First world problems?

Post Reply New Topic

I made a post on Guardian's Comment if Free (foolish endeavour, I know) about how I found teenage girl's magazines in the 90s (with their attempts to educate the readership about sex) heteronormative. That is to say, I'd read J17 every fortnight and feel crap about myself not only because I couldn't afford the fashions in there but because it was all boys, boys, boys, blowjob tips, blah, etc. There wasn't any admission from the editors that some of the readers might not be straight. I was replying to this because the journo who wrote the articles was lamenting the loss of a teenage publication which back in the day was all about the fashion and straight sex. I just wanted to give my different angle on things rather than whine.

Anyway, someone replied with 'first world problems'. I thought, well, yes they are, but that doesn't make them go away. You try being an LGBT teenager and telling me how it feels. Plus, heteronormativity is not a first-world problem. It might be worse in more 'traditional' cultures, but just because I wasn't sent to a foreign country to get married off to a first cousin at the first sign of sexual non-conformance doesn't mean I can't complain about anything. I know my problem was relatively trivial but they do this sort of thing with more serious problems.

I suppose gay marriage is a first world problem, so everyone should shut up about it? You know, at least we're not getting beheaded in this enlightened country. People do it with women's issues or anything gender related all the time, too. They also sometimes do it with race and class (at least you're not being beaten up in the street for your ethnicity/working in a sweatshop).

I wish I was a straight, middle-class, white guy so I could go around telling minorities that they have first-world problems.

Just ranting here because the comments were closed before I could come back with anything. I expect people on here to tell me 'but yeah, he's right, you are complaining about nothing' - but I needed to get this off my chest.

I think that is a gross misapplication of the phrase, "first world problem."

To my way of thinking, a first world problem is implicitly a problem related to the privilege of wealth, rather than to privileges of personal and political freedom.

Not having your favourite brand of espresso in the First Class lounge at the airport is a first world problem.

Not having access to culturally relevant media is a real problem. Just because queer youth in the first world have the freedom to self-identify does not mean that we are absolved of the responsibility to ensure that queer youth have access to the same supports that all other youth need. (Not that I think teen girl magazines are necessarily a brilliant support for youth...)

Thank you.

Maybe you have to have lived it to understand?

CiF is full of twats. I occasionally post there but rarely expect any real insight back - even the telegraph's comment pages are less sheep-like. Its just another orthodoxy.

I know CiF is for dummkopfs. You get a lot of CiF-like thinking amongst people in general though, which annoys me. It's lazy point-scoring.

I think I have a faint impression of how it can be called a “first-world problem”.

It wouldn’t have made the slightest difference for me. I almost never went out, and never really had friends to go with. I greatly doubt my parents would have let me do anything remotely looking like having a girlfriend, and, of course, sex was entirely unthinkable. It’s not like your sexual orientation matters a lot when you can do absolutely nothing that would depend on it. In fact, being gay would’ve been easier; at least, I’d have had a better chance to disguise any love interest as a mere friend.

These matters still puzzle me greatly. Almost everybody agrees teenagers shouldn’t be allowed to have sex. Even people who had it to their heart’s content—and, of course, continue to have it—agree with this as soon as they leave their teenage years. So what’s all the fuss?

It's about more than social isolation. You can end up hating yourself and feeling defective. It's hard to explain feeling so out of sync with nature.

Being at discord with oneself is an agonizing feeling. Something nobody should have to endure. A friend recently asked me what this whole acceptance thing brought to mind ---- that^^

*hugs to puddingmouse*

*hugs around*

^ I'm just glad I don't feel like that any more.

Teenage mental health is a bit overlooked and queer teens suffer from worse mental health problems. For a form of media that touts itself as reaching out to teens and educating them (teen magazines), it would be nice if they could've taken this issue into account, as it's a very real experience for the people living it.

Don’t let teenagers read such magazines—problem solved!

I don't really get what The Guardian's "Comment is Free" or the National Post's (Canada) "Full Comment" is about? Are these just articles whose comment sections are unmoderated? Where are the "comment is unfree" or "partial comment" sections?

The magazines inform the teens peer group as well. The teen might not be reading them but their friends/peers are and it is important that everyone is aware and accepting of different modes of nature. Also teens are exposed to such magazines whether they are allowed to read them or not, teenagers have a knack for that sort of thing

CiF is moderated. It's just articles with comments sections.

Not if they’re isolated enough and too busy with more pressing things to even think of that.

Arguing on the internet is a first world problem.

I think feeling like a freak of nature is pretty pressing.