  • #38
Sorry MGB 50 years ago, the legal age in most states was 21. 100 years ago, you went to work very young, that didnt mean you could vote or be considered a adult.
 
  • #39
Anyone know how our drinking and driving stats measure up to that of europe with lower drinking age?
 
  • #40
drankin said:
This is an alarmingly ignorant, irresponsible and immature statement.

Back up your ignorant, irresponsible, and immature opinion.
 
  • #41
hypatia said:
Sorry MGB 50 years ago, the legal age in most states was 21. 100 years ago, you went to work very young, that didnt mean you could vote or be considered a adult.

a 100 years ago adulthood was considered reached 15 to 17. In even earlier times, adulthood was considered even younger. However, you are correct that voting was a restricted privilege. In early America, voting was for propertied white males at least 21 years of age. Note, voting was only propertied, white males who were I believe 5 years above the accepted age of adulthood.
 
  • #42
animalcroc said:
Here are two points of interest .

1) The american drinking age is 21 but yet at 18 one can do pretty much everything (and have pretty much everything done to them) imaginable. Although we know that this silly drinking law came into existence in the 80s because of the usual dirty and petty politics, media, politiicans, cops(especially) still act as if under-age drinking is the ultimate evil. Do you think it's time to repeal it? I do.

2) On TV (or anywhere else) extreme violence like arm-breaking, faces oozing with blood, gunshots to the head or eye, heads being chopped off, kids (by kids I mean 5 year olds) fighting in boxing or karate matches, etc is accepted. Just yesterday on TV I saw a real-life robber get shot by police officers with pistols and rifles at close-range and I saw his slumped over body. I found the scene nerving. Yet, if a nip*le -shot (like Janet Jackson's) appears on TV then hell is raised. I strongly disagree that violence should be accommodated while nud*ty (or s*x) should be treated as the ultimate evil. I see no rational thought behind the way things currently are. I wish it was the other way around.


I actually think you're not an adult until you turn 30. I'm in support of raising the voting age and the drinking age to age 30.
 
  • #43
LightbulbSun said:
I actually think you're not an adult until you turn 30. I'm in support of raising the voting age and the drinking age to age 30.

So, the parents would be responsible for their minor children until 30?
 
  • #44
animalcroc said:
So, the parents would be responsible for their minor children until 30?

Yes. People in their 20's still act like extreme whackos. They need further education before they can make bigger decisions such as drinking and voting. Not that you're immune from ignorance at a certain age, but 30 is the magic number for me. When you're 30 you start to calm down a bit and make better decisions.
 
  • #45
LightbulbSun said:
Yes. People in their 20's still act like extreme whackos. They need further education before they can make bigger decisions such as drinking and voting. Not that you're immune from ignorance at a certain age, but 30 is the magic number for me. When you're 30 you start to calm down a bit and make better decisions.

Opinion respected, but it looks like women won't have the chance to have kids unless they want to increase the chances of retardation. The men would need viagra.
 
  • #46
animalcroc said:
Opinion respected, but it looks like women won't have the chance to have kids unless they want to increase the chances of retardation. The men would need viagra.


Where is this statement coming from?
 
  • #47
Astronuc said:
Well, I've been drinking milk since the day I was born. Of course, after 6 months, I had to change over to cows milk. Drinking water too. I don't see anything wrong with that.

I've been drinking tea since I was 2 and coffee since I was about 11-12. Still see nothing wrong with that.

Drinking coffee at 11 or 12? A bunch of people think that's wrong believe it or not.
I don't drink cow milk but soy milk because I don't like the way the animals are treated.
 
  • #48
LightbulbSun said:
Where is this statement coming from?

Okay, there's exaggeration for humor but some truth to it.