If they were, why can we see badly behaved children and defiant teens throughout literature:
Emma - not a spoilt teenager who thought she knew it all?
Romeo and Juliet - the story of teenagers not affected by their hormones?
Agnes Grey - no unpleasant teens in the Bloomfield family?
Max and Moritz - good boys who always listened to their elders?
The lion and Albert - a poem about a well behaved boy doing as his parents said for fear of a clip around the ear?
Obviously literature isn't fact, but if the entitled brat/ naughty child/ selfish teen were really a recent phenomenon then the type wouldn't appear in literature going back centuries...
Or do people perhaps believe that children and adolescents were uniquely respectful and law abiding in their own youth or that of their children and things have deteriorated from the heady examples set for us by the teenage mods of the 1960s ... :o
Not denying aspects of childhood and society have changed over time of course, and that while some if the changes have been for the good others have not, but MN seems peppered with comments on how children / teens used to be, in one way or another, better (better behaved, more respectful) at some vague point in the past (due, it is often implied, to mollycoddling ).
AIBU to think this is just sloppy cliche and rose tinted nostalgia, and that kids have always been naughty (sometimes), teens have always been stroppy and defiant (sometimes - and almost certainly even before the term teenager came into use) and every single generation since the dawn of time has believed that society is going to the dogs, as proved by the dreadful behaviour of Young People These Days?