PASabreFan Posted March 15, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2017 Well, everyone matures at their own rate due to many different factors, but what I've picked up from the psychology community (they are, in fact, always close to the physicists, due to alphabetical ordering ;) ) is that evidence suggests that the average male isn't fully matured until around that time period. That doesn't immediately imply that every male under 30 is immature, and I never suggested that, even with my loose phrasing, which is bound to happen on a hockey board between bites of sandwich. I'll also mention that the winky face at the end of my boomer/Gen X statement was meant to signify that I was serving back some of the medicine I received in my discussion last night, and almost every day in some form or another from the person in question. I don't actually believe that stereotype, as many of the people born in those particular years have taught me more than I ever thought I could know about physics, hockey, and life in general. Just males? I thought the popular conventional wisdom surrounded development of some part of the brain not being completed until mid-20s or something -- hadn't heard it was just the guys. Somebody get this guy a violin. I don't feel sorry for myself. I don't really care. It's just interesting that in such a politically correct society, you can say stuff about men, especially white men, and the elderly and get away with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted March 15, 2017 Report Share Posted March 15, 2017 Just males? I thought the popular conventional wisdom surrounded development of some part of the brain not being completed until mid-20s or something -- hadn't heard it was just the guys. I do have the idea that it was earlier for females than males, but I don't have the studies on hand and am not a sociologist/psychologist so I'm uncomfortable going farther than saying that. FWIW, I just think Jack's a rich, talented punk (maybe) and that he'll gain perspective and wisdom and will mellow out as he develops throughout his career. That's all I really want to say here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woods-racer Posted March 15, 2017 Report Share Posted March 15, 2017 I think this is overblown. The average service member spent something like 16 months on deployment during WWII. That happens much more regularly for soldiers these days along with multiple deployments, extensions, and stop loss measures where soldiers get extended passed their scheduled EAS dates (especially during the height of the Iraq war in the early-mid 2000's). Of course the percentage of people who served was way higher in the old days so I'd venture it's true for the population at large, just not on an old soldier vs recent soldier basis. The average deployment in WWII was death/dismemberment or the end of the war, which ever came first. That averaged to 16 months for millions of GIs. Apples and oranges as compared to today's service personnel. There are plenty of stories of GIs landing on the beaches of Normandy and 4 years later fighting to the finish in Berlin, hoping they wouldn't get shipped off to the Pacific theater next. That practice changed and tours of duty where introduced for Korea and Vietnam. They where/are the greatest generation for a reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted March 15, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2017 The average deployment in WWII was death/dismemberment or the end of the war, which ever came first. That averaged to 16 months for millions of GIs. Apples and oranges as compared to today's service personnel. There are plenty of stories of GIs landing on the beaches of Normandy and 4 years later fighting to the finish in Berlin, hoping they wouldn't get shipped off to the Pacific theater next. That practice changed and tours of duty where introduced for Korea and Vietnam. They where/are the greatest generation for a reason. Is that average of 16 months weighed down by those who lasted a month or six months? FWIW my dad was over there for almost three straight years and couldn't even come home when his dad died. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted March 16, 2017 Report Share Posted March 16, 2017 Not to split hairs here, but didn't the war end in Europe roughly 11 months after D-Day? Is that average of 16 months weighed down by those who lasted a month or six months? FWIW my dad was over there for almost three straight years and couldn't even come home when his dad died. Your father was a WWII vet? Man, just how old of a man are you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Amerk Posted March 16, 2017 Report Share Posted March 16, 2017 Reading this thread made me realize that the team needs to get better. Fast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted March 16, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2017 Your father was a WWII vet? Man, just how old of a man are you? 5-0. But there certainly could be quite a few people 40-ish with a WWII vet father. The youngest vets of that war are in their late 80s. Heck, there might even some toddlers out there. All this reminds me that I still haven't gotten the personnel file on the soldier I suspect of being my dad's best friend during the war (Pappy; search for related thread). Almost two years after making the request, which was supposed to be filled by May 2016. You can call an office, but they can't tell you anything except to wait. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.