I mean you can be expelled, socially ostracized, held back. There are plenty of ways to punish students for expressing verboten opinions or proclivities.
Unless you went to an insanely strict school (I don't know, maybe you did), you're talking about different orders of magnitude between the trouble you can get in for voicing an unpopular or unorthodox opinion at work vs school.
"I think women are biologically more suited to staying at home with kids."*
Result of saying this at school: some of your classmakes dislike it/you. Maybe they talk shit about you to your friends.
But what 5th grader is being punished for repeating things he overheard his Dad listening to on Joe Rogan? Think about things a school-age child is more likely to actually say/believe though:
"Math is pointless." -> Uh oh, Johnny's dumb! Might need to hold him back a grade.
"I'm not going back inside. I'm going to keep playing on the jungle gym." -> Uh oh, Jenny's a troublemaker! Might need to suspend her.
"Isn't believing in God kind of silly? What if gay people aren't possessed by the devil?" -> Uh oh, we can't have little Harriet disrupting our parochial school's curriculum with these kinds of thoughts. Either send her to Pastor Dave's Devil-Free Summer Camp this summer, or next year she'll have to go to public school!
I think you’re significantly overstating the certainty here, especially if you couched that in being based on your religious beliefs. A lot of places have senior management who agree with that and most of the times I’ve seen things like that it gets no more than a reminder not to talk religion/politics at work, if even that.
The one exception is if you’re in a policy making position: if it sounds like fuel for a lawsuit arguing that women aren’t being fairly compensated or promoted, that is more likely to get attention. A lawyer I know mentioned that most of the DEI programs his firm setup were requested by CEOs specifically to protect the company from lawsuits, with the goal of being able to cut one manager loose rather than having the whole company be liable.
Generally any disciplinary action against a student must be justified. Saying something like "We sent this kid to detention because he said his parents voted for X" is not going to hold water, especially if you are talking about drastic punishments.
Nobody has to like you in school. But that's the same as the rest of society.
I think you have the wrong end of the stick. The surveillance here isn't Palinitr; it's TikTok. And the kids love TikTok.
Same goes for pissing off their elders -- as the comment above said, it's about their peers, not society at large, who matter (as it is for all of us).
Once more, the claim to which I responded was that kids today are consensus-bound/risk-averse because of the threat of surveillance. Saying that they "love" the party doing the surveillance isn't responsive (if anything it argues against the point).
Once more: kids are assholes. More so now than they used to be. Threatening to surveil them, via TikTok or not, does nothing but piss them off.
The kids are fine, basically. The point is just wrong.
I'm two years older than you, and the difference you need to key in on is how much more time kids (like everyone) spend on their phone now vs 2008 or whatever.
It was uncommon (and lame) to film EVERYTHING and put it on YouTube or whatever. Embarrassing (or yes, tragic) things leaked sometimes, but now it feels like something being made public is the norm, not the exception. And that sucks.
reply