• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

Preschoolers and other young trainer classes

Meduza

Majestic Dawn
392
Posts
13
Years
    • Seen Jul 8, 2014
    Maybe children under the age of ten can have pokemon and battle, but maybe they just can't get a Pokedex, a Starter Pokemon or earn badges until they're ten. Because you don't see any Preschoolers with any of the unova starters (I think).

    And I think the Youngsters class which has been aorund since Gen.I seemed a lot younger than 10 to begin with.
     

    Sydian

    fake your death.
    33,379
    Posts
    16
    Years
  • Because Youngsters and Lasses are totally not kids. lol Preschoolers are fine, as long as they have little Pokemon you'd expect a little kid to have, like the two Preschoolers that you have a double battle with, they have Herdier. I thought it was adorable, tbh. Cause you know, Herdier is a dog. I just imagine them snuggling their Herdier. XD;
     

    Giratina ♀

    what's your sign?
    1,439
    Posts
    16
    Years
    • Seen Jul 23, 2013
    I'm telling you, the presence of these younger characters (because really, they've been around for a while now, not just the five-year-old little kids we see in B/W) has really begun to make me reconsider what I know about the canon in the games. I think I want to run through all of them (or at least all that I can find) and clarify this age thing for myself.
     

    ShinyMeowth

    Gone forever
    397
    Posts
    13
    Years
  • Have you really put that much thought into your post before actually looking up how my comments are interlinked in their conjoined message? I'm sorry if that's how it seemed, but I'll clarify this:

    I'm not saying older>younger. I'm commenting that it's clear from what the poster wrote that he's naive. I'm commenting his individual maturity, which correlates to the general maturity of his age group. Clearly the person doesn't realize why there are age limits for things.

    I've been 14 too, and the only reason I can find that he feels discriminated is that he's not well educated enough in how these things (age limits) work and why they're enforced. That's something he should get either from school or his parents (I got from both sources, from school at 13 years of age and from parents well before that).
    How does any of this make me selfish? He's 14 and he doesn't understand how things work yet, and that's why one shouldn't blurt out anything without knowing more about it. But that doesn't mean I will treat him any better just because he's younger. Regardless of age I think that he's being naive and speaking like a kid. He should learn this.

    If you want to you can try to enforce a system which measures individual maturity efficiently and cost-effectively. That'd be grand.
    But as it's now that's not possible and for now we'll have to decide the general maturity of the population at certain ages through enforcing an age limit. And that's how it works.
    Okay, this is just insulting. I have Asperger's, which has given me a great intelligence. I've been studying Calculus at 13, and for the last 3 years I've been constantly correcting everything my teachers say. I've been playing the piano for half a year now and I'm working on the third movement of Beethoven's moonlight sonata. I try to achieve perfection at everything I do, and it always eventually happens, usually 10 or 20 times faster than normal. I hate showing off, but sometimes the ignorance and conservatism of people is too much to take. The mother of a classmate of mine had the same attitude you have, when I confronted her about her flawed parenting. "I am not going to bother talking with a 14 year old." was her signature reply to everything, even though we both knew I was correct. I am much more mature than every 18-year old I know, and it makes me mad when people don't take me seriously because of my age.

    I am sure you have been 14 too, but the fact that you were not like me does not prove anything. I am more than well enough educated about how age limits work, and I am also well enough educated to prove how the way they work is conservative, discriminatory and ridiculous. The fact that I comment on how things are incorrect does not imply that I am unfamiliar with the subject. And last time I checked, "speaking like a kid" meant ignoring grammar, arguing without backing up your case, and swearing excessively. Last time I checked, none of those conditions were met by my posts.

    I am not saying every kid should be given adult rights, I know statistically (my school), that a lot of kids are idiotic. However, same goes for a lot of adults. In fact, turning 18 does not cure you from idiocy. Nothing will cure anybody from idiocy. What I am saying, is that there should be no "adult" rights. A more correct system, would be to make everybody have an IQ test and put the result on their IDs. Then, we could write laws about rights around that. For example, banning everybody with an IQ less than 80 from drinking. That would work much better than what we have now. Age discrimination is effectively the same as racism and sexism, and its funny how while the society frowns upon the last two, nobody gives the crap about age discrimination.

    tl;dr: Stop treating me like an idiot. I am correct and you know it.
     
    Last edited:

    Oryx

    CoquettishCat
    13,184
    Posts
    13
    Years
    • Age 31
    • Seen Jan 30, 2015
    A more correct system, would be to make everybody have an IQ test and put the result on their IDs. Then, we could write laws about rights around that. For example, banning everybody with an IQ less than 80 from drinking. That would work much better than what we have now.

    I can't speak for the rest of your post, but coming from someone who has been in Mensa for years, IQ means nothing. The "IQ" test I took, the official Mensa test, spent a large portion of the test asking me vocabulary questions. I read a lot so I did well on it, but someone can be completely brilliant without knowing any of the IQ-worthy vocabulary words. Intelligence comes in so many different forms, and people with low IQs can still be responsible while people with high IQs can still be irresponsible. Intelligence often has little to do with the decisions people make. I know plenty of smart people from where I grew up, in the not-so-nice part of town, that are completely irresponsible because of how they grew up and were raised, not their intelligence. IQ isn't maturity quotient.

    As for the acting like a child, I believe that was referring to the fact that although there are countless studies explaining the 21 rule, you state that having any age laws are unacceptable. Not listening to the facts ("Youth who start drinking before age 15 years are five times more likely to develop alcohol dependence or abuse later in life than those who begin drinking at or after age 21 years", CDC) and instead stating your own opinion with anecdotal evidence is usually what a less matured mind would do. If you were arguing it from the perspective of an older person (especially an older person of your intelligence), you would most likely be throwing facts at the other person, because while "I drank before and I was fine" means absolutely nothing, facts cannot be denied.

    Anyway, this is all completely off topic, just my two cents.
     

    ShinyMeowth

    Gone forever
    397
    Posts
    13
    Years
  • I can't speak for the rest of your post, but coming from someone who has been in Mensa for years, IQ means nothing. The "IQ" test I took, the official Mensa test, spent a large portion of the test asking me vocabulary questions. I read a lot so I did well on it, but someone can be completely brilliant without knowing any of the IQ-worthy vocabulary words. Intelligence comes in so many different forms, and people with low IQs can still be responsible while people with high IQs can still be irresponsible. Intelligence often has little to do with the decisions people make. I know plenty of smart people from where I grew up, in the not-so-nice part of town, that are completely irresponsible because of how they grew up and were raised, not their intelligence. IQ isn't maturity quotient.

    As for the acting like a child, I believe that was referring to the fact that although there are countless studies explaining the 21 rule, you state that having any age laws are unacceptable. Not listening to the facts ("Youth who start drinking before age 15 years are five times more likely to develop alcohol dependence or abuse later in life than those who begin drinking at or after age 21 years", CDC) and instead stating your own opinion with anecdotal evidence is usually what a less matured mind would do. If you were arguing it from the perspective of an older person (especially an older person of your intelligence), you would most likely be throwing facts at the other person, because while "I drank before and I was fine" means absolutely nothing, facts cannot be denied.

    Anyway, this is all completely off topic, just my two cents.
    When I mentioned IQ, it was more a proof of concept. I know the tests are flawed, I wanted to make a point about age not being as important as people seem to believe.

    I would like to see some of those studies, especially how the 21 is derived. What I use as evidence, is what I can actually see, like the statistics that can be gathered at my school. I believe I could elaborate on the "I drank before and I was fine" point, by stating that by "drank" I mean half a glass of wine. If we calculate the volume that covers, I am more than positive we can reach a percentage of wine/blood that is even legal for a driving adult to have taken. If you don't want to take my word on that, we can do the math tomorrow, as I have to sleep now.
     

    Oryx

    CoquettishCat
    13,184
    Posts
    13
    Years
    • Age 31
    • Seen Jan 30, 2015
    When I mentioned IQ, it was more a proof of concept. I know the tests are flawed, I wanted to make a point about age not being as important as people seem to believe.

    There are no tests that test maturity. Intelligence is not maturity, and vice versa. There is no way to base a drinking limit on how "mature" you are. If you believe otherwise, the burden of proof is on you. Show me a way that's more effective than age.

    I would like to see some of those studies, especially how the 21 is derived.

    See any of the sources here, I'm not going to look up each one for you. My favorite quotes are " Memory impairment has been found in adult rats exposed to alcohol during adolescence", "Adolescents who began drinking at an earlier age had proportionately smaller hippocampal [part of brain involved heavily in learning] volumes compared with those who began later", and "The rate of fatal crashes among alcohol–involved drivers between 16 and 20 years old is more than twice the rate for alcohol–involved drivers 21 and older".

    What I use as evidence, is what I can actually see, like the statistics that can be gathered at my school. I believe I could elaborate on the "I drank before and I was fine" point, by stating that by "drank" I mean half a glass of wine. If we calculate the volume that covers, I am more than positive we can reach a percentage of wine/blood that is even legal for a driving adult to have taken. If you don't want to take my word on that, we can do the math tomorrow, as I have to sleep now.

    You might want to read this on the dangers of convenience sampling.
     

    ShinyMeowth

    Gone forever
    397
    Posts
    13
    Years
  • There are no tests that test maturity. Intelligence is not maturity, and vice versa. There is no way to base a drinking limit on how "mature" you are. If you believe otherwise, the burden of proof is on you. Show me a way that's more effective than age.

    See any of the sources here, I'm not going to look up each one for you. My favorite quotes are " Memory impairment has been found in adult rats exposed to alcohol during adolescence", "Adolescents who began drinking at an earlier age had proportionately smaller hippocampal [part of brain involved heavily in learning] volumes compared with those who began later", and "The rate of fatal crashes among alcohol–involved drivers between 16 and 20 years old is more than twice the rate for alcohol–involved drivers 21 and older".

    You might want to read this on the dangers of convenience sampling.
    I see your point. It is true that there can't be a generalized maturity test. I can now see that the best way to ensure safety, is what happens now: Have the 21 law there, and ignore it when I know it is pointless (drinking half a glass of wine at formal occasions).

    What I did was not actually convenience sampling, since I was observing teenagers to make an assumption about teenagers. I know the dangers of convenience sampling, and always take them into consideration.
     
    13,600
    Posts
    15
    Years
    • they/them
    • Seen Dec 11, 2023
    I'm not too sure how the above conversations relate, but I just skimmed and preferred not to question. :(

    But in my personal opinion... I didn't really see a problem with it. While there may have been preschoolers, as far as I know they were either near the Daycare, or it was the double-battle, and not only was Alder was nearby. The ones near the daycare there were adults watching them, and as for the double-battle ones they didn't care for battling, they just thought their Pokemon were cute. Now, if I saw a Preschooler on the Route say... before the Victory Road, then I would start questioning just how realistic for a child of five to be there with a level 45 Simipour or something.
     

    Oryx

    CoquettishCat
    13,184
    Posts
    13
    Years
    • Age 31
    • Seen Jan 30, 2015
    What I did was not actually convenience sampling, since I was observing teenagers to make an assumption about teenagers. I know the dangers of convenience sampling, and always take them into consideration.

    I would trust most of the friends I've made from my Catholic high school to drink responsibly over the high school I went to for one year as a freshman, in a bad, low-income area. Observing teenagers from one school because you go there is the definition of convenience sampling, because that's not a random sample of teenagers, those are teenagers that live in that area (financially segregated) or got into that school if it's competitive (academically segregated). I knew schools back home that couldn't give people GPAs because people were so obsessed with grades that they would fight over rankings, and this was a public school. It was that way solely because of the kind of people that lived in the area. Likewise, my old school had to deal with evacuations, fires, and bomb threats because of the area it was in.

    tl;dr: Observing teenagers at your school is convenience sampling because they all share the trait of being easy for you to observe.

    And Peaches, yeah we're pretty off topic but it's an interesting discussion nonetheless (:
     
    13,600
    Posts
    15
    Years
    • they/them
    • Seen Dec 11, 2023
    Well... I'm not the moderator here so I have no power, but I'm sure you can find another place for your debate. We're here to speak about the little preschoolers in the Pokemon Game, not age discrimination.

    Speaking of the preschoolers though, my grammar in my past post was off. Let's see.. only preschoolers I saw were the one at the daycare with adults watching them, and the two in which were where Adler was, and only thought that their Pokemon were cute. By no means did they think of 'em as things in which would make you stronger (or whatever the lesson was to Cheren then.)
     

    jcsimpson

    Sing into my mouth
    306
    Posts
    13
    Years
  • I really wish a conversation about Pokemon characters would be a...conversation about Pokemon characters. I don't care about them being that young...an opponent is an opponent and I actually thought it was cool having the second strongest of the Winstrate family being a child.
     
    41
    Posts
    13
    Years
  • You know, I spent about 30 minutes adding my say to that whole conversation. I then promptly deleted it all, shook my fist and cursed at the screen for wasting my (precious) time, and made a sandwich. A sandwich I could've had 30 minutes ago in retrospect. What a waste...


    But to the real topic for discussion, I think my first reaction was "WTF" followed by "Are these kids even old enough to talk?" followed by "Screw it, I'm playing a video game".

    The real icing on the cake is that they made the Preschoolers some of the selectable trainer avatars you can use online. I'd like to see a Preschooler configure their DS for WiFi connectivity and wade through the menus and actually do something. That kid would be my hero.
     

    SquirtleGirl

    Pokémon: 10 years + Counting..
    553
    Posts
    14
    Years
  • I'd believe they had them as some kind of protection :) To be honest I was kinda weirded out when I first came across them but then I thought that the Youngsters can't be much older...

    [offtopic]I also agree with the whole age doesn't equal maturity argument. I've seen 17 year olds drink more sensibly than someone who is say, 25. [/offtopic]
     

    Lambda

    Boss of Team Plasma
    119
    Posts
    13
    Years
    • Seen Oct 2, 2011
    I cant believe i was a trainer when i was four! lol But in Black someof the preschoolers have level 40-60 leveled pokemon.
     
    173
    Posts
    13
    Years
  • I like the preschoolers and the other younger Pokemon trainers. It is cool that you can battle young kids and it is also funny too.
     
    Back
    Top