Children should be seen and not heard

...its after all the parents that are meant to teach them how to behave both privately and publicly; that must treat them well when they behave well, and punish them when they are out of turn. Swearing and screaming at a child is not the answer. Parents should be taught how to be parents before they teach their children how to be people.

My name is Tess Groody and I am a kid myself. You guys are selfish and senseless for blaming everything on kids. I have been exploring topics on this humblee site; Debatewise, and found alot of debates are based on kids and what a neuisense they are. I looked at the debate on the topic that children should not eat as much salt and sugar, and all the people who posted a comment were saying how kids are so obese these days. Have you looked at all the grown ups these days?! jeez. Seriously you guys.
I'm in a poof because of all you people out there you are disrespectful to us!!!!!!!!!!

'Seen and not heard' is a Victorian ideal based on the idea that quiet, obedient children are superior in some sense. However, we should not be teaching young human beings to be completely submissive and to not express opinions, otherwise they will grow up as gutless, unconfrontational and easily controlled. Leaders are not usually the quiet ones and if we continue to tell children to be "seen and not heard" all we are doing is crippling their ability to grow up and be successful people.

The phrase children should be see and not heard was set in the victorian times now its the exact opposite. I am a child who is writing a speech on the topic: Young people should be seen and heard. What some of you dont realise is what it actually means. Before children were not allowed to stand up and voice their opionion, what they said did not matter in society. Adults did not care what children said. The children did not get opportunities to stand and say a speech like i am participating in now. This is the real meaning.
I know this and remember i am only a child.

I am 15 years of age at the moment and though I am speaking for the negative in this instance, both sides have valid arguments. Kepp in mind here i am in high school and doing two university subjects, one in psychology and one in child psychology.

I watch my younger cousins today as they run around shopping centres, continuously ask for items and steadily get louder and louder as they are refused, the items. I watch as they scream at their mother, my aunt because they wont get what they want and I even see them hit each other and tease each other for no apparent reason, aslthough it might just be because the younger of the sisters is, well lets just say she takes after her mother. Children learn from their parents, my aunt yells and stomps around and glares when she doent get what she wants or when someone wont do what she wants, and her two daughters the younger one in paticullar copy this behavior to the point where i have had one of them come up and kick me because, i was looking after them when they wanted something. This is an example the affirmative should use, these are the kids that need to be told to shut up. But i have met many other kids in shopping centres who have been polite, courtious and reasonable. I was a very mature child when i was young, i was forced to mature quickly because of family circumstances but the point is if my mum would tell me to do something and i said no, the arguement either went two ways either she yelled or she persuded me to do it, when she told me to do something i wouldnt do it but when she asked and persuaded i would do it with out complaint, most young children are similar. If they are cowed into doing something they will have a tendency to push boundries and be rude unless commanded, these children quite often turn out to be delinquents and bullies in schools but also these are the ones that are most often misbehaving in shops. Children whos parents however distasteful many adults will find this, but children whos parents try to talk with them will have a tendency to push boundries, but they will know when they are going near the limit and back off like for example they will ask for something once and maybe ask again but they will know to stop there, these children generally turn out to be high acheiving students in school, then there are kids who walk all over their parents, these kids either misbehave silently or are very loud and rude. then their are abused or negleted kids, these kids generally are either overly polite or even worst such as the little kids who run around and bite people and beleive me it happens.

I have really not talked about the main topic so i apologise, but i was trying to give some insight into what modern child psychologists and myself have found through study and observation, but though i speak for the negative, thats only because there is not a grey area, kids who are told not to tlak in public are not menatlly healthy they can opften become, secluded and unsocial, but children that are given free run are well rude generally, this is based purely on sources that i have gathered for assignments, but children should be told to stick close to the parents but be allowed to speak within a reasonable margin of noise, but more to the point parents need to teach their kids this, if they can do that this out dated topic becomes redundant.