Market Street In The Woodlands

[hbcu]

this is how I see it.......you run to Alaska....the same problems you leave will find you...but lets be real now....how many places are teenage friendly these days? Astroworld is gone so now, those folks who dropped their kids off everyday, what will they do?

[KatieDidIt]

this is how I see it.......you run to Alaska....the same problems you leave will find you...but lets be real now....how many places are teenage friendly these days? Astroworld is gone so now, those folks who dropped their kids off everyday, what will they do?

Well, I don't think I'd ever drop my kids off at an open air street to linger, that has been having crime in the parking garage, and leave them til late evening. But everyone is different. The mall during the day is a completely different story.

I'd just rather them come hang in the gameroom or out by the pool.

[Parrothead]

I am hoping to have a kick a*s game room and pool so Phoebe and her friends will all want to hang out at our house. I was one of those "crafty" teenagers...I practically wrote the book on sneaking out and taking the car, so I am going to have to keep a sharp, but distant, eye on Feebs.

[bachanon]

It seems the authorities have heard the complaints and now the kiddies are feeling oppressed. Sipping $4 coffee, living in one of the highest rated developments nationally, $100/week allowances are SO hard. I love these kids, but come on.

The new developments coming this year along the waterway will begin to disperse the concentration of youngsters.

Dec. 27, 2005, 4:04PM

Some Woodlands teens feel alienated at Market Street

Retail center management says facility caters to patrons of all ages

By BETH KUHLES

Chronicle Correspondent

Alfonso Olvera likes to hang out with friends at the Market Street retail and entertainment area of The Woodlands, but lately he said it feels more like a jail.

LINK

[MidtownCoog]

Bach,

One thing is for sure. Somebody in The Woodlands is ALWAYS griping about somthing. Concert noise, light pollution, teens, etc.

Print It

[RedScare]

I started a thread about this type of situation several months ago. Suburban developments are built as adult and younf family playgrounds. Teens are an afterthought. When teens are actually thought of, the developers put in amenities that THEY think teens should like, like soccer fields, instead of looking to the teenagers themselves for inspiration.

When it doesn't work out, everyone blames the teens, who only happen to be the teenage children of the complaining residents. Kind of interesting that the Sheriff said they have only responded to one incident. Couldn't be over reaction by Woodlands residents, could it......Nah.

[The Great Hizzy!]

Interesting points, RS. I wonder what the value of skate parks, roller rinks, game rooms (I mean, with virtual matchups, big screens and tournaments) would be for such developments.

Just a couple of ideas, as it's been about 20 years since I was a teenager.

[MidtownCoog]

skate parks, roller rinks, game rooms

So I wonder why The Woodlands does not have things like this? I see them in the other burbs (Clear Lake, Humble, Sugar Land)...

Do they even have a bowling alley in the tony The Woodlands?

[pineda]

Hi Everyone!

I just came back from Christmas vacation and decided to check out what's happening on the forum. One of the best places we visited along the way was Bear Creek, formerly known as Doe Mountain, in Mucungie, PA. The place was absolutely packed with families and lots of teenagers on their own, everyone having a blast. Up there you can buy a season pass for around $300.00 and it's good until almost April/May. This is where all the teens hang out instead of at the mall. The slopes there are split between 30% beginner, 40% intermediate and 30% expert, with lots of "terrain" parks for the teen snowboarders to blow off some steam. It was also fun to just sit indoors and out at the lodge just watching all the people coming down the mountain. The skiing was a lot more fun than playing arcade games, going bowling, skating in a rink or skateboarding, going to Splashtown or Astroworld and it included all ages. I was trying to think of something to compare it to here in the Houston area, and I thought maybe Schlitterbahn in Galveston came close. Anyone come up with anything else? I'm sure I'm forgetting some other type of entertainment venue like this.

[bachanon]

there is the "main event" in shenandoah with a game room, bowling alley and pool tables. brand new, geared toward the kids. my fifteen year old says that only nerds hang out there. i've never seen it packed. there is also a bowling alley in oak ridge north right across the street from the entrance to the woodlands. seeing as kids like to "hang" the waterway will ultimately provide plenty of space for that.

after reading pineda's post it looks like we need an indoor skiing/snowboarding facility.

welcome back pineda.

[RedScare]

One of the best places we visited along the way was Bear Creek, formerly known as Doe Mountain, in Mucungie, PA.

I was trying to think of something to compare it to here in the Houston area, and I thought maybe Schlitterbahn in Galveston came close. Anyone come up with anything else? I'm sure I'm forgetting some other type of entertainment venue like this.

How about the infamous Mount Houston, the only mountain on the Gulf Coast?

http://www.johnbridge.com/mount_houston.htm

[PureAuteur]

Teens in the Woodlands, much like teens anywhere, should have less dependence on technology and less corporate junk in their faces. Build places and things that promote teens to think independently, be inventive, and use their minds. These places should also be for adults. There shouldn't be any singling out of teens, like with kids. I'd say the Woodlands is already doing a good job with innovative building projects, and they can continue to add to the cultural and visual landscape. How about more statues, sidewalks and corridors with artwork, sculptures, and outdoor jazz music.

Here's another idea, but this wouldn't be specifically for teens. Build an outdoor theater, not like the Pavilion, but much smaller and nestled in trees. It would have tables for dining and reclining chairs for relaxing. There would be a small stage with nightly events such as comedy, dancing, singers, and stage plays. They would not be big corporate events, but rather more locally organized things. The patio will be landscaped beautifully with all sorts of exotic plants and flowers. There will be a waterfall (think smaller than the Galleria Waterwall but larger than something you could install in your backyard). It will be a very peaceful place, but with activity. There will be no cost for coming to this place, so it will give teens something to do without having the feeling that they're loitering. It will have food service similar to the San Antonio Riverwalk or an outdoor French or Italian cafe. So basically, you could just come and hang out with friends, go off alone and read, write, contemplate your life, whatever you want to do. And there won't always be something going on on the stage. It will have down time. This should be near the waterway and the market street thing, and it should help to disperse large crowds of teens, so any one area is not so concentrated.

[bachanon]

similar items are coming soon.

town center to bring cultural venues

next wave of construction

[houstonfella]

How about the infamous Mount Houston, the only mountain on the Gulf Coast?

http://www.johnbridge.com/mount_houston.htm

I never knew this existed. Anyhow, destroying Mount Houston is environmentally incorrect. I hope someone can stop the fools. But, sigh, this is Texas - Bush country.

[H-Town Man]

You guys are funny. Reminds me of what parents said in the 20s...and 30s...and 40s...and 50s...and 60s...and 70s...and 80s...and 80s. I would not worry about these kids too much. Given that our parents were so worried about us, and now the US is so conservative it sounds like the Taliban took over, I don't think these kids will turn out so bad. In a decade or so, they will probably be more conservative than we are....and we'll have to tell them to lighten up!

The US is so conservative it sounds like the Taliban took over? Are you sure about that? Was it common under the Taliban for thirteen-year-old girls to dress like prostitutes? Were people who questioned the decency of this treated as though they were Nazis or KKK members? Were hating one's parents while spending large amounts of their money, losing one's virginity before the age of 15, or developing drug habits that blunt any drive to excel in school or succeed in life considered important parts of "becoming an individual"?

Yes, people have complained about these things since the 20's, because they have all been problems since the 20's - although, with the exception of drug use, I think they have all risen in recent decades. Are you quite sure Generation X turned out okay? One of the signs that perhaps it didn't is that we now have a generation of parents that is starting to doubt that these things are problems (and thinks that anyone who doesn't doubt it is comparable to the Taliban).

[bachanon]

owwwww!!

[dbigtex56]

The US is so conservative it sounds like the Taliban took over? Are you sure about that? Was it common under the Taliban for thirteen-year-old girls to dress like prostitutes?

Finally, someone who gets it!

Yes. It's time we recognize the true enemy; little girls who reveal their sweet sweet young flesh, and endanger our whole society by doing so.

For, they are the true enemy. Unlike the Taliban, America has no history of stoning immoral people to death. We are a proud, Christian nation; ask the people around Salem MA. Of course, in Houston we'll have to import the stones; but that's no matter, we're a prosperous community.

It's time we recognize that the rot comes from within. Just look at how our country has withered with its permissive attitudes. The last hundred years has shown how Providence has frowned upon us. It started with giving votes to Negros and females, and of course, it was all downhill from there.

I'm glad that someone finally has the courage to point out that our failure as a country - you know, the reason people want to leave, and no one wants to come here - is due to hot, sweaty slutty little girls.

Thank goodness we're different from the Taliban, and God Bless America!

[RedScare]

I'm glad that someone finally has the courage to point out that our failure as a country - you know, the reason people want to leave, and no one wants to come here - is due to hot, sweaty slutty little girls.

Thank goodness we're different from the Taliban, and God Bless America!

Actually, that's the only reason I haven't left.

[H-Town Man]

Finally, someone who gets it!

Yes. It's time we recognize the true enemy; little girls who reveal their sweet sweet young flesh, and endanger our whole society by doing so.

For, they are the true enemy. Unlike the Taliban, America has no history of stoning immoral people to death. We are a proud, Christian nation; ask the people around Salem MA. Of course, in Houston we'll have to import the stones; but that's no matter, we're a prosperous community.

It's time we recognize that the rot comes from within. Just look at how our country has withered with its permissive attitudes. The last hundred years has shown how Providence has frowned upon us. It started with giving votes to Negros and females, and of course, it was all downhill from there.

I'm glad that someone finally has the courage to point out that our failure as a country - you know, the reason people want to leave, and no one wants to come here - is due to hot, sweaty slutty little girls.

Thank goodness we're different from the Taliban, and God Bless America!

Are you responding to my post? Who said anything about the "true enemy"? Did I even mention Christianity? Did I suggest reverting to Puritan tactics - would this be the same as concern about how children are understanding sexuality? Did I say anything at all about "Negros" and females? Or "failure as a country"?

In my post, I wrote "Were people who questioned the decency of [how certain girls are dressing] treated as Nazis or KKK members?" And in responding, you of course have treated me exactly like I was a KKK member. You lumped me in a bunch of categories, including racism, that I don't belong in. Apparently to you there is no difference between simply having morals and being a witch judge in Salem (you probably won't believe this, but when I was writing the post, I actually considered using "Puritan witch judges" as my example of how people with values are treated instead of "Nazis or KKK members" - amazing how you reacted exactly as I expected).

I teach rhetoric to college students, and one of the things we talk about is the "straw man" argument. This is where a person who doesn't feel that he can rationally deal with an opponent's stated position instead chooses to dress that person up with a bunch of things that he or she didn't say, so that he can have something more manageable to take down. He creates a "straw man" since he cannot handle the real man's argument, and carries on a shadow fight against the straw man that he has created. This is what you have done to me, and for any person trained in rational debate, it shows poorly on you.

People who do not obey the moral law that is inside everyone - people who put sensual craving in front of moral reason - harm themselves more than anyone else can ever harm them. You may or may not believe this statement, but it wasn't a Christian who said it first - it was a guy named Plato. I don't worry about what other people, especially children, are doing because I want to oppress them. I worry because I don't think they know where their actions lead. I don't force anything on people, but I do worry. Certain things make me concerned.

dbigtex, your comments might win over some likeminded sympathizers on this forum, but logically they are a mess, and I am offended by what you have insinuated of me. And for what - posing a few questions? Why not just answer the questions? If this is the kind of behavior I can expect from a moderator, this forum is in poor hands. In the past you and I have been able to respectfully agree and disagree about things, without making things up or slandering each other. When did you become so nasty?

[KatieDidIt]

Ok this thread has really gone off topic.

In the neighborhood I used to live in the Galleria area, the girls didn't dress in the hiphuggers and too small T's with the lipgloss and high heels. I think its more of a suburban thing. My husband and I agree that if my son brings a girl dressed like that into our house she will either have to put on and X-large T over herself or go home and get dressed. I know this will MORTIFY the boys, but that's what makes a good parents.

As to Market Street: I hate the loitering but its a heck of a LOT BETTER than the Fire Bombs they are throwing at houses now. And setting the Country club and parks on fire.

[sevfiv]

i don't see fallacy in dbigtex's dialectic. rhetoric schmetoric. to me he is just stating the obvious with a smidge of mordancy...

[RedScare]

Are you responding to my post? Who said anything about the "true enemy"? Did I even mention Christianity? Did I suggest reverting to Puritan tactics - would this be the same as concern about how children are understanding sexuality? Did I say anything at all about "Negros" and females? Or "failure as a country"?

In my post, I wrote "Were people who questioned the decency of [how certain girls are dressing] treated as Nazis or KKK members?" And in responding, you of course have treated me exactly like I was a KKK member. You lumped me in a bunch of categories, including racism, that I don't belong in. Apparently to you there is no difference between simply having morals and being a witch judge in Salem (you probably won't believe this, but when I was writing the post, I actually considered using "Puritan witch judges" as my example of how people with values are treated instead of "Nazis or KKK members" - amazing how you reacted exactly as I expected).

I teach rhetoric to college students, and one of the things we talk about is the "straw man" argument. This is where a person who doesn't feel that he can rationally deal with an opponent's stated position instead chooses to dress that person up with a bunch of things that he or she didn't say, so that he can have something more manageable to take down. He creates a "straw man" since he cannot handle the real man's argument, and carries on a shadow fight against the straw man that he has created. This is what you have done to me, and for any person trained in rational debate, it shows poorly on you.

People who do not obey the moral law that is inside everyone - people who put sensual craving in front of moral reason - harm themselves more than anyone else can ever harm them. You may or may not believe this statement, but it wasn't a Christian who said it first - it was a guy named Plato. I don't worry about what other people, especially children, are doing because I want to oppress them. I worry because I don't think they know where their actions lead. I don't force anything on people, but I do worry. Certain things make me concerned.

dbigtex, your comments might win over some likeminded sympathizers on this forum, but logically they are a mess, and I am offended by what you have insinuated of me. And for what - posing a few questions? Why not just answer the questions? If this is the kind of behavior I can expect from a moderator, this forum is in poor hands. In the past you and I have been able to respectfully agree and disagree about things, without making things up or slandering each other. When did you become so nasty?

Interesting that you are so offended by bigtex' insinuations, given that you are the one who insinuated that anyone who questions you is treating you as a Nazi or KKK member. You also have mastered the straw man technique, as well. I might suggest that one so easily offended by these techniques should not first use them himself.

As to your suggestion that all of these kids are disobeying moral law, whose moral law are we talking about here? Yours? If wearing hip-huggers is such a violation, do we go back to the tight jeans of the 80s? The hot pants of the 70s? Knee skirts of the 50s? How about not showing ankles? Would that bring your moral compass back to True North?

It is fine to opine that contemporary morals are not where you would like to see them. To suggest that those who disagree with your views are depraved perverts or otherwise idiots is to attempt to disguise your opinions as facts...another well known debating tactic.

KatieDidIt suggested a fine way to enforce her sence of morality and decency in her own home. You on the other hand, are trying to enforce your version of morality and decency in everyone else's. I wouldn't describe that as Nazism...although I would mutter that you sound like the Morality Police.

[pineda]

speaking of teenager fashions...

[RedScare]

speaking of teenager fashions...

Can't wait for Pat Robertson to get ahold of that one.

I can hear it now: "...and I have to tell you, Sweden, if an eartquake or a flood strikes Sweden, don't ask God for help, because you have voted God off of your ass."

[bachanon]

another thread bites the dust.

[H-Town Man]

Interesting that you are so offended by bigtex' insinuations, given that you are the one who insinuated that anyone who questions you is treating you as a Nazi or KKK member. You also have mastered the straw man technique, as well. I might suggest that one so easily offended by these techniques should not first use them himself.

As to your suggestion that all of these kids are disobeying moral law, whose moral law are we talking about here? Yours? If wearing hip-huggers is such a violation, do we go back to the tight jeans of the 80s? The hot pants of the 70s? Knee skirts of the 50s? How about not showing ankles? Would that bring your moral compass back to True North?

It is fine to opine that contemporary morals are not where you would like to see them. To suggest that those who disagree with your views are depraved perverts or otherwise idiots is to attempt to disguise your opinions as facts...another well known debating tactic.

KatieDidIt suggested a fine way to enforce her sence of morality and decency in her own home. You on the other hand, are trying to enforce your version of morality and decency in everyone else's. I wouldn't describe that as Nazism...although I would mutter that you sound like the Morality Police.

You need to reread the posts, RedScare. In my first post, I simply pointed out that people in the U.S. who worry about morals are often treated like they are Nazis or KKK members. I did not accuse anyone on this forum on that. So I don't see how I am using the "straw man" fallacy.

dbigtex, on the other hand, assumed that because I thought there were problems with how some teenagers are behaving, that I must also be racist against black people... and against women's rights... and in favor of enforcing my morality with stones a la the Puritans. dbigtex employed a classic technique of liberal anti-moralism - he lumped me with every bad example he could think of in history of people who have possessed something similar to my views, and assumed that I held all the views that they profess. Notice that he didn't simply question me as to these other views, or specifically debate the points that I had made - a fact which shows that he is probably not interested in rational debate, and probably is incapable of respecting an opponent who disagrees with him.

As for your arguments concerning "which morality"... I did not have any particular period or style in mind. My point is simply that, by how they dress, young people seem increasingly to make themselves objects of sensual craving, and I don't think that this bodes well for them. Whose morality? When I wrote my last response, I had Plato in mind - see his "Gorgias," especially - but the same principles are held by almost every philosophy and religion. Again, it is more about caring for the person than it is oppressing him or her, and I would at any rate never impose my views on anyone (but I won't hesitate to express them). I think that you, like dbigtex, are mixing my arguments with other people you have heard, and responding to those people's arguments and pointing out their inconsistencies instead of mine (what, for instance, do my views have in common with Nazism, of all things?). You both need to read what I say more carefully.

By the way, I think that there are other people on this forum who agree with me, but are afraid to say it. People generally scatter when the topic of morality comes up. A quote from W.B. Yeats is relevant here: "The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate sincerity." Society has told us for so long that anyone who expresses moral beliefs is either Puritanical, a Nazi, or simply uncool, that people are afraid to voice their beliefs. That's pretty sad, especially for those who haven't discovered those principles yet, and only hear the voices that preach indulgence.

[KatieDidIt]

If people are hearing voices, I am like so outta here!

[RedScare]

By the way, I think that there are other people on this forum who agree with me, but are afraid to say it. People generally scatter when the topic of morality comes up. A quote from W.B. Yeats is relevant here: "The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate sincerity." Society has told us for so long that anyone who expresses moral beliefs is either Puritanical, a Nazi, or simply uncool, that people are afraid to voice their beliefs. That's pretty sad, especially for those who haven't discovered those principles yet, and only hear the voices that preach indulgence.

I love it when you use the "oppressed minority" angle. Imagine. A religious conservative in Houston, Texas is oppressed. Alert the media! Why would someone be afraid to stick up for morality? Because the evil, perverted RedScare might laugh at them (insert diabolical laugh here)?

I'm thoroughly amused at your belief that sex kills. However, there is nothing wrong with members of one sex preening for members of the opposite sex. It is human nature. It is the way we are hardwired. I recognize that you might not agree with me on the Darwinism thing, but that is how the species survives and prospers.

By the way, for all of your pontificating about the evils of teenage preening, you have not produced one fact to support your conclusion. Could it be that teenage preening does not automatically lead to sex, as you suggest? Would it surprise you to find teen pregnancy levels are down from the 80s and 90s? Holy Cow! Is it possible that how these kids dress is not as important as straight talk about teen sex by their parents?

[bachanon]

moderators? wanna reign these guys in?

[H-Town Man]

I love it when you use the "oppressed minority" angle. Imagine. A religious conservative in Houston, Texas is oppressed. Alert the media! Why would someone be afraid to stick up for morality? Because the evil, perverted RedScare might laugh at them (insert diabolical laugh here)?

I'm thoroughly amused at your belief that sex kills. However, there is nothing wrong with members of one sex preening for members of the opposite sex. It is human nature. It is the way we are hardwired. I recognize that you might not agree with me on the Darwinism thing, but that is how the species survives and prospers.

By the way, for all of your pontificating about the evils of teenage preening, you have not produced one fact to support your conclusion. Could it be that teenage preening does not automatically lead to sex, as you suggest? Would it surprise you to find teen pregnancy levels are down from the 80s and 90s? Holy Cow! Is it possible that how these kids dress is not as important as straight talk about teen sex by their parents?

Again: you label me with a bunch of things I didn't say. It's almost like you're incapable of handling a rational argument. I do not consider myself oppressed. I really wouldn't call myself a religious conservative - haven't I talked more about Plato than about Christianity? Is this common among religious conservatives? I didn't call you evil or perverted. I have not even used the word evil. I did not say that teenage "preening" automatically leads to sex. I certainly don't believe that "sex kills." And I'm not surprised about teen pregnancy levels being down. Why do you assume all these things of me? Does your mind only contain one category for people who hold moral viewpoints, and you shove all of them indiscriminately into that same category?

This whole thing began when you compared the United States with the Taliban, and I merely pointed out that it wasn't common under the Taliban for women to dress the way they often do here (not that I would want us to adopt the Taliban's oppressive rules) - nor was it common for people who found something wrong with brazen sexuality among thirteen year olds to be castigated and equated with Nazis or KKK members. Neither of these points have so far been answered, and I am still waiting for you to do so.

Instead, I have been hit with childish insults, I have had my words misinterpreted in bizarre, inexplicable fashion, I have been compared with Salem witch judges, I have been told that I am "pontificating" and that my views sound like "Nazism," and at least one person on this forum is under the serious impression that I think that he is an "evil pervert." If anyone has reason to be angry about what people have said in this thread, it is me.

I ask you again, RedScare: Are you capable of talking to me in a coherent, rational fashion? Without putting words in my mouth or assuming things about my character? Are you capable, in other words, of reading what I write and responding to it?