Daniel Johnson
Art Editor
I really don’t remember much of my youth. But no matter how bad I was I sincerely doubt that I could have been worse than today’s youth. They are annoying, bratty, obnoxious little hooligans. And someone needs to take responsibility for these aberrations.
I was in 7-Eleven, minding my own business, purchasing a cool beverage when a herd of children ransacked the place. Instantly the aroma of chlorine-soaked bodies overtook me, and I fell unconscious. I awoke with enough wits to immediately hide everything that was important and/or shiny. I had a vision of playing hide and seek in a convenience store – a youthful, modified form of extortion – “Tell me where my keys are and I’ll buy you candy till you puke, you maggot.” Luckily they didn’t notice me. I will not be their victim today, but the mind of a child is a fickle mistress so I bid an exceedingly hasty farewell to that fine establishment.
Later. While drinking a stolen Slurpee, I pondered the nature of children. These youths have no sense of discretion or consequences. I have fallen victim to toddlers reeling down sidewalks making erratic direction changes. This forces everyone taller than three feet to halt, side-step the child, move back a little, then conduct a flying front roll to avoid the youth charging into one’s kneecaps. And while I am conducting this intricate dance who is just standing by watching? That’s right, mom and dad.
I feel that parents are to blame. Keep an eye on your kids. Don’t let them wander everywhere. They know that their child will eventually cause trouble, but what do they do about it? Nothing! I have the deep-down urge to kick any annoying kid I come across. But as soon as I try, the parents suddenly start to care about their kids. What’s with that?
Laziness is a good excuse: “It’s hard to look after my kids!” Well, not this time. There are lazier answers that solve this problem. Lock your kids in the car, cripple them so they can only crawl, buy a kid leash or drug them. Shock collars are also becoming popular. All of these are acceptable alternatives to free-range children, but please don’t ignore the problem.
The heart of the dilemma is that parents can’t pay enough attention to their child. The mom and dad walking down the street with the kamikaze toddler were both pushing strollers stuffed with more kids.
Parents just can’t handle more than one child.
When parents have multiple children, they do a pathetic job of parenting. And the parents aren’t the only ones that suffer. People like me suffer too. This diluted parenting needs to stop. It is poisoning our society. I want a world where I can walk on the street without fear. I want a country where I can enter a store and utilize capitalism to purchase a Slurpee. As rampant children traumatize our social structures we risk collapsing into communism. We are confined, lurking in trepidation, fearful of the world outside. What have we become?!
I have a modest proposal to solve this. I think China has the right idea. Only one kid per household. No more seven kids abolishing the convenience from stores or hampering my ambling. But this one-child-per-household statute won’t take effect for a little while. What about the kids that are bothering us now? Good question. I propose that this law be retroactive as of Dec. 31, 1996. That way parents with more than one child born after that shall receive a “refund” in the form of all but their oldest child. With the implementation of this edict, the dilemma of the overabundance of children will be solved instantaneously. It’s probably too late to get my proposal on this year’s ballot, but in the meantime don’t have too many kids.
10-28-2004
