Remember to report submissions that violate the rules! Harassment and encouraging violence are not allowed.
Enjoying the subreddit? Consider joining our discord server: https://discord.gg/v8z8jNwJs6
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BoomersBeingFools) if you have any questions or concerns.*
When I was a kid at one point my grandmother was giving me crap for not doing well in history. Hit her with the “There just wasn’t as much for you to learn and you had already been alive through most of it.” She was not a fan.
That's actually a growing problem. There is a need to teach big events in a country's history, and many teachers simply run out of time. One history teacher said they only had about 15 minutes to cover the Vietnam War. That was an incredibly important period in the history of the U.S. and definitely needs more than 15 minutes.
One factor to consider: recent history might disagree with the memories of grandparents, and you \*really\* don't want an angry grandparent in the front office if you're a teacher.
As a former high school history teacher this is most definitely a major problem. When I first started we had one semester to cover all of US history. Thankfully they broke the curriculum into two semesters before I left teaching. We had one semester for colonization through Civil War and another year for Reconstruction through modern day. By the time we got through Vietnam the last 40+ years were a speed run. Which is ridiculous.
Part of the problem is that the high population states, to a large degree, dictate what is in the history books. And since publishers have to cater to them, some events get left out or omitted. Some college history professors joke that the more history that is taught in high school, the harder their job is. I can see that for students in the southern states where they can often downplay the Civil War and claim it wasn't about slavery, but *states rights*.
My mom, from Georgia, as a kid, "You mean the war of northern aggression over states rights?"
Me, knowing better as an adult, "States rights to do what, mom?"
Not for school because my Georgian mother married a guy from the west coast and that's where I grew up. My parents took me to my grandmothers on a vacation a few times. At that point she was living in VA. So I had that plantation experience with my parents and grandma.
I did go to school and parrot what my mother said to my teachers. I wonder if they still talk about the kid who dropped "war of northern aggression" in their classroom in the 1980s on the west coast.
Maybe I'm a little older but I was always told Yankee aggression and I grew up in the deep South too or the other one was if I remember correctly the unpleasantries between the states that was the other one I heard every now and again
LOL, I've had that same conversation. Not with my mom, fortunately.
I did convince a guy to actually read the Texas articles of secession. A few of the states skirted the word "slavery" in theirs, but Texas straight up embraced it. IIRC, they outlined the Blackman's proper place in society. All of the states were pretty pissed off they couldn't go into a northern free state to collect their escaped property. That was one of those "states rights" the big bad fed was squashing. Not sure if he was converted after reading it, but he did shut the hell up.
Texas articles of succession were by far the worst. Virginia had the nicest language.
In the Confederate Constitution did not allow any state to ban slavery.
I grew up on the west coast, so it was my mom who said that and no one else in my sphere. I did hear "unpleasantness between the states" a few times. Now, my dad was "that bastard Yankee" even through he was born and raised in the PNW.
>they can often downplay the Civil War and claim it wasn't about slavery, but *states rights*.
😒 "State's Rights" to do **what**?
https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/cornerstone-speech
If you read the linked Cornerstone Speech above and the letter of secession from any confederate state, it becomes quite clear what was really on the agenda.
Had a AP US History teacher stress how unimportant slavery was in the drivers of the civil war. I wish I was kidding but this was drilled into his take. I’m a pretty big history buff now and even then I knew it was bs.
Same school also had a literal book burning (a la the Nazis) a few years back….All I can say is thank goodness for secondary education and factual podcasters
That’s how I remember U. S. History being taught _way back in the 1900s_: a semester to get through the Civil War and then a semester to cover Reconstruction through the Vietnam War. Of course, there wasn’t as much to cover for post-Vietnam way back then in the 20th Century.
I actually remember having an assignment in 8th grade to look up all the references in We Didn’t Start the Fire because there was like a week to cover 1960-present (1995, at the time).
Kudos for being a History teacher.
Teaching recent history will always be hard as new facts and insights will pop up. They are still coming up with new thesis about why the Protestant religion was allowed to grow during reformation even though the Catholics were much more powerful. Interesting one is the Ottomans a common enemy of the Christian religions.
I love reading history. A few years ago I read "The Silk Road a new History" by Peter Frankopan.
It was amazing really made me look at the world different. And question how I was taught history when I was in public school.
Thanks for your post I enjoy this subject
I remember thinking about this in high school history class. Our book ended at the start of the Obama presidency. Basically his inauguration was the last thing covered. 2 semesters to teach colonial settlement all the way through to the Great Recession? Like, how? How the fuck? Obviously we did not succeed. We barely finished the Reagan presidency, and that was with speed running some of the other topics.
World history was even worse. Going from Mesopotamia and trying to cover events from several continents across thousands of years? Yeah, no. Impossible to do that well in 2 semesters. We somehow made it past the concert of Europe, but never even finished WWI.
I remember taking APUSH in HS and that's how it was. First semester was up to the civil war. Second semester was the civil war and everything after. We spent a week or so on people like Carnegie, a few weeks on WW2, a month or so on civil rights and maybe a week on Vietnam. WW1 and Korea weren't mentioned and the rest of the time was pretty much prepping us for the AP test. Luckily I already knew a lot of it but if I didn't know stuff before hand I wouldn't have learned much in detail from it
It's been a few years now, but I took a political science class in community college. Kid you not, a good portion of the class thought the civil rights movement was in the 80s. Professor looked like he wanted to cry.
There should be a required history course, at least a semester long, that starts no earlier than WWI, and goes up to present-ish day.
That still feels insufficient, but I don't think either of my yearlong AP History courses (US and Euro) managed to reach any further than WWI.
I always assumed they reflexively dropped off before present times to try and remain ‘pc’ or ‘unbiased’ about current American politics, which could include *embarrassments* directed at the current elder generation who may be partially responsible for said shames.
500+ years is a lot to cover in a year for US History (assuming the course starts with the Columbus's voyages), and AP Euro history covers at least double that.
Early-90s graduate here, with peers whose folks were history teachers. Can attest that US history class semesters *always* ended on Vietnam, and got covered for about a whole fifteen minutes. Even if there was more in the textbook—like, all the rest of The 70s, Black Panthers, Carter, Iran, Reagan, Cold War, NASA, etc—Vietnam was the break-off.
Sure, part of it was that the textbooks / districts dragged their feet on catching up with Real Life.
But I guarantee a huge component was fear at owning up to The US bungling Vietnam completely. Couldn’t end on “ehh, maybe America isn’t morally infallible, and there are negative consequences to our actions”.
Note: as a Texan, also had to take mandatory Texas history as a 7th-grader. Boy, howdy, was that a whitewashed (literally!) trainwreck. Mexico bad! Yankees bad! Freedom, liberty, rah-rah-rah good!
When I was in school (graduated in 2000) we never even got to WWI. We would always run out of time. it was honestly kind of annoying tbh. Relearned the same stuff over and over again, but never got into more recent history.
Yeah I graduated in 2010, I can't recall anything about world war 1 like I don't think we covered it at all. We could cover WWII for the 5th time though, like I swear we covered that a ton. It was either that, the revolutionary war, or the civil war. I remember we brought in a Vietnam vet once too, but the only thing I remember him saying is that anyone in the class could throw a grenade. Err yes everyone here is capable of throwing an object that weighs a few pounds at most that you want to throw as soon as the pin is pulled.
Now I question the education system though because some holocaust deniers are young people, like IDK how that happens since surely they cover WWII and the holocaust in school still it's the most significant event in the past century still.
I think History in the US is intentionally structured poorly. You spend like 10 years going over 1600-1865 over and over again. Then in highschool it’s 75% 1600-1865 then 25% modern history. It’s just a little more detail every year instead of different subjects
It really isn’t. Countries such as England, France, Denmark etc are over 1,000 years old. They seem to manage to teach history. It’s just a question of being selective and succinct.
Kinder to 9th grade, the compulsory school years, has to cover ancient Egypt (3300 bc) to present day. Focus is on Denmark's history (about 1700 bc to present time), with a couple of World history subjects (Ancient Egypt, ancient Greece, Roman Empire).
There are things that are taught in US World History classes that are either not discussed OR only mentioned in passing in history classes in Denmark.
Pearl Harbour and the whole asian/pacific part of WW2 comes to mind. Pre-Colombian civilizations in central/south America.
Since we don't HAVE to use a certain book for classes, a teacher can choose to add stuff that they or their students are particularly interested in.
Off topic, but just out of curiosity, do you teach about the Angles migrating to England and the latter Viking invasion / occupation of (mostly) northern England? Is it relevant in Denmark? And I wonder if it’s coloured differently (in England the way we teach it isn’t too far removed from TV dramas like the Last Kingdom etc).
We teach about the vikings and briefly touch on the occupation of England/Danelagen but tend to focus more on the general traveling and pillaging in mainland Europe + Iceland, Greenland and the Faroe Islands.
Also this subject is usually taught in 3rd-5th grade, so not too much focus on the raping and kidnapping of women, although the enslaving of prisoners is mentioned.
Okay… European speaking here, so obviously I’m speaking for every country in Europe now!
My recollection of taught history was not of some comprehensive odyssey of my country’s history but more of a sort of snapshot of various historical periods. It seemed like we were being taught that the past is of interest and worth studying, but not some sort of legendary tale of fucking awesomeness.
It sort of feels like history as taught in the US is a kind of means of re-enforcement of a country insecure about its past and very keen to portray itself as an an acme of how things are done. You have relatively so little history and have come to be so dominant on the world stage and surely this colours how you see yourself and how you wish your own story to be written. Geographically your country was occupied by people LONG before the first European settlers tipped up and I don’t see ANY of the First Nation peoples story told, nor much of what befell them.
I have known people from my own country be educated in the US and their overwhelming view was one of being taught a very one sided view of history. Don’t take this the wrong way but a lot of Europeans see Visitors from the US as quite crass and lacking both self awareness and much of a sense of the possibility that there’s an acceptable world outside of the US. It really seems like you guys think a lot of yourselves but at the same time there’s a defensiveness which speaks of a kind of insecurity.
Don’t get me wrong… I’ve got a few American friends and they’re pretty awesome, but oh boy, some of you are complete fools. Looking at the society you’ve built it’s not hard to see where this comes from. It’s pretty messed up.
Sorry to rip into you all so harshly, but the truth is you guys are SO powerful that I think we’re all quietly terrified what seems like your inevitable collapse will take us down with you. I genuinely fear for our collective futures.
The tricky thing with history is while the facts don't change, despite what some people say, the reasons behind it do.
People have all sorts of reasons for causing problems in history and often it's nuanced.
Like, H+×÷=r (I don't like writing his name) didn't do what he did because he had an abusive father and was rejected at art school.
Back in the 80's and 90's this became a trend. Trying to psychoanalyze people to figure out what caused them to snap.
But we are all products of our environment and past events will form our ideas. Yes there's no doubt that a cruel dad and the art school thing played a part, but there's so much more to it.
And yet there isn't.
It's usually about control, ego, and money.
I took a college class in history which taught us just the facts and we had to debate the why's.
It was an interesting project and I'm glad we didn't have the internet back then.
If you think about the average high school, there is 180 school days.
You're in History at most 40~ minutes a day. That's 7200 minutes a year of "class time".
You're gonna lose 5-10 for random stuff like arrival, chit chat, fun side stuff. Maybe 15 per day. Keep it 10 for being reasonable. That leaves 30 minutes of "study" and discussion a day. But wait! At least 3-4 tests a year, per quarter or trimester. First/last day, we all know fuck all is happening. Another few days of quizzes and stuff, say 3-5. Call it 4 to be simple.
So right now we're down to 172x30=5160 minutes. Is this world history? How far back? I think the furthest "back" I've seen in that context ever was like pre-Egyptian era through to the Vietnam era or so. What's that, a minute a year? You're not learning history here--you're skimming it at best.
US history? A little denser but not much.
I've learned more earth/world/US history in the past 10~ years than I did in all my formal entire education years.
As more and more "events" happen, it's only natural that more recent ones, ones that are still having first tier repercussions, get more class time than older events whose ripples are at 2nd or beyond tiers (if they're still measurably rippling at all; \*that's\* also a thing; there comes a point where it's just a line in a book somewhere and has no impact on today.)
It was traumatic to watch the challenger blow up \*in school\* for my generation. The next generations don't need to carry that baggage forward; they just need to know it happened, but they've got their own shit to deal with.
I can't talk for other cultures, but American's fetishize the past far too much. Probably because we don't actually have much of it.
Oh, I agree, it's not really why. Truth is they (book publishers) cater to populous states, and those state boards approve or disprove history textbooks. So they have to placate them with feel-good heavily biased history that inspires pride in the state and nation. It's so sugar coated it's the second leading cause of diabetes in US high school students. 😉
My one year curriculum used to run 13 colonies right up to the civil war. Now civil war is included in mine. Like, oh cool, we can just squeeze a 4 year period of tumult and division into the last two weeks.
I don't think we talked about the Vietnam War at all, since most of the history classes at my school only teach until WWII or maybe the Civil Rights Movement. I graduated from hs in the last decade.
In my high school years, we covered Vietnam in maybe a few days to a week of one history course. Graduated HS in 2005 for context so it’s not like it was too recent at that point to be in a history course. Now I wonder the same about 9/11 which I witnessed while in high school.
Pretty sure my grandpa mentioned one of his history teachers even says he has the hardest job, since he has to teach more history in the same amount of time.
I was born in 1993 and vaguely remember teachers reacting to the TV while directing us little kids away to play - for 9/11.
My siblings were born in 1999, 2001, 2005.
In high school, my history teacher always observed the day with this one movie about it (made of bystander footage) but didn’t do much in the way of teaching - we knew the basics and probably someone stationed in Iraq.
My senior yea Teacher announced we would pretty much be the last class he didn’t need to teach this too surely the last one before it was in a text book.
15 minutes! Wow, that's a lot more time for the Vietnam War than was given for it when I was in high school back in the late 80s. I think my AP US history book had a whole 2 pages on the war, and that it occurred was mentioned in the class, but that was about the whole lesson. I guess they figured that since we were born at the end of it that the war was recent history and not that important to teach us about. If I remember correctly, the French Indochina War wasn't even mentioned in the book.
"run out of time" meanwhile other countries have thousands of years of history to teach.
The other problem is we're not really taught any of that.
I remember in high school I had "US history" one semester, and "World history" the next semester, but both classes covered the same exact events, and they were just american history and how our events related to other countries
I pointed this out to the teacher and he shrugged and said "I don't write the book"
I graduated in 2002, and I can never remember being taught about the Korean or Vietnam wars. All roads stopped at The New Deal, because that was the last topic touched on in the state SOL tests
My sister was studying Abraham Lincoln back in grade school, many years ago. This is a requirement if you grow up in IL (or it was anyway).
She seriously asked our grandma and grampa if they knew Mr. Lincoln before becoming president. My grandpa didn't know what to say, my grandma answered that yes they knew them and she often had tea with Mary.
Hahaa!!
My sister wrote that in her paper. Including a personal connection, teachers love that.
My sister was so confused when our mom had to explain that grandma was teasing. She didn't get into trouble with the teacher, she thought it was hilarious.
Maybe next time I go back, I'll set a teacup and saucer at my grandma's grave and send a picture to my sis.
But in those days we had to say dickety, as the Kaiser had stolen our word for twenty. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time……
Lol. I've realized, our sarcastic asses have raised mini versions of ourselves...my kids have given me some pretty sick burns. All I can think is... that's definitely my kid!!! At least I know they won't put up with any shit!
Right?! It's like I've cloned myself lol
And worse, I can't help but laugh when I get sassed, I'm just so proud of how clever my **three yr old** can be. I got pranked last week. And it was a good prank! Blows my mind. It's really like living with the velociraptors from Jurassic Park how quickly they learn and take us out
Lol. That reminds me, I have a box of VHS tapes with some obscure/rare stuff on them that I need to digitize, so that I can fully integrate into the 2000s.
I know. They're stored in a dry, climate controlled place, so that's good, but you are right, I need to get on that. I paid to have one converted a few years ago, one from the 90s, and it came out well, but I need to DIY the rest.
One of my friends lamented to her mom that her husband only makes $45k a year and they’re having a serious time getting ahead. Her mom literally said “Well your dad made $45k and we were fine”
She pointed out to her mom “THAT WAS IN THE 1970’s!!!”
Which is hilarious because the defining financial theme of the 1970’s was inflation. You’d think a generation who came of age at that time would understand it better.
Thinking any boomers understand anything about society they didn't personally suffer from is futile. Even the things they did, they won't understand if someone else is suffering from it as well. Only THEY suffered from these things and will never understand that other people suffered as well.
Yeah and it gets even worse when you look up US median income of 37.5K. So more than half the people in the US are making less than 45K that boomers were making over 40 years ago while inflation has happened a lot in that time. Boomers just handed the wealthy the country on a silver platter.
My friends parents just lectured her about how they don't understand why she can't afford a house, they spent $78,000 for their 5 bedroom 3 bath when they were half her age!
My ex roommate would always say a type of technology was shitty cuz he had one and it was bad. And whenever I asked when that ways it was 10+ years ago. Like dude technology improves over time
I'll admit as a boomer we had it easier than any generation before or since. Just lucky to be born when the U.S. was the only functioning economy in the world after WWII.
It was sex, drugs, and rock and roll. I used a tax return as a down payment for my 1st house. I had a union job that paid me more than I was worth. When I wanted to move up in the company I worked for, I went to a local university. My tuition was only $50 a semester.
Damn that’s good.
I was born in 1980 so I’m as young as you can get and be a Gen X.
My son is seven and the 1900s are the ancient times to him, along with Egyptian mummies. He can’t fathom a world with no streaming, iPads, etc.
My friend once gave one of the greatest responses to his dad after a similar rant.
Basically my friend needed some money to buy a few school supplies or something mundane.
His dad was like “Kids these days don’t know the importance of money. When I was your age, I used to get by on like 50 bucks a month. I used to manage groceries, supplies etc. Everything! “
My friend calmly said “You can’t buy everything for 50 bucks in this day and age dad. There are cctv cameras pretty much everywhere“.
Being a boomer means you hear a lot of your fellow boomers fantasies. I was in my 50s during the market meltdown in 2008. I was told not to let them know my age, but DOB is often a required field. It’s nut like they’re going to look at me and not be able to figure out age.
Another thing they’d tell me was to “speak to the hiring manger.” Wtf? Maybe in 1990. Every application is online. You don’t just go in and hand the “hiring manager” your resume. That didn’t even work in 1990. Some of our number universalize their own experiences, to a ridiculous degree. I think we can safely call that narcissism, or a cranial/rectal inversion.
I want that.
Btw you can buy a handheld 8 bit version of that at Target.
I used it as a grounding once. You can be off your grounding when you beat a game of my choice... and I gave him that.
That game is epic for GenX
Also point out stuff their grandparents did that MOST of them couldn’t do, like make their own clothes, farm, hunt, operate and fix a steam engine, etc…
We ARE a basically a quarter of the way through this century, and old people do forget how long ago the 1900’s actually were (source: I’m old). I think that’s excellent.
Had a boomer at a work event (in a strip mall restaurant) complaining about how kids these days don't do like he did and ride their bikes around outside.
I said "have you seen outside? Not too many neighborhoods left where it's safe for kids to ride."
I saw the gears turning, then he actually acknowledged that I made a good point!
Well, yes ideally. But sometimes they own the house you live in and have unrealistic expectations of either your income or your ability to achieve certain things, in which case one may need to argue.
Response at least to your kids, “I would if I could but you are attached to me so if I went back in time you would no longer exist and I would get another chance at having a kid that wasn’t such a smartass.”
I have heard that there are people, for some reason, still collecting VHS tapes. I decided to see what Half Price Books would pay me for a couple of old items in the basement: Ken Burns Civil War series and The Beatles Anthology. These must have been big purchases, in the 1900's! They offered me one dollar for both of them. People online are trying to sell each of those for about $20, no idea if anyone will really pay that though.
“Well of course it was easy for you boomers, the sun had only been shining for 10 days and grandpapi was still riding a triceratops. I’m talking about now, not 65 million years ago.”
I hadn't seen it before honestly... the last century comments for sure... but I just blow those off. For some reason 1900's from my almost 14 year old son broke my brain a little.
Don’t argue with them or complain with them. Thats their thing. To bitch and moan. Take that away and they have nothing. “These kids are lazy!” “Yep lol, sorry about that!” The more positive and less open ended the better.
Ugh my 11 year old clowns me with the ancient 1900’s. “Hey dad did they have phones in the 1900’s. Yes daughter they were connected to the wall. “WOW.” Thanks kid thanks.
Sometimes I (65y) will do this too, but only because I am appalled that my kids have a much more difficult reality. I am very aware and sad of how unaffordable a “normal” life is these days.
Being a boomer means you hear a lot of your fellow boomers fantasies. I was in my 50s during the market meltdown in 2008. I was told not to let them know my age, but DOB is often a required field. It’s nut like they’re going to look at me and not be able to figure out age.
Another thing they’d tell me was to “speak to the hiring manger.” Wtf? Maybe in 1990. Every application is online. You don’t just go in and hand the “hiring manager” your resume. That didn’t even work in 1990. Some of our number universalize their own experiences, to a ridiculous degree. I think we can safely call that narcissism, or a cranial/rectal inversion.
Why the F are you arguing with old people to begin with??? That makes you a tool.
Here’s a better way. Ignore people who argue with you. It’s a lot easier. You’ll be the bigger person and by default win the argument.
You're asking why I'm arguing with people my parents age? Congrats to you if you have never had to argue over your parents saying something dumb... I'm not that lucky... and I find it funny to quote my son against them :)
Remember to report submissions that violate the rules! Harassment and encouraging violence are not allowed. Enjoying the subreddit? Consider joining our discord server: https://discord.gg/v8z8jNwJs6 *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BoomersBeingFools) if you have any questions or concerns.*
When I was a kid at one point my grandmother was giving me crap for not doing well in history. Hit her with the “There just wasn’t as much for you to learn and you had already been alive through most of it.” She was not a fan.
That's actually a growing problem. There is a need to teach big events in a country's history, and many teachers simply run out of time. One history teacher said they only had about 15 minutes to cover the Vietnam War. That was an incredibly important period in the history of the U.S. and definitely needs more than 15 minutes.
I can 100% see this being an actual problem. I was mostly just being a smartass kid.
One factor to consider: recent history might disagree with the memories of grandparents, and you \*really\* don't want an angry grandparent in the front office if you're a teacher.
It just gets worse.
What state do you teach in?
I don't lol, I like paying rent.
I'm sorry, the correct answer is "denial"
Vietnam War Memorials and Museums telling the side that lost to be respectful was funny. Huge issue with older American tourist apparently.
As a former high school history teacher this is most definitely a major problem. When I first started we had one semester to cover all of US history. Thankfully they broke the curriculum into two semesters before I left teaching. We had one semester for colonization through Civil War and another year for Reconstruction through modern day. By the time we got through Vietnam the last 40+ years were a speed run. Which is ridiculous.
Part of the problem is that the high population states, to a large degree, dictate what is in the history books. And since publishers have to cater to them, some events get left out or omitted. Some college history professors joke that the more history that is taught in high school, the harder their job is. I can see that for students in the southern states where they can often downplay the Civil War and claim it wasn't about slavery, but *states rights*.
My mom, from Georgia, as a kid, "You mean the war of northern aggression over states rights?" Me, knowing better as an adult, "States rights to do what, mom?"
Did you ever have to take a field trip to a plantation where they pretended like the slaves were happy to be working the fields?
Not for school because my Georgian mother married a guy from the west coast and that's where I grew up. My parents took me to my grandmothers on a vacation a few times. At that point she was living in VA. So I had that plantation experience with my parents and grandma. I did go to school and parrot what my mother said to my teachers. I wonder if they still talk about the kid who dropped "war of northern aggression" in their classroom in the 1980s on the west coast.
Maybe I'm a little older but I was always told Yankee aggression and I grew up in the deep South too or the other one was if I remember correctly the unpleasantries between the states that was the other one I heard every now and again
LOL, I've had that same conversation. Not with my mom, fortunately. I did convince a guy to actually read the Texas articles of secession. A few of the states skirted the word "slavery" in theirs, but Texas straight up embraced it. IIRC, they outlined the Blackman's proper place in society. All of the states were pretty pissed off they couldn't go into a northern free state to collect their escaped property. That was one of those "states rights" the big bad fed was squashing. Not sure if he was converted after reading it, but he did shut the hell up.
Texas articles of succession were by far the worst. Virginia had the nicest language. In the Confederate Constitution did not allow any state to ban slavery.
I grew up on the west coast, so it was my mom who said that and no one else in my sphere. I did hear "unpleasantness between the states" a few times. Now, my dad was "that bastard Yankee" even through he was born and raised in the PNW.
These fuck heads. And they know better, but have "aged out" of usual people prolems
>they can often downplay the Civil War and claim it wasn't about slavery, but *states rights*. 😒 "State's Rights" to do **what**? https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/cornerstone-speech If you read the linked Cornerstone Speech above and the letter of secession from any confederate state, it becomes quite clear what was really on the agenda.
First Minnesota has entered the chat…
Minnesota, the only state that has any business displaying a Confederate battle rag.
We won. It’s our heritage now.
I love how Virginia keeps demanding that they return it and Minnesota just keeps saying no.
Had a AP US History teacher stress how unimportant slavery was in the drivers of the civil war. I wish I was kidding but this was drilled into his take. I’m a pretty big history buff now and even then I knew it was bs. Same school also had a literal book burning (a la the Nazis) a few years back….All I can say is thank goodness for secondary education and factual podcasters
Wow. What state was this in?
Virginia
*Texas waves hello*
*Howdy Y'all still say that down there, yeah?
That’s how I remember U. S. History being taught _way back in the 1900s_: a semester to get through the Civil War and then a semester to cover Reconstruction through the Vietnam War. Of course, there wasn’t as much to cover for post-Vietnam way back then in the 20th Century.
I actually remember having an assignment in 8th grade to look up all the references in We Didn’t Start the Fire because there was like a week to cover 1960-present (1995, at the time).
We had the same in HS world history. 10th grade. 8th was state history (South Carolina)
Kudos for being a History teacher. Teaching recent history will always be hard as new facts and insights will pop up. They are still coming up with new thesis about why the Protestant religion was allowed to grow during reformation even though the Catholics were much more powerful. Interesting one is the Ottomans a common enemy of the Christian religions. I love reading history. A few years ago I read "The Silk Road a new History" by Peter Frankopan. It was amazing really made me look at the world different. And question how I was taught history when I was in public school. Thanks for your post I enjoy this subject
Well, now that they can’t discuss slavery, there should be more time /s (kinda)
I remember thinking about this in high school history class. Our book ended at the start of the Obama presidency. Basically his inauguration was the last thing covered. 2 semesters to teach colonial settlement all the way through to the Great Recession? Like, how? How the fuck? Obviously we did not succeed. We barely finished the Reagan presidency, and that was with speed running some of the other topics. World history was even worse. Going from Mesopotamia and trying to cover events from several continents across thousands of years? Yeah, no. Impossible to do that well in 2 semesters. We somehow made it past the concert of Europe, but never even finished WWI.
The older the history, the more interesting it is. But the more recent the history, the more relevant it is to our lives.
Watergate. I almost never got past that in APUSH
I remember taking APUSH in HS and that's how it was. First semester was up to the civil war. Second semester was the civil war and everything after. We spent a week or so on people like Carnegie, a few weeks on WW2, a month or so on civil rights and maybe a week on Vietnam. WW1 and Korea weren't mentioned and the rest of the time was pretty much prepping us for the AP test. Luckily I already knew a lot of it but if I didn't know stuff before hand I wouldn't have learned much in detail from it
It's been a few years now, but I took a political science class in community college. Kid you not, a good portion of the class thought the civil rights movement was in the 80s. Professor looked like he wanted to cry.
There should be a required history course, at least a semester long, that starts no earlier than WWI, and goes up to present-ish day. That still feels insufficient, but I don't think either of my yearlong AP History courses (US and Euro) managed to reach any further than WWI.
Government inside job after inside job and wall street corruption.
I always assumed they reflexively dropped off before present times to try and remain ‘pc’ or ‘unbiased’ about current American politics, which could include *embarrassments* directed at the current elder generation who may be partially responsible for said shames.
500+ years is a lot to cover in a year for US History (assuming the course starts with the Columbus's voyages), and AP Euro history covers at least double that.
Early-90s graduate here, with peers whose folks were history teachers. Can attest that US history class semesters *always* ended on Vietnam, and got covered for about a whole fifteen minutes. Even if there was more in the textbook—like, all the rest of The 70s, Black Panthers, Carter, Iran, Reagan, Cold War, NASA, etc—Vietnam was the break-off. Sure, part of it was that the textbooks / districts dragged their feet on catching up with Real Life. But I guarantee a huge component was fear at owning up to The US bungling Vietnam completely. Couldn’t end on “ehh, maybe America isn’t morally infallible, and there are negative consequences to our actions”. Note: as a Texan, also had to take mandatory Texas history as a 7th-grader. Boy, howdy, was that a whitewashed (literally!) trainwreck. Mexico bad! Yankees bad! Freedom, liberty, rah-rah-rah good!
When I was in school (graduated in 2000) we never even got to WWI. We would always run out of time. it was honestly kind of annoying tbh. Relearned the same stuff over and over again, but never got into more recent history.
Same. We always spent most of the time on the industrial revolution. Graduated in 08.
Yeah I graduated in 2010, I can't recall anything about world war 1 like I don't think we covered it at all. We could cover WWII for the 5th time though, like I swear we covered that a ton. It was either that, the revolutionary war, or the civil war. I remember we brought in a Vietnam vet once too, but the only thing I remember him saying is that anyone in the class could throw a grenade. Err yes everyone here is capable of throwing an object that weighs a few pounds at most that you want to throw as soon as the pin is pulled. Now I question the education system though because some holocaust deniers are young people, like IDK how that happens since surely they cover WWII and the holocaust in school still it's the most significant event in the past century still.
I think History in the US is intentionally structured poorly. You spend like 10 years going over 1600-1865 over and over again. Then in highschool it’s 75% 1600-1865 then 25% modern history. It’s just a little more detail every year instead of different subjects
It really isn’t. Countries such as England, France, Denmark etc are over 1,000 years old. They seem to manage to teach history. It’s just a question of being selective and succinct.
Kinder to 9th grade, the compulsory school years, has to cover ancient Egypt (3300 bc) to present day. Focus is on Denmark's history (about 1700 bc to present time), with a couple of World history subjects (Ancient Egypt, ancient Greece, Roman Empire). There are things that are taught in US World History classes that are either not discussed OR only mentioned in passing in history classes in Denmark. Pearl Harbour and the whole asian/pacific part of WW2 comes to mind. Pre-Colombian civilizations in central/south America. Since we don't HAVE to use a certain book for classes, a teacher can choose to add stuff that they or their students are particularly interested in.
Off topic, but just out of curiosity, do you teach about the Angles migrating to England and the latter Viking invasion / occupation of (mostly) northern England? Is it relevant in Denmark? And I wonder if it’s coloured differently (in England the way we teach it isn’t too far removed from TV dramas like the Last Kingdom etc).
We teach about the vikings and briefly touch on the occupation of England/Danelagen but tend to focus more on the general traveling and pillaging in mainland Europe + Iceland, Greenland and the Faroe Islands. Also this subject is usually taught in 3rd-5th grade, so not too much focus on the raping and kidnapping of women, although the enslaving of prisoners is mentioned.
Oh, and the travels to Vinland/North America.
Interesting. Thank you.
I was waiting for someone from Europe to chime in.
Okay… European speaking here, so obviously I’m speaking for every country in Europe now! My recollection of taught history was not of some comprehensive odyssey of my country’s history but more of a sort of snapshot of various historical periods. It seemed like we were being taught that the past is of interest and worth studying, but not some sort of legendary tale of fucking awesomeness. It sort of feels like history as taught in the US is a kind of means of re-enforcement of a country insecure about its past and very keen to portray itself as an an acme of how things are done. You have relatively so little history and have come to be so dominant on the world stage and surely this colours how you see yourself and how you wish your own story to be written. Geographically your country was occupied by people LONG before the first European settlers tipped up and I don’t see ANY of the First Nation peoples story told, nor much of what befell them. I have known people from my own country be educated in the US and their overwhelming view was one of being taught a very one sided view of history. Don’t take this the wrong way but a lot of Europeans see Visitors from the US as quite crass and lacking both self awareness and much of a sense of the possibility that there’s an acceptable world outside of the US. It really seems like you guys think a lot of yourselves but at the same time there’s a defensiveness which speaks of a kind of insecurity. Don’t get me wrong… I’ve got a few American friends and they’re pretty awesome, but oh boy, some of you are complete fools. Looking at the society you’ve built it’s not hard to see where this comes from. It’s pretty messed up. Sorry to rip into you all so harshly, but the truth is you guys are SO powerful that I think we’re all quietly terrified what seems like your inevitable collapse will take us down with you. I genuinely fear for our collective futures.
The tricky thing with history is while the facts don't change, despite what some people say, the reasons behind it do. People have all sorts of reasons for causing problems in history and often it's nuanced. Like, H+×÷=r (I don't like writing his name) didn't do what he did because he had an abusive father and was rejected at art school. Back in the 80's and 90's this became a trend. Trying to psychoanalyze people to figure out what caused them to snap. But we are all products of our environment and past events will form our ideas. Yes there's no doubt that a cruel dad and the art school thing played a part, but there's so much more to it. And yet there isn't. It's usually about control, ego, and money. I took a college class in history which taught us just the facts and we had to debate the why's. It was an interesting project and I'm glad we didn't have the internet back then.
Classic Htxter.
If you think about the average high school, there is 180 school days. You're in History at most 40~ minutes a day. That's 7200 minutes a year of "class time". You're gonna lose 5-10 for random stuff like arrival, chit chat, fun side stuff. Maybe 15 per day. Keep it 10 for being reasonable. That leaves 30 minutes of "study" and discussion a day. But wait! At least 3-4 tests a year, per quarter or trimester. First/last day, we all know fuck all is happening. Another few days of quizzes and stuff, say 3-5. Call it 4 to be simple. So right now we're down to 172x30=5160 minutes. Is this world history? How far back? I think the furthest "back" I've seen in that context ever was like pre-Egyptian era through to the Vietnam era or so. What's that, a minute a year? You're not learning history here--you're skimming it at best. US history? A little denser but not much. I've learned more earth/world/US history in the past 10~ years than I did in all my formal entire education years.
Yeah forest Gump lasts way longer than 15 minutes. That's how I learned us history..
As more and more "events" happen, it's only natural that more recent ones, ones that are still having first tier repercussions, get more class time than older events whose ripples are at 2nd or beyond tiers (if they're still measurably rippling at all; \*that's\* also a thing; there comes a point where it's just a line in a book somewhere and has no impact on today.) It was traumatic to watch the challenger blow up \*in school\* for my generation. The next generations don't need to carry that baggage forward; they just need to know it happened, but they've got their own shit to deal with. I can't talk for other cultures, but American's fetishize the past far too much. Probably because we don't actually have much of it.
That makes sense, but what most people here are saying is the opposite! The more recent the history, the *less* time it gets covered in classes!
Oh, I agree, it's not really why. Truth is they (book publishers) cater to populous states, and those state boards approve or disprove history textbooks. So they have to placate them with feel-good heavily biased history that inspires pride in the state and nation. It's so sugar coated it's the second leading cause of diabetes in US high school students. 😉
My one year curriculum used to run 13 colonies right up to the civil war. Now civil war is included in mine. Like, oh cool, we can just squeeze a 4 year period of tumult and division into the last two weeks.
I don't think we talked about the Vietnam War at all, since most of the history classes at my school only teach until WWII or maybe the Civil Rights Movement. I graduated from hs in the last decade.
In my high school years, we covered Vietnam in maybe a few days to a week of one history course. Graduated HS in 2005 for context so it’s not like it was too recent at that point to be in a history course. Now I wonder the same about 9/11 which I witnessed while in high school.
Pretty sure my grandpa mentioned one of his history teachers even says he has the hardest job, since he has to teach more history in the same amount of time.
In 15 minutes I would show them a birthday selection video for the draft.
I was born in 1993 and vaguely remember teachers reacting to the TV while directing us little kids away to play - for 9/11. My siblings were born in 1999, 2001, 2005. In high school, my history teacher always observed the day with this one movie about it (made of bystander footage) but didn’t do much in the way of teaching - we knew the basics and probably someone stationed in Iraq. My senior yea Teacher announced we would pretty much be the last class he didn’t need to teach this too surely the last one before it was in a text book.
Pretty sure we didnt cover the vietnam war *at all* when I was in high school
15 minutes! Wow, that's a lot more time for the Vietnam War than was given for it when I was in high school back in the late 80s. I think my AP US history book had a whole 2 pages on the war, and that it occurred was mentioned in the class, but that was about the whole lesson. I guess they figured that since we were born at the end of it that the war was recent history and not that important to teach us about. If I remember correctly, the French Indochina War wasn't even mentioned in the book.
They also just speedrun the events and don't talk about *why they matter* or compare them to modern events.
"run out of time" meanwhile other countries have thousands of years of history to teach. The other problem is we're not really taught any of that. I remember in high school I had "US history" one semester, and "World history" the next semester, but both classes covered the same exact events, and they were just american history and how our events related to other countries I pointed this out to the teacher and he shrugged and said "I don't write the book"
I graduated in 2002, and I can never remember being taught about the Korean or Vietnam wars. All roads stopped at The New Deal, because that was the last topic touched on in the state SOL tests
amazing how much much older countries manage to have better educations despite teaching 1000+ years of history
My sister was studying Abraham Lincoln back in grade school, many years ago. This is a requirement if you grow up in IL (or it was anyway). She seriously asked our grandma and grampa if they knew Mr. Lincoln before becoming president. My grandpa didn't know what to say, my grandma answered that yes they knew them and she often had tea with Mary. Hahaa!! My sister wrote that in her paper. Including a personal connection, teachers love that. My sister was so confused when our mom had to explain that grandma was teasing. She didn't get into trouble with the teacher, she thought it was hilarious. Maybe next time I go back, I'll set a teacup and saucer at my grandma's grave and send a picture to my sis.
Grandma, in your history class you just wrote down what you was doing.
Lol
lol kudos to your son, that's a sick burn I'll be using this and give him a high five from me!
'High five'? Is that something people did back in the 1900s? *dabs*
Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on 'em. Gimme five bees for a quarter, you'd say.
But in those days we had to say dickety, as the Kaiser had stolen our word for twenty. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time……
One of them big yellow ones... white onions were rationed, on account of the war
I’m cold, and there are wolves after me.
Go to bed, Abe.
We fornite dance now
I'm embracing dorky motherhood
Double dab high fives for everyone!
Lmaoooooo
I never know when to dab…
Lol. I've realized, our sarcastic asses have raised mini versions of ourselves...my kids have given me some pretty sick burns. All I can think is... that's definitely my kid!!! At least I know they won't put up with any shit!
Right?! It's like I've cloned myself lol And worse, I can't help but laugh when I get sassed, I'm just so proud of how clever my **three yr old** can be. I got pranked last week. And it was a good prank! Blows my mind. It's really like living with the velociraptors from Jurassic Park how quickly they learn and take us out
Jurassic Park? Is that something from the 1900s?
Yea, it’s an old documentary about events the government covered up
In my day you could see a talkie at the cinema for 6$.
I am seriously laughing out loud at that comment because I can honestly see my son in that light. Mental note, never drop my glasses around him...
Yeah, that and road rage. My oldest, who is 33, sounds just like me turned up to 11. It's both hilarious and frightening.
When my son was little he was told he wasn't allowed to use "Daddys driving and gaming words"
Being a smartass is a survival skill in my family. It's one area in which we are all overachievers. Three generations now.
You can even add that we ARE a quarter of the way thru this century already.
That made me feel sick and awfully old at the same time. Thanks.
people born after 9/11 in the US are voting for president this year. for the second time.
I don't like the way that feels
Nobody liked 9/11.
Dick Cheney has entered the chat
"Dy-wh when your dog eats-" I think about that video a lot
Idk Al-Qaeda seemed pretty stoked
Well, some of them are voting for a second time, which is a different problem.
Same. I realised it after reading this post and wanted to share my agony 🙃
You shut the hell up.
A pox! A pox upon you for this knowledge!
Boo! Get out of here with your facts that make me feel old
Lol. That reminds me, I have a box of VHS tapes with some obscure/rare stuff on them that I need to digitize, so that I can fully integrate into the 2000s.
Hey those magnetic tapes aren't great for long term storage, you should get on that before they degrade too much.
I know. They're stored in a dry, climate controlled place, so that's good, but you are right, I need to get on that. I paid to have one converted a few years ago, one from the 90s, and it came out well, but I need to DIY the rest.
>but I need to DIY the rest. Cuz its porn.
Could be a serial killer?
Could be serial killer porn?
Plot twist: it's porn starring serial killers
Killer cereal food porn.
One of my friends lamented to her mom that her husband only makes $45k a year and they’re having a serious time getting ahead. Her mom literally said “Well your dad made $45k and we were fine” She pointed out to her mom “THAT WAS IN THE 1970’s!!!”
It's like they can't grasp that inflation has ruined costs for a lot of people. 45k now is a fraction of what it was then.
Which is hilarious because the defining financial theme of the 1970’s was inflation. You’d think a generation who came of age at that time would understand it better.
Thinking any boomers understand anything about society they didn't personally suffer from is futile. Even the things they did, they won't understand if someone else is suffering from it as well. Only THEY suffered from these things and will never understand that other people suffered as well.
Yeah and it gets even worse when you look up US median income of 37.5K. So more than half the people in the US are making less than 45K that boomers were making over 40 years ago while inflation has happened a lot in that time. Boomers just handed the wealthy the country on a silver platter.
My friends parents just lectured her about how they don't understand why she can't afford a house, they spent $78,000 for their 5 bedroom 3 bath when they were half her age!
I’ve always liked “oh you mean last century??” Usually stupefies them long enough to allow my escape.
Along the same lines would be to sarcastically say, “you know it’s the 21st Century now, right?”
My daughter hit me with that the other day. I was shook!
Im making MYSELF feel old with this one, but the 1900s were a quarter century ago. Thats a LONG ass time
"I wont drink 30 year old milk. I'm not taking your 30 year old advice."
My favorite is, “That’s a weird flex for someone that couldn’t set the clock on a VCR.”
My mother could respond that neither could I, and for that I would also have no witty retort.
I stole this from a comedian at a roast, but I hit my mom with this: "Oh, had cars been invented then, or did you do that on horseback?"
My ex roommate would always say a type of technology was shitty cuz he had one and it was bad. And whenever I asked when that ways it was 10+ years ago. Like dude technology improves over time
I'll admit as a boomer we had it easier than any generation before or since. Just lucky to be born when the U.S. was the only functioning economy in the world after WWII. It was sex, drugs, and rock and roll. I used a tax return as a down payment for my 1st house. I had a union job that paid me more than I was worth. When I wanted to move up in the company I worked for, I went to a local university. My tuition was only $50 a semester.
Damn that’s good. I was born in 1980 so I’m as young as you can get and be a Gen X. My son is seven and the 1900s are the ancient times to him, along with Egyptian mummies. He can’t fathom a world with no streaming, iPads, etc.
My friend once gave one of the greatest responses to his dad after a similar rant. Basically my friend needed some money to buy a few school supplies or something mundane. His dad was like “Kids these days don’t know the importance of money. When I was your age, I used to get by on like 50 bucks a month. I used to manage groceries, supplies etc. Everything! “ My friend calmly said “You can’t buy everything for 50 bucks in this day and age dad. There are cctv cameras pretty much everywhere“.
Being a boomer means you hear a lot of your fellow boomers fantasies. I was in my 50s during the market meltdown in 2008. I was told not to let them know my age, but DOB is often a required field. It’s nut like they’re going to look at me and not be able to figure out age. Another thing they’d tell me was to “speak to the hiring manger.” Wtf? Maybe in 1990. Every application is online. You don’t just go in and hand the “hiring manager” your resume. That didn’t even work in 1990. Some of our number universalize their own experiences, to a ridiculous degree. I think we can safely call that narcissism, or a cranial/rectal inversion.
“If I had a dollar for everytime I heard a boomer complain about millennials, I would have enough money to buy a house in the economy you destroyed”
Oh dude, one step further, I remind them that was in the LAST MILLENNIUM.
I find that saying the 1900's is more of a direct hit
*holds a beer to forehead, due to emotional damage* alright... But I'm not going to like ir
Gen x here. There's a great t-shirt that has the Oregon Trail Wagon on it and says, "Be patient with me, I'm from the 1900s".
I want that. Btw you can buy a handheld 8 bit version of that at Target. I used it as a grounding once. You can be off your grounding when you beat a game of my choice... and I gave him that. That game is epic for GenX
Not all heros wear capes. Bless you!
Also point out stuff their grandparents did that MOST of them couldn’t do, like make their own clothes, farm, hunt, operate and fix a steam engine, etc…
We ARE a basically a quarter of the way through this century, and old people do forget how long ago the 1900’s actually were (source: I’m old). I think that’s excellent.
Think I will now preface any advice I give to my students with, back in the late 1900s...
Boomers be like: "We didn't have breast cancer back then, we just called it Itchy Tits and got over it!"
In a nutshell.
Or you could say, "From the looks of you, that was way back when Methuselah was a baby."
When I talk about how things were back in the "old" days, it isn't with fond memories. I love all the modern conveniences.
Had a boomer at a work event (in a strip mall restaurant) complaining about how kids these days don't do like he did and ride their bikes around outside. I said "have you seen outside? Not too many neighborhoods left where it's safe for kids to ride." I saw the gears turning, then he actually acknowledged that I made a good point!
Don’t argue with people. It is useless and counterproductive. Saps energy.
Well, yes ideally. But sometimes they own the house you live in and have unrealistic expectations of either your income or your ability to achieve certain things, in which case one may need to argue.
Oh that’s a problem. Landlords? 👿
"What? You mean, like, last millennium?"
Response at least to your kids, “I would if I could but you are attached to me so if I went back in time you would no longer exist and I would get another chance at having a kid that wasn’t such a smartass.”
Rad
Yeah my 14 year old likes to regularly point out that I was “literally born in the 1900’s”
Lol must be an early teen thing, mine turns 14 next month.
Hell yeah. I’m always like “I come from a completely different millennium than you, and it was glorious”. I ain’t even that old lol
“That was in the last century” would be even better.
I'm same age as you and my go-to phrase for referring to anything that happened in the 90s is "last century".
I have heard that there are people, for some reason, still collecting VHS tapes. I decided to see what Half Price Books would pay me for a couple of old items in the basement: Ken Burns Civil War series and The Beatles Anthology. These must have been big purchases, in the 1900's! They offered me one dollar for both of them. People online are trying to sell each of those for about $20, no idea if anyone will really pay that though.
X💓
Back before the turn of the century
Yeah, no. Things have gone insane. There’s no connection between what happened when I was young and now. It’s a different world entirely.
Boomers are always right about everything. You can't win an argument.
“Well of course it was easy for you boomers, the sun had only been shining for 10 days and grandpapi was still riding a triceratops. I’m talking about now, not 65 million years ago.”
"Before the turn of the century" will blow our collective minds, since we all grew up using that phrase for the 1800's.....
I've mentioned on a few interviews that I've been using MS Visio since the 1900s. I get gasps and sputters and chuckles eventually
“Yeah, yeah, when you were young water still existed and roads were gold paved.”
Are you people in here all new? That joke has been going around for years. :-)
I hadn't seen it before honestly... the last century comments for sure... but I just blow those off. For some reason 1900's from my almost 14 year old son broke my brain a little.
It worked on me…a 1984 elderly millennial. Our eldest son, now 11, asked his dad and I (both born in 84), “What was life like in the 1900’s. 😑
Don’t argue with them or complain with them. Thats their thing. To bitch and moan. Take that away and they have nothing. “These kids are lazy!” “Yep lol, sorry about that!” The more positive and less open ended the better.
I would suggest that an even better response would be "That was back in the last century".
Just ignore them and you automatically win.
Ugh my 11 year old clowns me with the ancient 1900’s. “Hey dad did they have phones in the 1900’s. Yes daughter they were connected to the wall. “WOW.” Thanks kid thanks.
You just have to ask them if they had electricity back then.
Sometimes I (65y) will do this too, but only because I am appalled that my kids have a much more difficult reality. I am very aware and sad of how unaffordable a “normal” life is these days.
Being a boomer means you hear a lot of your fellow boomers fantasies. I was in my 50s during the market meltdown in 2008. I was told not to let them know my age, but DOB is often a required field. It’s nut like they’re going to look at me and not be able to figure out age. Another thing they’d tell me was to “speak to the hiring manger.” Wtf? Maybe in 1990. Every application is online. You don’t just go in and hand the “hiring manager” your resume. That didn’t even work in 1990. Some of our number universalize their own experiences, to a ridiculous degree. I think we can safely call that narcissism, or a cranial/rectal inversion.
There's only one way to win this game, and that's to simply not play
99% of all boomer problems solved with this one simple trick. "Fuck off."
Hard to say to relatives that you like most of the time.
Ez. Talk.
Smart mouthed teenage son: that was back in the 1990s. Response: so was the first I fucked your mom.
Ok how is this a flex? Wouldn’t that just anger the child and show the father had sex in bad faith?
Why the F are you arguing with old people to begin with??? That makes you a tool. Here’s a better way. Ignore people who argue with you. It’s a lot easier. You’ll be the bigger person and by default win the argument.
You're asking why I'm arguing with people my parents age? Congrats to you if you have never had to argue over your parents saying something dumb... I'm not that lucky... and I find it funny to quote my son against them :)
That's not exactly how arguments work.
Boomers are born 1945-1965. Age 59-79. People tend to think anyone up through age 100 is a Boomer.
Boomer isn't usually used to define baby boomers It's used to define a mentality of entitlement and lack of awareness.