You know that real teenagers often get into romantic relationships, right?

Now, I CAN understand the complaint that the YA market as a whole has too much focus on romance. As much as people tout YA for its diversity, it's actually a pretty limited category in terms of stories and plots. I actually have a whole rant on how American media does a poor job of catering to teenagers, ha ha. But that's a problem with the market as a whole, it's not a problem with individual books. There's nothing inherently wrong with a teen romance story.

Kids aren't reading because adults aren't reading. Parents might say "you have to read because it's good" but then they don't do anything to facilitate a love of reading.

Different things are contributing to this, but I think technology is the main culprit. And not so much in an "it makes kids too stupid to read!" sense (though I have my concerns about tech addiction and how it might damage the attention span) but in the sense that it competes for their time. Any time you introduce a Cool New Thing, that's going to mean less time for the old things. These days it's normal for teens and even preteens to have smartphones, books have a hard time competing with that.

I'm also thinking that it's a problem that perpetuates itself. Like, they're reading less as preteens, which means that they aren't developing reading skills as well as they otherwise could. This causes them to read less and less over time, because reading is boring when it's too difficult.

I don't think the majority of teens are dealing with heavy academic workloads. If you're not in AP classes you're probably not doing much.

I think the heavy drop in teens versus preteens probably has a lot to do with smartphones. Like, I figure teens are much more likely than preteens to have their own smartphones. And preteens with smartphones probably have more parental regulation than teens who have them.

I also figure it's a problem that feeds into itself. They're reading less as preteens, so they don't develop their reading skills as well as they could, and this causes them to lose interest in reading as they get older. People aren't going to enjoy reading if it's too difficult for them.

This is hardly the first generation to be given assigned reading. That can't be the cause.

I totally agree. A lot of parents will tell their kids to read because it's good for them, but they don't do anything to actually facilitate it. And a lot of them are so hooked on phones themselves that they don't see it as a problem when their kids are hooked too.

I totally agree with your first point. Most parents aren't modeling reading. Everyone complains about kids being hooked on their phones, but that's not surprising when the adults are so hooked too. Parents can say "reading is good" all they want, but if they're not actually modeling it then it doesn't do much good.

I'm going to argue on the latter point, though. A lot of popular social media now is image and video based rather than text-based. Text that is there tends to be pretty short. I doubt the average teen today is reading much on their smartphone.

Keep in mind that most high school students aren't taking on this kind of workload. I don't think it's a big factor here.

It’s less about human safety and more about not disturbing the animals. When whales and dolphins are constantly being approached by humans, it stresses them out and disrupts their normal routines and behaviors. They start to avoid areas where they’re being approached, which is a problem when those places are important feeding and calving grounds. When it’s just one guy it’s not an issue, but it’s a big problem when a lot of people do it. Hence the law.

I don't really get it. Don't most people use cases anyway?

Yeah, people are often too quick to dismiss a fascination with dark and taboo subjects as just being in it for the shock value. Shock value is often part of the appeal but there can be more to it than that.

And it almost goes without saying, but kids need to have access to different activities if you want them off the screen. Are there books, toys, and crafts in the home? I hate when parents complain about their kids not doing things when they don’t give them the opportunity to do it.

Any correlation isn’t going to affect every child equally. But there are going to be other factors taken into account too. Did your kids have opportunities for enrichment outside of screentime? And maybe the content itself matters too. PBS probably does less damage than something fast-paced and mindless.

That makes sense. Little kids are interested in actually doing things, interacting with things. I always suspected that issues from too much screen time may be more common in kids who get a lot of screen time early on.

Nah. Sometimes a book doesn't have an intended deeper meaning. (though I maintain that you can always find some kind of meaning, some reflection of what the author believes or feels even if they're not actively trying to send a message)

But even for the books that do, finding that meaning can take not only a certain mindset, it often requires a certain set of knowledge. What do you know about the time period and culture that Alice was written in? What do certain aspects of the book mean within the context of that time and place? How does it compare to other children's books from that time? What does it do differently from those books? What was the author's life like and how might that have influenced the book?

Being on a very different level from the people around you (whether you're well above or well below) is going to be inherently isolating, so there's that. But as you say, other things factor in.

I like to learn shit.

Yeah, the stylized ones take more of an understanding of art to pick out. Even you don’t necessarily know the technical aspects of art it can still be doable.

Some people need to help somebody

I got the stylized ones but they definitely took a little more thought.

Being a celebrity kid brings about a lot of unique issues, and being in the public eye makes it harder to move past them. But yeah, some of these people might have become screw-ups even without child stardom. We’d have no way of knowing.

Dude, the series was intended for teenage girls. What you describe is for a totally different audience.

Nah, there's always room to recontextualize. In this case... Vampires are often a metaphor for sexual deviancy. If you're part of a group that is viewed as sexually deviant, then maybe you'd sympathize with vampires. I think vampire romance is so popular with women (and teen girls) because female sexuality is so stigmatized. (unless it's for male pleasure) Vampires are unashamed in their sexuality, so it's an appealing fantasy.

Sure, there are other aspects to the fantasy as well, but the sexuality of vampires plays into the traditional depictions.

A lot of these concepts would be really fun for a work of fiction.

Lol for real. I think most people fall out of reading for other reasons but I guess it’s easier to just have one target, one where someone else is responsible.

Many people complain about those books too. Nothing has universal appeal. Hell, if my high school had only assigned YA in an attempt to engage kids I would have been pissed; I could read YA on my own, and I liked assigned reading as a way to expose me to new and important stuff and help me understand it.