|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2006 9:22 pm
Isel zz1000zz Isel What is so wrong with acting like a prep, or being a gangster, wannabe or not? Is there a problem with being a hick? Is there a problem with acting like the "emo kids"? Wannabe gansters are pathetic people latching onto a group to be "cool." They act tough because they are too afraid to be themselves. Hicks are ignorants fools. Bigoted idiots. Emo kids are whiney and self-centered idiots demanding attention for the most trivial matters. Yes there is a problem with being any of those.
It does seem like you're throwing out generalizations left and right, regardless of the quality of the people I speak of. I could easily say there's something wrong with being a car salesman because car salesmen try to milk all the money they can get out of you- but that would be doing what you're doing, and casting an incorrectly-placed shadow over the entirety of car salesmen, despite the fact that I've met car salesmen who have great character.
So what if the wannabe gangster thinks it's cool to act tough? So what if the hick chooses to be close-minded? So what if the emo kid demands attention?
It's not bringing harm to anyone around them; the only reason you dislike these people is because you choose to. You let it bother you, and I can bet a fat kid's lunch money that somewhere in your subconscious, you made the decision to dislike these people because other people seem to dislike them too, and that little monkey in the back of your mind said you should voice this ill-influenced opinion.
Now tell me- had you not known the stereotypes of gansters, hicks, and emo kids, would you think there was something wrong with them inherently?Wrong on some moral level? No. Wrong on a personal level? Yes. I hate hicks and wannabe gangsters. Not because of some societal urge, but because they fit into the groups of people i hate. The same way i hate racist people, murderers, rapists and child molesters. Isel So what if the wannabe gangster thinks it's cool to act tough? So what if the hick chooses to be close-minded? So what if the emo kid demands attention? Close-mindedness harms society by erecting societal barriers. It harms society by preventing acceptance of all people. Mock toughness hurts society by encouraging violence and crime. Hating all car salesmen because some are crooks is illogical. Hating black people because some are criminals is pathetic. Hating KKK members because they are racist is logical. Hating bigots because they harm society is quite understandable. The difference is simple. Hating an entire category of people for what individual members of the category do is wrong. Hating an entire category for what the category is, is not wrong. (Notice i said nothing of punk rocker and prep? Yeah, there would be a reason.)
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2006 9:23 pm
Isel zz1000zz CrimsonThanatos Those are the steriotypical ones. <.< No. A hick is an ignorant fool. A bigoted idiot. That is the definition of a hick. The descriptions i gave are not stereotypes, they are definitions of labels. (The emo one not so much.) Referring to ignorant and bigoted fools. That the label is misused does not change the people falling under that category are not good people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2006 9:32 pm
zz1000zz Isel zz1000zz Isel What is so wrong with acting like a prep, or being a gangster, wannabe or not? Is there a problem with being a hick? Is there a problem with acting like the "emo kids"? Wannabe gansters are pathetic people latching onto a group to be "cool." They act tough because they are too afraid to be themselves. Hicks are ignorants fools. Bigoted idiots. Emo kids are whiney and self-centered idiots demanding attention for the most trivial matters. Yes there is a problem with being any of those.
It does seem like you're throwing out generalizations left and right, regardless of the quality of the people I speak of. I could easily say there's something wrong with being a car salesman because car salesmen try to milk all the money they can get out of you- but that would be doing what you're doing, and casting an incorrectly-placed shadow over the entirety of car salesmen, despite the fact that I've met car salesmen who have great character.
So what if the wannabe gangster thinks it's cool to act tough? So what if the hick chooses to be close-minded? So what if the emo kid demands attention?
It's not bringing harm to anyone around them; the only reason you dislike these people is because you choose to. You let it bother you, and I can bet a fat kid's lunch money that somewhere in your subconscious, you made the decision to dislike these people because other people seem to dislike them too, and that little monkey in the back of your mind said you should voice this ill-influenced opinion.
Now tell me- had you not known the stereotypes of gansters, hicks, and emo kids, would you think there was something wrong with them inherently?Wrong on some moral level? No. Wrong on a personal level? Yes. I hate hicks and wannabe gangsters. Not because of some societal urge, but because they fit into the groups of people i hate. The same way i hate racist people, murderers, rapists and child molesters. Isel So what if the wannabe gangster thinks it's cool to act tough? So what if the hick chooses to be close-minded? So what if the emo kid demands attention? Close-mindedness harms society by erecting societal barriers. It harms society by preventing acceptance of all people. Mock toughness hurts society by encouraging violence and crime. Hating all car salesmen because some are crooks is illogical. Hating black people because some are criminals is pathetic. Hating KKK members because they are racist is logical. Hating bigots because they harm society is quite understandable. The difference is simple. Hating an entire category of people for what individual members of the category do is wrong. Hating an entire category for what the category is, is not wrong. (Notice i said nothing of punk rocker and prep? Yeah, there would be a reason.)
Mock toughness doesn't always encourage violence and crime- a lot of hair metal artists wanted people to think they were tough, and you didn't see them going around and killing people to prove it.
Since when did we need to accept all people? Granted, we should tolerate them, but that doesn't mean that acceptance is required. You just have to put up with them. I know plenty of people who stay close-minded yet keep it to themselves, but can easily go into a business realm or professional atmosphere and act accordingly.
Closed-mindedness does not always interfere with interactions. For example, I personally dislike many people and wish to continue disliking them, yet I go into public (school, mainly) and deal with them anyway. Am I harming society by stating that I have a problem with people but do not refuse to work with them? I think not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2006 9:34 pm
zz1000zz Isel zz1000zz CrimsonThanatos Those are the steriotypical ones. <.< No. A hick is an ignorant fool. A bigoted idiot. That is the definition of a hick. The descriptions i gave are not stereotypes, they are definitions of labels. (The emo one not so much.) Referring to ignorant and bigoted fools. That the label is misused does not change the people falling under that category are not good people.
Oh, but wait! It involves race and or religious preference and that's a no-no because it harms society!
Woe, woe is the world that crumbles under the weight of a word!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2006 9:45 pm
Isel You realize that by exposing your group of people you hate, you've equated child molestors and murderers to hicks and gangsters.
Mock toughness doesn't always encourage violence and crime- a lot of hair metal artists wanted people to think they were tough, and you didn't see them going around and killing people to prove it.
Since when did we need to accept all people? Granted, we should tolerate them, but that doesn't mean that acceptance is required. You just have to put up with them. I know plenty of people who stay close-minded yet keep it to themselves, but can easily go into a business realm or professional atmosphere and act accordingly.
Closed-mindedness does not always interfere with interactions. For example, I personally dislike many people and wish to continue disliking them, yet I go into public (school, mainly) and deal with them anyway. Am I harming society by stating that I have a problem with people but do not refuse to work with them? I think not. I equate child molesters to hicks, yes. I also equated murderers to *wannabe* gangsters. I equated those to each other insofar as saying i hate them. Such a horrible thing to do. You compared the criticism goths get to the criticism hicks and wannabe gangsters get. There is a large difference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2006 9:49 pm
zz1000zz Isel You realize that by exposing your group of people you hate, you've equated child molestors and murderers to hicks and gangsters.
Mock toughness doesn't always encourage violence and crime- a lot of hair metal artists wanted people to think they were tough, and you didn't see them going around and killing people to prove it.
Since when did we need to accept all people? Granted, we should tolerate them, but that doesn't mean that acceptance is required. You just have to put up with them. I know plenty of people who stay close-minded yet keep it to themselves, but can easily go into a business realm or professional atmosphere and act accordingly.
Closed-mindedness does not always interfere with interactions. For example, I personally dislike many people and wish to continue disliking them, yet I go into public (school, mainly) and deal with them anyway. Am I harming society by stating that I have a problem with people but do not refuse to work with them? I think not. I equate child molesters to hicks, yes. I also equated murderers to *wannabe* gangsters. I equated those to each other insofar as saying i hate them. Such a horrible thing to do. You compared the criticism goths get to the criticism hicks and wannabe gangsters get. There is a large difference.
Is saying "I hate them because of this" any different when applied to different people? It is all hate.
Of course... I think I may cede from this argument, and let your "accepting of most while hateful towards some" thoughts continue along on their dream-train of high horses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:13 pm
Wow. Well said, man.
Now that I think about it, that's all true...you don't have to like everything about other sorts of people, but you don't have to actively hate it either. Live and let live. I'm sure if you're one of those who whimper in a corner when they get odd looks or someone doesn't like them for being different, you'd feel the same way if some goth was being cruel and you were a total prep. We're all humans, and everyone feels in the same way as you.
(Not that they feel like you do, but they have the ability to feel just like you have the ability to...thats what I meant...)
People have to deal with the repercussions of thier descisions if they're going to make the ones they want to. And people need to stop hating if they don't want to be hated. It's exactly that sort of narrowminded asshattery that makes me want to bash people's skulls in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:25 pm
Agree agree agree. If you dress differently you WILL GET LOOKED AT. Why are people so suprized when it happens? Gah.
I'm pretty damn judgemental so I don't complain when people look at me a bit longer than they would another person or have some idiot yell out stuff like 'Halloween is over' (which in Australia, doesn't make much sense because we don't even celebrate it).
Luckily I don't get much s**t come my way.
Everyone is a bit of a hypocrit.
And I like labels. I don't get why everyone hates them so much.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 12:00 am
Isel zz1000zz Isel You realize that by exposing your group of people you hate, you've equated child molestors and murderers to hicks and gangsters.
Mock toughness doesn't always encourage violence and crime- a lot of hair metal artists wanted people to think they were tough, and you didn't see them going around and killing people to prove it.
Since when did we need to accept all people? Granted, we should tolerate them, but that doesn't mean that acceptance is required. You just have to put up with them. I know plenty of people who stay close-minded yet keep it to themselves, but can easily go into a business realm or professional atmosphere and act accordingly.
Closed-mindedness does not always interfere with interactions. For example, I personally dislike many people and wish to continue disliking them, yet I go into public (school, mainly) and deal with them anyway. Am I harming society by stating that I have a problem with people but do not refuse to work with them? I think not. I equate child molesters to hicks, yes. I also equated murderers to *wannabe* gangsters. I equated those to each other insofar as saying i hate them. Such a horrible thing to do. You compared the criticism goths get to the criticism hicks and wannabe gangsters get. There is a large difference.
Is saying "I hate them because of this" any different when applied to different people? It is all hate.
Of course... I think I may cede from this argument, and let your "accepting of most while hateful towards some" thoughts continue along on their dream-train of high horses.Forgive me me for my errors. I was wrong in thinking the reason for hatred mattered. I now see saying "I hate bigots because they are close-minded idiots" is no better than saying "I hate black people because they are black." It is all hate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:46 am
I really like this thread. I think it should be compulsory reading for anyone who joins the guild - _-
Much as I'm embarrassed to talk about it with my (non-goth) friends, I hate calling myself a goth, depending on who it is that asks. I had the fiancee' of a good friend ask me "why the goth thing"? I had to explain to him, I like the macabre fashion aesthetic, I like the clubs, and the people I know there, I like the music (well, most of it), and I like being, or feeling different from other people. Being a black-clad goth sets you apart from the hordes of people wearing fast-fashion poorly dyed poorly matched gloppy clothes. Being a goth-rock/death-rock/industrial/whatever music-listening goth sets you apart from the Sean-Paul, Justin Timberlake, Britney Spears etc etc etc people. It gives you a wonderful appreciation for all kinds of things, the same way I suppose being a "chav" would make you a connoisseur of Gucci glasses and Prada purses, or that being an emo makes you attuned to the finer shades of grey in human suffering, or that being a "gangsta" would make you an afficianado of rap rhyme schemes, gritty urban struggles for...i don't know (see how ignorant I am about it?).
Each of these labels relates to a cluster of stereotype beliefs about the label. E.g, "all goths worship the Devil!!" (lol... we all know that one isn't true.) Anyhow, a person being or becoming a goth, emo, gangsta, chav ...and so on... means they get to accentuate something about themselves they think makes them appealing. Or, on an anthropological level, makes them feel like they "belong" somewhere. If you look at Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of human needs, the top three, (which includes self-actualisation, esteem of peers, and "love") are all belongingness needs. Belongingness is very important! Belonging comes with two parts however: Us, and Them. It's perfectly natural for some people to want to pit social groups (subcultures) against one another in order get more of this lovely "belongingness" feeling. It makes you feel great. I think eventually most of us realise it's silly to think that way, but a sad few keep thinking (albeit some with good reason) that it really is Us versus Them.
There is a big difference between educated cliquism, and ignorant cliquism, but in the end, the two feed each other and the result is the same: further segregation of the subcultures. Can't we all just be happy, people?
blaugh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:51 am
Pardon the incoherence of my last post... it's 5 am where am, and i've had insomnia all night. eek
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 7:59 am
*thumbs up*
Thankeh for saying that. I try not to be too judgemental of people, but I will throw around stereotype terms such as "emo" and my "sugar goth" designation casually. Fortunately, I'm tolerant of pretty much anyone so long as they do not harass my friends, my family, or me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 8:39 am
zz1000zz Isel What is so wrong with acting like a prep, or being a gangster, wannabe or not? Is there a problem with being a hick? Is there a problem with acting like the "emo kids"? Wannabe gansters are pathetic people latching onto a group to be "cool." They act tough because they are too afraid to be themselves. Hicks are ignorants fools. Bigoted idiots. Emo kids are whiney and self-centered idiots demanding attention for the most trivial matters.Yes there is a problem with being any of those.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 8:53 am
Excellent thread. A point well stated and well taken.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 9:30 am
I believe my IQ has dropped significantly by simply reading zz1000zz's responses.
But then again, it's nice that Isel has garnered proof of his original argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
![[ D i z z y ! ]'s avatar](https://a1cdn.gaiaonline.com/dress-up/avatar/ava/a4/1a/2e138f412f1aa4_flip.png?t=1203547751_6.00_01)
