
When Your 11-Year-Old Says No to a Smartphone - lucasjans
https://www.vogue.com/article/parentings-new-frontier-no-smartphones
======
m-i-l
I read a report recently on predictions for Generation Alpha, i.e. the
generation after Generation Z (in turn the generation after the Millennial
Generation) very roughly born after 2010. One of the predictions was that they
would be both "digital masters" but also "the new old fashioneds" that would
be looking to break away from technology more, perhaps as a result of feeling
neglected by parents constantly distracted by phones. Examples cited included
children placing smartphones on lists of things they wish had never been
invented, and the 7 year old in Germany who got 150 people to attend a march
with banners like "Play with ME, not with your phones!" Although it is too
early to make any predictions that are likely to be especially accurate, and
I'm not even sure how widely accepted the Generation Alpha name even is, it is
none-the-less interesting from a technology perspective. And perhaps not too
surprising since generations often go in cycles, rejecting parts of what
defined the preceding generations.

~~~
Klinky
No one can really even define what a Millennial is, or who falls in to
Generation Y/Z. Even "who is a Boomer?", and the tropes of what a Boomer is,
fail when looking at my anecdotal data. Also often activist children are
heavily influenced by their activist parents. Generational classification and
"analysis" is almost as bad as stereotypes.

~~~
ensignavenger
This comment is being down-voted, and I sort of understand why, as it comes
off as overly abrasive. Obviously demographers use different years to define
generations depending on the study. But I think the last part about
stereotyping is worth discussion, even if the comment is overly abrasive.

I was born in a year that traditionally was generally not considered
"millennial" by demographers, but since it also did not fit with the years
they used for previous generations, modern definitions tend to include my
birth year as "millennial". This irritates me, because myself and most of
those that I know who are my age don't fit the usual descriptions of
"millennials" and we don't like the association. Now, I happen to like
millennials. My wife is solidly in the millennial years. I have many friends
who were born in the millennial years. But I don't like having the label
applied to myself and I don't fit the descriptions at all.

In the end it isn't a big deal. I have no plans to ever call myself a
millennial. But it is worth cautioning against stereotyping individuals
because of the year they were born, as I unfortunately see many people do.

~~~
planck01
Generations are basically agegroups that share for a part the same cultural
experience, e.g. the same mass media, cartoons, educational trends, etc.
Research shows that these overlaps in culture lead to several predictive
trends in behavior and opinions.

It's normal you don't associate personaly with every trend. Especially if you
lived in some local bubble or if you are on the edge of some defined group.
That doesn't matter and I would just ignore it. This isn't about any specific
person.

~~~
perl4ever
If you divide people into generations, most of them are not in the center and
maximally separated from the adjoining generations. The thing about talking of
generations is that it implies being near the boundaries is much less common
than being far from the boundaries, which isn't true.

Being out of step with your peers is a separate issue.

------
outime
This looks like a smart kid from the description given. It's possible that he
spent a good time reading recent literature about the drawbacks and decided
not to join the masses. Or he just thought twice before following everyone.
Either way it's always refreshing to find very young people doing different
stuff by themselves as it's specially tough not to follow the trends during
that age.

I also noticed that there's something different compared to when we were teens
which we often forget and it's that there are devices (smartphones) which are
used as extreme surveillance tools by some parents. It'd not be unreasonable
to think that this only reason may make the devices much more unattractive to
them.

Edit: verb typo.

~~~
ordu
> This looks like a smart kid from the description given. It's possible that
> he spent a good time reading recent literature about the drawbacks and
> decided not to join the masses. Or he just thought twice before following
> everyone.

Or it is a reaction to a parent obsession. I can imagine how a kid hates
screens because parent spend more time with them then with the kid.

~~~
xemdetia
I don't have any insight but from just various anecdotes about kids getting
smartphones I would say: they are now getting them in early primary school
rather than late secondary school, exceptionally helicoptering parents have
only become more obnoxious, and most kids are still pressed into many
extracurriculars. If I was of the same mindset when I was child in this day's
age being exposed to other children with completely obnoxious phone usage
would be completely off-putting and I would not want any part of it. It might
be that the observed negatives of having a smartphone as a child from peers
and parents would be probably higher than any perceived benefit. Then with the
way I see some parents help/press kids into after school activities many
probably are crying for that separation to have a space away from their
parents (which is one of the most valuable experiences schools provide), and
so keeping that wall there is inevitably valuable.

------
Traubenfuchs
There is a whole subreddit dedicated to probably made up behaviour of children
like that.

[https://www.reddit.com/r/wokekids/top/?t=all](https://www.reddit.com/r/wokekids/top/?t=all)

~~~
im3w1l
I don't know, children are crazy. They will say all kind of stuff. I bet some
kid did say they didn't want a phone. Another cried because they got a phone
the wrong color. And a third asked for a hundred phones to throw at turtles.
Yet we don't hear of those two latter kids.

The very stupidest ideas are filtered out by parents "no you aren't getting
100 phones to throw". And the merely mundane ideas are filtered out by
newspapers "a kid wanting a green phone isn't newsworthy".

------
endymi0n
For my parents, having their own car was freedom, as their parents didn‘t have
them when they were young.

For me, the internet is the world I discovered for myself, first in the age of
BBSes and an early WWW before any of FAANG were even born.

For kids, how better to make a difference than having _none_ of the consumer
devices that everyone including their parents carries around.

Kids need to make a difference, as we all did. It‘s in our genes and we better
learn from them.

~~~
teekert
Seems like most kids today (10-20?) are not making that difference, instead
the are "hooked" (I'm saying hooked like a real cynical old parent) into
social apps like we never were, "manipulated" on unprecedented scale. If your
theory holds, their children might turn against that.

~~~
nostrademons
I think this goes down to generation that were in high school when Snapchat
came out (14 in 2013, so today's 20-year-olds). The generation _currently_ in
high school is much more moderate and circumspect about their technology use.
Among my friends' middle-schoolers, they tend to use technology much more as a
tool (learning to program is apparently now standard practice in late
elementary school) and less as a way of life, and they value their privacy
much more highly.

Possibly not coincidentally, that's the generation boundary: the divide
between Millenials and Homelanders is usually placed between 1998 and 2001,
based on whether you're old enough to have living memories of the time before
9/11\. The first children born after 9/11 are entering college this month. It
makes sense that the generation that grew up in the pervasive culture of fear
since then would look at technology not through the lens of "How can this
connect me to the rest of generally-benevolent humanity?" but through the lens
of "How can this be used against me?"

~~~
dvfjsdhgfv
> "How can this be used against me?"

And rightly so. Kids I observe learned well from our mistakes and they know
better than giving away their real data, posting their photos etc. I was
stunned to hear from a 10-year old "but this review is obviously fake, anyone
can write what they want on the internet to trick you into buying something."
I guess they're better prepared to deal with the digital world.

------
throwaway66920
Seems like a banal humble brag about her kid. The author makes it pretty clear
she is really into social media and projecting an image of her best self. She
goes to quite an effort to make it clear her son is rejecting shallow values.
Likely embellished.

I didn’t want a phone as a kid. That doesn’t mean I didn’t spend tons of time
on the computer instead.

A kid not liking pop music or social media is probably extremely common. Heck
a lot of 11 year olds aren’t emotionally developed in such a way that they
really care about any music at all.

~~~
fatnoah
This was my feeling as well. It feels more like a humblebrag than anything. My
own 11 year old loves popular music and would probably carry me to work every
day on his back if I let him get a smartphone.

------
kmjg88nvf8
"I mounted photo after photo of them on Facebook with overworked captions"

"He didn’t like seeing pictures of him, or anyone else he knew, online."

That explains it - but I don't think it is a good model to follow for
protecting kids from the internet.

------
vigenutis
I wonder if her children's reluctance to embrace smartphones is completely
caused by the way she uses hers? If so, maybe we will see more children
rejecting them as the 18-25 range become parents. I think many of the people I
know in that range would do the same things that she was doing.

------
reportgunner
Kid says this about phones:

 _1\. They’re infantilizing, a set of digital apron strings meant to attach
you to your mother. (He was onto something there.)_

 _2\. They compromise a boy’s resourcefulness because kids come to rely on the
GPS instead of learning Scout skills._

 _3\. They make people trivial._

That's one smart kid.

~~~
EForEndeavour
The boy didn't say any of these things. The author interpreted them from their
son's actions, like using printed maps to get around, and verbally mocking the
author with shouts of "texty! emoji!" when he sees her using her phone.

~~~
dahart
Not to distract from the good point made above that the kid is smart by
arguing about the syntax of words of the article, but what makes you certain
he didn’t actually put words what his mother implied he said?

The article is not explicit on this point, it does not claim she interpreted
them, the article says: “As I learned on his birthday, my son had decided
three things about smartphones.“ That wording does imply they may have had a
conversation, on his birthday, which is now being summarized. That implication
is reinforced with “(He was onto something there)” because it implies he
stated an objection to being monitored.

------
keiferski
As much as parents might find it irritating, it's actually a cool thing that
almost all kids go through a rebellious phase.

It's sort of a built-in societal balance mechanism; no matter how far one
generation pushes a particular set of values or behaviors, you can expect the
following generation to push back against it.

------
Phenix88be
Anyone else think this is fake ? I mean, 11 years old can have that level of
thinking ? Or maybe I m missing something ?

~~~
CalRobert
11 year olds can be brilliant, and tragically I suspect far more of them would
if we didn't infantilize them.

~~~
grenoire
Some level of infantilising is not necessarily a bad thing. I definitely was
not equipped mentally to be able to overcome the things I am dealing with in
my 20s. Was I any less smart when I was 11? Probably not; but now I have other
skills and traits apart from intelligence. Work ethics, sense of
responsibility, and empathy to name a few.

Giving kids _too much_ responsibility or credit does not help them further
down their lives, but at the same time disregarding them entirely because
they're kids will do irreparable damage to their self esteem.

~~~
jerf
"Was I any less smart when I was 11? Probably not;"

For reasonable definitions of "less smart", yes, you were. There's a lot of
work on child development, and it does not support the idea that an 11-year-
old is as fully equipped as an adult. Piaget's child development stages is an
accessible overview if you want a nice Googleable term. Modern academics would
quibble with various aspects but from what I can see a lot of the general
ideas one would get from a quick breeze-through are still a reasonable start.

I'm actually pretty close to first in line to say that we underestimate
children... _buuuut_ , at the same time, no, they are not just little adults
that are getting suppressed by The Man or whatever. They really aren't
anywhere near fully developed yet, and are as a population, generally
incapable of many things no matter how hard you tried to push them. And even
if you do find an individual 11-year-old that, say, is fine with calculus, in
another 10 years they'll be _even more_ developed.

------
hnarn
One take that I have heard repeatedly lately is that while our current "old
generation" may be seen as the digital immigrants that are never quite
embedded due to not growing up with the technology around them, and the
somewhat younger but now adult generation may be seen as the digital natives
that did, the next generation may very well be the one that looks back at the
digital natives and (probably correctly) states that they were naive in their
assessment of technological threat, the rise of "big data" and whatever other
privacy concerns may arise from the way we treat, or rather don't care about,
our personal data today.

Without question most people today (myself included) upload their private
photos and videos to "free" cloud services without a second thought of what
these may be used for. Technologies like facial recognition, deep fakes etc.
are only in their infancy, but it doesn't take much imagination to see the
next generation launching a counter culture, partly because that's just what
young people do, to later look back at the "digital natives" with the smug
realization that they never saw any of it coming despite the signs being
obvious.

Parents today love to concern themselves with "screen time" and other
pointless measurements of how "genuine" (read: how similar to their own) the
childhood of their own kids is, but they couldn't care less about how their
own bank accounts, personal photos and phone calls slowly are slipping into
the semi-public domain.

Maybe it's just my own penchant for cyberpunk talking, but I have a hard time
seeing how the subcultures of the future won't turn against these "convenient"
sacrifices that regular people make on a daily basis, using their own privacy
as currency. Just ask any young person what they think about Facebook and
you'll get the idea -- it's for old people.

------
IceDane
I can't help but find this article incredibly cringy.

Firstly, while I can understand some background info, I don't feel like her
entire digital biography is needed to tackle this subject. Second, I can't
help but think that her kids are acting the way they do as a response to their
mother's behavior.

> They’d create formidable, indomitable avatars with vast powers and an
> absolute immunity to scams, trolls, and disinformation. Their avatars, one
> day, would heroically match wits with J.K. Rowling and Soledad O’Brien, or
> whatever luminaries would dominate Twitter in the future.

Am I the only one who thinks this is strange? What parent wants their kids to
be some ... internet celebrity on the worst platform in the world? Seems kind
of sad to me.

I have a feeling this woman is incessant and obsessed when it comes to
technology and that her kids don't want to become their mother.

------
thiccly
Inspiring. Just when I was thinking our culture is "doomed" the young ones
surprise me like this. Wish the best to the family.

~~~
magashna
Can't have been that "doomed" if a kid not wanting a phone is a savior.

------
sneeze-slayer
Very interesting article. Anecdotally, I know several of my friends who have
downgraded their phones from various smartphones to a simple flip phone or
even no phone at all.

One of them introduced me to the Light Phone
([https://www.thelightphone.com/](https://www.thelightphone.com/)) which seems
like it is in a similar vein, even if it costs more than a 10 year old flip
phone.

I wonder if this trend away from the "always-on" status quo will continue in
the future.

~~~
scotty79
For me, the ability to voice call people is the least useful main feature of
my phone. If I were to downgrade it would be to the phone that noone can call
me on.

------
dr_dshiv
There are $40 smart watches for kids that have a sim card and no location
tracking. Perfect. They Dick Tracey when they want. We can let them play on
the streets of Amsterdam and just call when it is time to come home.

~~~
rahoulb
My wife (who is a primary school teacher) was saying that a kid in her school
was taking photos with her watch. She didn't even know watches could do that
and it means they are going to have to rewrite school policies (currently
phones are banned in school because of safeguarding/photos without consent)

~~~
leetcrew
do they allow laptops and tablets in school? seems like a "no camera" policy
would require the school to provide any electronic devices itself. or I guess
they could just not have computers at all; it worked back in the day.

~~~
rahoulb
Only school ones are allowed (it's a primary school so kids 11 and under).
Which means any photos taken don't leave the device

~~~
leetcrew
oh okay, that kind of policy makes sense when everyone is under 12.

------
cik
I think it's brilliant, and applaud the child.

IMHO people spend far too much time on their phones, and other devices. My
devices are for work, they're rarely for play (yes, the occasional video
game), but there's an intense reality that I now have real conversations with
people - and they're much more authentic, even about their time.

I meet people for meals, for drinks, for a walk. I find out about their lives,
and share my own - as opposed to skulking them on InstaFaceTwitterGram. For me
it works - for others it might not. Fair enough.

------
menssen
"Kid who has eschewed the internet gets exploited by mom for vogue.com clicks"

~~~
dvfjsdhgfv
I assume he agreed to publishing his photo though.

------
fergie
This is one of the most uplifting articles I have ever read. There is so much
hope for the younger generation.

------
GuB-42
There are a lot of comments about "smart kid".

I am not convinced. Not saying he is a retard of course, but that his aversion
for smartphones is not a positive trait.

Smartphones are incredibly useful tools. Very empowering when used well. It is
the abuse that is bad. Refusing to have one is admitting that you can't handle
it. Better than being addicted, but not as good as reasonable use.

Another aspect is cultural. All other kids grew with smartphones, they have a
common experience of memes, apps, and whatever is popular. Part of that
culture he will be lacking, and he may feel himself excluded from
conversations, and maybe even considered a bit weird. Not a huge deal, but
that's something to consider. And no, lacking "stupid" cultural references is
never a good thing, no matter how inane you think these things are.

That your kid doesn't want a smartphone when other kids do is not something I
would consider alarming or even something that should be corrected. But it is
not something worth bragging about IMHO. It is just a personality quirk.

------
Causality1
A question I have that went unanswered is why the author would be hurt by
being called a gamer.

~~~
JenBarb
Getting called anything feels mean when a 14 year chants it at you.

------
mellosouls
Who else clicked on this thinking it would be some brat who wanted a higher
end model?

Nice surprise.

------
Paianni
When the iPhone came out is was supposed to be simpler to use then all the
basic phones that came before it, I'm not sure that's still the case anymore.

------
hdfbdtbcdg
This mother seems very disrespectful of her son...

Her children are not her chattel to do with as she sees fit they are human
beings with thoughts and feelings of their own that need to be respected.

~~~
endymi0n
If you read closer, you‘ll notice a lot of stylistic (self-)irony and
exaggeration between the lines. The last paragraphs clearly give away that
she‘s very much respecting their kids.

~~~
TeMPOraL
Yup. I cringed for most of the article, but the ending does significantly
change how it all sounds.

...to the point it makes me doubt how much truth there is to the story. It
very much reads like a classical hero's journey - which "involves a hero [the
mother] who goes on an adventure [tech-full parenting], and in a decisive
crisis [lost her phone charger while finding herself in the middle of nowhere]
wins a victory [has a deep moment of connection with her tech-rejecting son],
and then comes home changed or transformed [see the last paragraph]."

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero%27s_journey](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero%27s_journey)

(I still liked the story, though.)

~~~
iddan
You can frame every story like that

~~~
TeMPOraL
Not every - there are multiple recognized story archetypes; "hero's journey"
is just one of them. My point however is that stories are always unlike real
life, and this article reads very much like a story.

------
newnewpdro
Smart kids.

~~~
Swalden123
It’s a shame the Mother can’t see this

~~~
kalms
Did you really read the article? Or are you talking in more general terms?

The mother is full on accepting of her son and use it to question her own
motives in life. As a parent, I found the read very refreshing.

~~~
Swalden123
The very son that didn’t want to be all over the Internet? Yet there he is
pictured in the article on vogue.

I got the feeling from the article that she didn’t understand her sons point
of view.

------
azangru
I cannot imagine how it can be a good idea to reject the internet. Avoid
social media all you want, but choosing not to have a search engine,
dictionaries, encyclopedias, maps and so on at your fingertips is just
bonkers. Also, smartphone is great at being a digital watch with alarm clock,
a audiobook reader, a radio set, etc. You can rebel against the mindless
social media generation to your heart's content and still benefit greatly from
this piece of technology.

~~~
TeMPOraL
Or, you can buy a standalone alarm clock, a dead-tree book, a standalone radio
receiver, etc. for a fraction of the price. Now, I love my smartphone for all
the non-social features. But I kind of see how the new generation can see
these things as a gateway drug to being sucked into social media and having
their minds and hearts ruthlessly exploited for profit. On top of that, it's
teenagers we're talking about; teenage rebellion isn't usually a paragon of
restraint or rationality :).

~~~
lonelappde
How much do you think a phone costs?

~~~
TeMPOraL
Much more than a separare alarm clock, radio and a mp3 player together. These
things are _cheap_ now.

~~~
rjsw
Can you really get separate devices for less than a feature phone ? My
Nokia/HMD was only $20. I agree that a smartphone isn't the cheapest solution.

~~~
TeMPOraL
I can get a radio and an alarm clock for something like $10 to $15 total on a
local flea market. It's probably not even the cheapest option. Not sure if I
could find an MP3 player for $5-10 on that market, but I can find one for
below $5 with free shipping on Aliexpress.

