immaturity

I am amazed at the depth of immaturity present in the herp world. I'm not just talking about dealing with teens, etc. A quick scan of the forums shows what I am talking about. Name calling, threats, atrocious grammar, scamming, stealing. Geez, makes you lose faith in humanity.

I do have to say that it is not all bad apples. On the flip side I have seen and met some of the nicest, pleasant people too.

It just seems the bad overshadows the good.

Thoughts?

Terry

Well, I guess you can't have kittens without dealing with the litterbox, you know?

Erin B.

Immaturity is one of the great things about this hobby. It makes the herpers as interesting as the herps.....two for the price of one.

You may have confused immaturity with maturity somewhat as

Treachery and old age will always overcome youth and inexperience... Anon

But yes there are a lot of nice people in the herp field. In fact, herpers are some of the most sharing people I have ever met. They will share: collecting information as to hot spots, they will share care information, they share breeding information (In the past this was not readily done in many other fields, but certainly one of the reasons for the bloom in herpetoculture. In fact at one time when it was considered almost impossible to breed let alone keep many species, breeding success methods were readily shared.). Of course they also share a love of things slimy and scaly.

As to the immaturity, well with all that sharing going on, and with the many different individual personalities that come together over things like the Internet, conflicts are bound to arise. These conflicts often take the shape of petty bickering. Petty bickering seems to be part of human nature. While petty bickering and name calling and the like may begin in childen, it usually carries over to adulthood. Just because it started in childhood does not mean it is immature. Somethings we were meant to out grow, others were probably meant to stay with us, petty bickering may be one of the latter - to act as a steam valve, so to speak. It is kind a curiosity that: When what is perceived as a good trait from childhood carries over to adulthood, it is said the person acts maturely when carrying out that trait; however, if it is generally considered a bad trait that started in childhood, an adult is considered immature if he/she exhibits that trait.

All the best,
Glenn B

Sorry but name-calling is just immature. There is no excuse to have to resort to such things. I don't care if petty things do carry over into adulthood; I think that's part of society's problem (*yes, I am a sociology major).
Try reading "Arrested Adulthood" by COTE and you may be surprised at the high levels of narcissism and "immaturity" present in society. I think he makes some EXCELLENT points.

Jennifer,

Oh I am sorry, how immature of me, I just alled you a name.

I am a grad student in Forensic Psychology, so what? (Darn now I called myself a name.) Does this make my point less or more valid than yours? Was your name calling of yourself to be considered mature? That is what you did you know, you called yourself a name (or in other words labelled or qualified yourself with a verbal descriptor which is the essence of name calling).

I expressed my opinion, and you yours, and I will agree with one thing - name calling can be a problem. It is, on the other hand, likely a phenomenon of evolution not a problem of society. It is only viewed as a societal problem because a group of people get together in a clique somewhere and say lets call this a problem, write a book about it, and sell that book to college students. Rather than a problem, it is an adaptive measure taken by people in order to survive, that can blossom into a problem when the person doing it does so consistently in all situations of stress, and can not figure a more appropriate behavior. It happens in all societies, in almost every person there is. I can push anyone enough to get them mad enough to call me a name, so long as they can understand me, and so long as they can speak or write or sign. Yet, name calling is actually adaptive to a certain extent because it often relieves stress, and prevents further action such as physical combat.

The real things that are or should be considered societal problems, the ones for which there are no excuses, is when there is a large population within a society who pander to others who would destroy our society such as terrorists, killers, peodophoiles, drug pushers, smugglers, polluters, and religious fanatics.

Of course I could refer you to numerous authors among the sociologists, psychologists, police scientists, and crimonologists. Many of whom could tell you that they have different opinions as to what is the real problem. I give my opinion as none of those, I give mine as one who is concerened with the pragmatism of real liffe as opposed to book knowledge wherein usually lies too much data and not enough living.

By the way, I think you really missed my point about name calling in my first post. I am willing to bet that Cote considers good behavior in childhood that carries over into adulthood, in his eyes, to be just what I said it would be - which is mature. Just as I am also willing to bet that he considers bad behavior in childhood that carries over into adulthood to be, in his eyes, just what I said it would be, which was immature. Name calling can be either (even when used by adults) dependent upon the circumstances under which it is utilized. I may just have to do my thesis on just such a hypothesis. It would certainly speak to many situations in law enforcement that could be assisted by a better understanding of this issue when dealing with person suffering from antisocial personality disorder, serial killers and so forth. Thanks for helping plant an idea.

Then again there is another aspect to name calling, and that is as the saying goes 'calling a spade a spade'. If someone is being a fool, or a liar, or an idiot, or a braggart, or a wise man, or a truth teller, or a scholar, or a genius, or whatever, then what is wrong with pointing such out? Might not pointing out such an observation save others some of the time it would take, and possibly a lot of the hardship it would take, in order to arrive at the same conclusion by a third party from scratch? Heck if our founding fathers in the USA had not resorted to some name calling, would our revolution have ever taken place? Name calling is a very adult thing to do, it is practiced by virtually everyone. What is rather immature, I think, is to attribute something to immaturity in order to sell a book.

All the best,
Glenn B

You don't need to get all "smart" with me. And you can call me Jen if you want. Oh, but that's a name too!

I am in no way smarter or better than anyone, but I WAS trying to express my opinion about the problem of name calling.
I did refer to myself as a student studying sociology, and I'm sorry you took that offensively or something. I said it to somewhat back up the fact that I see name calling as a problem of society, though almost in a joking way. But to you, my major's just another "name," right? I guess the problem seems to be what is IN a name?

I enjoyed reading Cote, and thus I used his book as an example. I might not agree with everything he says, but I stick to my view that name calling is a problem of society. I do not share your view that it's some sort of adaptive measure. Just because you think that, do YOU think YOU'RE any better than me?

Interesting, though, how you started your post with what seems to be some sort of negative attitude, then ended with "All the best."

You state that:

"Petty bickering seems to be part of human nature. While petty bickering and name calling and the like may begin in childen, it usually carries over to adulthood. Just because it started in childhood does not mean it is immature."

I agree that name calling is something that may carry over in most cases, as would Cote. But what I am saying is that there is way too much of it in society. I am not saying that it shouldn't be dealt with on an individual basis. However I will also agree that it can be quite problematic, and that is all I was really trying to state from my post.

Just wondering though, does the fact that it just seems to "happen" in every culture mean that it is not a problem of society? Here is where I do not quite agree...

Also, one more thing, in response to this:

"If someone is being a fool, or a liar, or an idiot, or a braggart, or a wise man, or a truth teller, or a scholar, or a genius, or whatever, then what is wrong with pointing such out? Might not pointing out such an observation save others some of the time it would take, and possibly a lot of the hardship it would take, in order to arrive at the same conclusion by a third party from scratch?"

ALL of the above are based on OPINION, not fact. That is where my problem lies. Not everyone has the same opinion. What makes someone a genius in one person's eyes may not be the same for another person. So you're saying that it's better to rely on other people's opinions rather than make your own? Again, I disagree.

Jenni,
It's really immature to get upset about immaturity. You are obviously very sheltered and have no sense of humor. BTW, what 'school' are you going to that teaches such sloppy thinking. I must assume it is one of the poorer quality institutions of which there are so many in the Boston area.

Sorry JT, but it's hard to take anything you say seriously after your posts on "fat people." It is also quite "immature" to put down my school due to the fact that I got "upset." And your calling me sheltered IS quite amusing, actually. So I don't see why you think I have no sense of humor. Most of the things you say do quite amuse me, mainly since you seem to be one of the most ignorant people on here so far.
Like I said, though, these are only my opinions. Everyone is entitled to their own.
This last thing is posted to everyone in general: Sorry if I seem harsh or "upset" but I have just completed finals and they were quite stressful. Take it for what it's worth; I'm not using this as an excuse to be overly b*tchy or anything.

Jen,

Someone was right, in my opinion, you need a better sense of humor. Now I will rid my writing of humor for this reply, well of most of it anyhow.

Allow me to quote you:

Interesting, though, how you started your post with what seems to be some sort of negative attitude, then ended with "All the best."

Are you telling me I cannot disagree vehemently with someone and yet not wish them well? Are you that shallow? That is what often happens in the best discussions and debates.

By the way, I didn't have a negative attitude. Instead, I think you missed a very important point I made in my last two posts. I had an observational outlook blended with an unintentional test. You took the test when you read my post. Go figure the results by rereading your post and thinking of the attitude you had when you posted it. Then go figure out my test. You see, name calling really is part of normal and mature life. It is considered to be a mature aspect of our lives when done in a positive manner. People love to be called positive things such as professor, student of..., doctor, Mr. Mrs., Ms., excellent worker, wonderful parent, great athlete, divine minister, sir, ma'am, kind, sweet, smart, genius, helpful, African American, Western European, German American, well educated, loving, caring, faithful and so on. Those same people often love to label themselves positively with many of the various positive names. Yet many of these same people are often the same people who cannot stand to be called a name in a negative fashion, even when it is well deserved, because their skin is too thin or their emotions too sensitive. In fact when that happens these people often scream foul and say that "name calling" is immature! They revert to negative name calling themselves when they do that, but they do not see that they are actually doing such, they feel above "name calling". I suggest that such an attitude is immature. As I see it, you have illustrated this point perfectly by you last post. I really had not called you any bad names, nor did I even imply anything negative about you. I jested, I rebutted, and I asked some questions that may have made you uncomfortable. Then I quite unintentionally did just what I said I could do in the following:

I can push anyone enough to get them mad enough to call me a name, so long as they can understand me, and so long as they can speak or write or sign.

Did you see that I had done that? It really was rather unintentional but, by virtue of your reply to me, it became a test of sorts. I guess the test became seeing how long it would take for me to push someone's buttons to get a person to revert to the so called 'immature' act of name calling. I guess, in your case, I pushed the right buttons because in your very first sentence of your reply you called me, I think, by implication, a name. Didn't you do that? It really was not my intention. If I had really meant to push your buttons it would have been much more intense. Yet nonetheless your buttons were apparently pushed.

You don't need to get all "smart" with me.

You were right though, I don't have to get all smart with you, but it is just that I am fairly smart, so why not remain that way. But alas, I am pretty sure you did not mean that in a complimentary manner - did you! Oh, by the way, just how immature is it to call someone names?

If you had viewed my post as did James, then maybe you would have realized my post was little more than a good natured rebuttal, sprinkled with some humor, of your opinion. It was my opinion and as for opinions and their importance:

ALL of the above are based on OPINION, not fact. That is where my problem lies. Not everyone has the same opinion. What makes someone a genius in one person's eyes may not be the same for another person. So you're saying that it's better to rely on other people's opinions rather than make your own? Again, I disagree.

As for this point, are you kidding: who made reference to the opinions of Cote in such a, seemingly to me, self satisfied manner? Who is apparently, as I see it, basing her whole argument (her opinion) upon the writings (opinions) of another person? Of course I depend upon the opinions of others when forming my own opinion; it is a fool who pays them no mind at all. I also depend upon factual evidence in addition to opinion. I also base my opinion upon physical evidence. Then I form my own opinion. To not do at least all of these, whenever possible, would be reckless.

If you are saying you do not, ever in any instance, depend upon the opinions of others in forming your own opinion, then you are, in my opinion: a joker, a liar, crazy, or a woman apart. By a woman apart, I truly mean: a woman alone in her uniqueness from the rest of mankind. Yet again I find myself asking: Who just cited Cote? My opinion could be wrong. It could be proven wrong. It also could be right. If my opinion is correct, it would not be to difficult to determine which it is among my choices that was/were correct. Once so determined it would be a fact, wouldn't it? You can be a proven trutful person or a proven liar. You can be a proven moron or a proven genius. Although genius is harder to prove, it is provable based upon standards, not based upon opinion. Yes there can be a significant difference between standards and opinion. Yet if someone creates a concept such as genius, and then sets standards for it - who are you or I to change those standards. We are just people with opinions. Of course the standards can change. Such can be good or it can be bad. That is a problem of its own - the ever changing standards in our world today reflect a problem of people who cannot accept anything as being the way it is, in a set fashion because they canot accept anyone else's opinion as being authoritative. That is another problem, but one that is linked to this discussion. Yet I digress, and will get back to the points you made.

Oh well, I guess we disagree, now what would you have me do? Should I declare war on you, should I rant and rave calling you bad names, should I kiss your bottom and change my opinion simply because we disagree - or should I rather turn the slate over to you with best regards? I choose to do the latter.

Best regards,
Glenn B