Another reason to keep kids off social media
(media.scored.co)
Comments (37)
sorted by:
Who knew keeping them away from dedicated narcissists that like to denigrate others to make themselves feel better (otherwise known as most of the social media teens use) would lead to healthier personal body image...
Yes but fat and ugly people shouldn't have good views of their body.
Even normal kids will have a negative image of themselves. This is basically where anorexia comes from nowadays, perfectly healthy girls thinking they are to fat. The same effect is also seen in porn where expectations are just entirely different to real life, what you see is not always real and inexperienced women don't need to behave like porn actresses.
Social media I feel has a similar negative effect in expectations and feeling of inadequacy. Boys and girls seeing people's lives through an artificial lense, be it taking thousands of photos and only posting that one image that looks the most attractive or literally just photoshopping the "bad" things out. I always remind family members and kids of friends to not look at them, explaining(and in case of Photoshop demonstrating) how fake this all really is.
I am in no way surprised it helps kids mentally to not use social media. It's an utter cesspool and deserves to be brought to its knees finally. People ruining their health and life because someone apparently has it all better even though that's clearly BS.
Fat people? Sure.
People born legitimately ugly can't help being ugly, its nothing but cruel to be mean to them.
if only there was a middle ground... oh wait.
Eh, with HAES lurking around every corner of social media I'd argue it social media creates as much fat people as it creates healthy people with retarded body-images.
Kudos to the Post Millennial for including trans teens in the "body image/mental disorder" camp. Because being transgender is really the ultimate body image disorder.
Getting through school with personal Geocities pages and 320x240 webcam pictures was bad enough, going now with modern social media and everybody carrying HD cameras 24/7 would be like doing the Klingon pain stick ritual every day for 12 years.
Not reading, but I'd be willing to bet it's just the "self-starvation" disorders. I'd be truly impressed if it managed to make whales thin.
HAES and Fat Acceptance grew via social media, so I think it's a net positive overall that people go back to being weight conscious, even if they're fat.
It feels awful to be fat. If there's no one telling you it's okay, your own body telling you that it isn't might be audible.
Sometimes, even the self can't really tell. At one point, I'd reached 235-240 pounds and didn't even know until a health screening at work revealed it to me. And when I started talking to people about it, they weren't surprised. I got around to working on it. Today, I tend to maintain a range of 190-200 pounds. Wish I could get to 180, but I'm still pretty lazy, and that would pretty much be the lowest I could go at my height without malnourishment.
I imagine your health screening at work went something like this.
Forgive me, but what is HAES? Urban Dictionary was no help.
Healthy at every size
Thank you.
Magically, when you stop looking at people's cropped, filtered photos you cease having an uneven playing field to compare yourself to.
Alternatively, once you remove every mirror you can't tell how fat and ugly you are anymore.
There are eight billion people in the world, and a lot of them suck. Children should not have access to social media until they're old enough to place a mental firewall between themselves and the abyss.
I'd argue some people should never be on it, ever. It just does so much damage to you if you don't know how fake it all is. At this point in time I wish we could all just go back to anonymity but I guess once pandoras box is open that bitch ain't gonna close it again.
This shit has been known for a while. Still, it's good to see the research continually reinforced with the same results each time.
But most parents don't want to be parents. And frankly, society at large don't want parents to be parents. They'd rather you fob all that responsibility onto other entities, namely the state with curated social media on the side to help reinforce the group think that gets encouraged.
https://thepostmillennial.com/teens-body-image-improves-after-just-one-month-of-slashing-social-media-use-report
Not sure if this site is worth supporting with clicks, so here's an archive in case they're not: https://archive.is/wip/nH64k
TPM is on our side.
Thanks.
Always use the archive regardless. The purpose of providing the archive link is not to deny clicks, it is to preserve the article.
Depends on where it is. Most of the time in KiA, archiving has been used to deny clicks while providing a reliable proof that isn't simply an image that could be faked.
Preservation is also an important element, but I find it's secondary in certain circles.
No.
Preservation has always been the reason to archive because from the very start this has been about dealing with dishonest media who are prone to retroactively erasing their misdeeds.
That's why there's been a whitelist and greylist of sites that doesn't or does require archiving over on halfKiA.
If it was purely about preservation, there'd simply be a bot in the chat that automatically archived all links (like they used to have years ago for the chat comments), not just those that are socjus aligned. Almost like it was about preventing sites like Kotaku and Polygon from getting clicks.
Preservation was and is important, so don't get me wrong as this isn't a black and white binary situation. There can be more than one reason, and it's not mutually exclusive from one another.
Or, it was there archiving everything...almost like we were dealing with a media industry that was prone to stealth editing and lying about it.
Preservation has always been important and anyone who says "oh we don't need to archive, these guys are good" is retarded or lying in order to justify their own laziness. Good institutions get infiltrated and compromised or did you all forget everything we've been cataloging for nearly a decade?
Good thing I never said that, eh Don Quixote?
I use it for this purpose 99% of the time
Thanks.
It also won't encourage them to become gay and/or trans. Who knew?
Your physiognomy is the result of your virtues, because stress and malnutrition have a huge effect on your body.
No shit, the giant fucking stress transmitter in your pocket has a bad effect on your mind and body. Removing it, reduces stress. Obviously.
I'm ready to call parents who let their kids on social media actively abusive.
That's because they are.
This might be a highly strange opinion, but knowledge of certain fetishes might improve body image.