Goth hates utterly the bray of bragging tongues.

[Alveus Lacuna]

This topic was split from the following discussion:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,24780.0.html

-YtterbiumAnalyst

I teach middle school. Goth is not alternative.

Goth is a pop culture alternative to pop culture.  Even our youthful rebellion is predetermined and readily constructed! Hot Topic and GAP are the same company.

[Iconodule]

I teach middle school. Goth is not alternative.

Goth is a pop culture alternative to pop culture.  Even our youthful rebellion is predetermined and readily constructed! Hot Topic and GAP are the same company.

Whenever you feel uncertain about your identity, you can buy a new one at Hot Topic 

To be fair, there are goths and there are goths. There is a more "underground" goth scene that scoffs and sneers at the people walking around the mall in Marilyn Manson and Dimmu Borgir shirts. Of course, even these underground subcultures are conformist in their own ways.

[ytterbiumanalyst]

I teach middle school. Goth is not alternative.

Goth is a pop culture alternative to pop culture.  Even our youthful rebellion is predetermined and readily constructed! Hot Topic and GAP are the same company.

Whenever you feel uncertain about your identity, you can buy a new one at Hot Topic 

To be fair, there are goths and there are goths. There is a more "underground" goth scene that scoffs and sneers at the people walking around the mall in Marilyn Manson and Dimmu Borgir shirts. Of course, even these underground subcultures are conformist in their own ways.

Exactly right, both of you. But I fear that this is now a tangent. I'll split it off so we can continue this discussion.

Now that it's split, I remember an episode of South Park in which the kids try to form a dance troupe. They go to a group of goths who are all dancing by taking one step, then smoking, then taking one step in the opposite direction. The kids try to recruit the goths, who all refuse to conform. Finally one goth agrees to go, stating that he will not conform to what the non-conformists want. The goths reply, "We just got goth-served."

[Quinault]

You should see the episode where South Park spoofs Twilight.

[Papist]

You should see the episode where South Park spoofs Twilight.

LOVE that episode!!!

[ytterbiumanalyst]

You should see the episode where South Park spoofs Twilight.

I haven't seen it in a few years. I lost interest after the whole Scientology debacle. It seems they lost the satirical quality to the show and went for safer fare, fart jokes and the like.

[Iconodule]

You should see the episode where South Park spoofs Twilight.

I haven't seen it in a few years. I lost interest after the whole Scientology debacle. It seems they lost the satirical quality to the show and went for safer fare, fart jokes and the like.

I always thought South Park was a deeply conformist show pretending to be subversive. Kind of like goth culture, actually.

[Ebor]

The show in which they have fun with World of Warcraft is a hoot if one plays that game.  That's the only one I've seen. 

[Asteriktos]

Am I the only one who doesn't have a clue what the title of this thread means?   I mean, I think I get it... but not really

[ytterbiumanalyst]

Am I the only one who doesn't have a clue what the title of this thread means?  I mean, I think I get it... but not really

It's an obscure quotation from Sophocles' Antigone: "God hates utterly the bray of bragging tongues." Ironically the goth subculture, which claims to despise the arrogance of the popular culture, in so doing comes off as even more arrogant.

[Papist]

How do emo kids feel about the bray of bragging tongues?

[Riddikulus]

How do emo kids feel about the bray of bragging tongues?

They probably find it depressing.

[Iconodule]

[Ebor]

Am I the only one who doesn't have a clue what the title of this thread means?  I mean, I think I get it... but not really

It's an obscure quotation from Sophocles' Antigone: "God hates utterly the bray of bragging tongues." Ironically the goth subculture, which claims to despise the arrogance of the popular culture, in so doing comes off as even more arrogant.

It may come across that way at times, but I came across this a while ago:  Gothic Charm School a website and book by "the Lady of the Manners"
http://gothic-charm-school.com/charm/?page_id=58

One can be a part of a particular set and not be unpleasent.

Ebor

[Lauren_Elisse]

Hehehehe I'm a combination of the two coolest things ever.
Orthodox and Goth
Both of them I have grown up with.
I didn't just fall into "Goth"
I think that it's more of a personal view on the goth thing.
To call people "goth" seems like a visual statement for the most part, but to say that goths are arrogant in general is strange.
Is it more the person himself or the goth that we see?

[Papist]

I think being Goth is all about drawing attention to oneself. I wonder if Goth kids were hugged enough when they were younger.

[Schultz]

I think being Goth is all about drawing attention to oneself. I wonder if Goth kids were hugged enough when they were younger.

My wife certainly was.  She was attracted the neo-Victorian dress style that permeated the Goth subculture in the late 80s and early 90s ( a style that has, unfortunately, gone by the wayside).  Her friends made their own clothes because Hot Topic did not exist and it was an outlet for their creativity and paradoxically fostered a sense of individuality within the confines of a larger group of like minded people.  From the outside, people look in and say, "Oh, they all just look the same" but, in the end, it's all about the details.   These details aren't always seen by those who aren't "in the know", so to speak.

Also, you can't paint any given subculture with such a broad brush regardless of what the sociologists want to tell you.  I write this as someone who was deeply involved in the anarcho-punk and mod/(anti-racist)skinhead subcultures in my younger days; even to this day, I still retain the dress style of an early '70s suedehead.  I've read most every scholarly treatise on the concept of youth subculture and, while most of them hit on certain points, they miss the forest through the trees.  Kids join subcultures because of the intense pressures of adolescence to both "fit in" and "be yourself".  Subcultures will continue to splinter as each generation innovates the look or meaning of a look. 

It's very easy for people who think that they weren't part of a subculture growing up (particuarly after, say, 1975) to point fingers and mock those who are obviously members of one.  Yet from most subculturists' standpoint, the "normals" are the ones who deserve to be mocked and derided for the same reason: they're different from you.

[Papist]

I think being Goth is all about drawing attention to oneself. I wonder if Goth kids were hugged enough when they were younger.

My wife certainly was.  She was attracted the neo-Victorian dress style that permeated the Goth subculture in the late 80s and early 90s ( a style that has, unfortunately, gone by the wayside).  Her friends made their own clothes because Hot Topic did not exist and it was an outlet for their creativity and paradoxically fostered a sense of individuality within the confines of a larger group of like minded people.  From the outside, people look in and say, "Oh, they all just look the same" but, in the end, it's all about the details.   These details aren't always seen by those who aren't "in the know", so to speak.

Also, you can't paint any given subculture with such a broad brush regardless of what the sociologists want to tell you.  I write this as someone who was deeply involved in the anarcho-punk and mod/(anti-racist)skinhead subcultures in my younger days; even to this day, I still retain the dress style of an early '70s suedehead.  I've read most every scholarly treatise on the concept of youth subculture and, while most of them hit on certain points, they miss the forest through the trees.  Kids join subcultures because of the intense pressures of adolescence to both "fit in" and "be yourself".  Subcultures will continue to splinter as each generation innovates the look or meaning of a look. 

It's very easy for people who think that they weren't part of a subculture growing up (particuarly after, say, 1975) to point fingers and mock those who are obviously members of one.  Yet from most subculturists' standpoint, the "normals" are the ones who deserve to be mocked and derided for the same reason: they're different from you.

If a person's whole purpose is being different for the sake of being different, that appears extermely childish and shallow. That's what I see in Goth kids. If I were to have children it would be a cold day in hell before I would let them take part in this nonsense.

[Schultz]

I think being Goth is all about drawing attention to oneself. I wonder if Goth kids were hugged enough when they were younger.

My wife certainly was.  She was attracted the neo-Victorian dress style that permeated the Goth subculture in the late 80s and early 90s ( a style that has, unfortunately, gone by the wayside).  Her friends made their own clothes because Hot Topic did not exist and it was an outlet for their creativity and paradoxically fostered a sense of individuality within the confines of a larger group of like minded people.  From the outside, people look in and say, "Oh, they all just look the same" but, in the end, it's all about the details.  These details aren't always seen by those who aren't "in the know", so to speak.

Also, you can't paint any given subculture with such a broad brush regardless of what the sociologists want to tell you.  I write this as someone who was deeply involved in the anarcho-punk and mod/(anti-racist)skinhead subcultures in my younger days; even to this day, I still retain the dress style of an early '70s suedehead.  I've read most every scholarly treatise on the concept of youth subculture and, while most of them hit on certain points, they miss the forest through the trees.  Kids join subcultures because of the intense pressures of adolescence to both "fit in" and "be yourself".  Subcultures will continue to splinter as each generation innovates the look or meaning of a look.  

It's very easy for people who think that they weren't part of a subculture growing up (particuarly after, say, 1975) to point fingers and mock those who are obviously members of one.  Yet from most subculturists' standpoint, the "normals" are the ones who deserve to be mocked and derided for the same reason: they're different from you.

If a person's whole purpose is being different for the sake of being different, that appears extermely childish and shallow. That's what I see in Goth kids. If I were to have children it would be a cold day in hell before I would let them take part in this nonsense.

I didn't mean that, but I can certainly see where you got that from I wrote.

As I noted in the first paragraph, people have different tastes.  Some people are drawn to the fashion, some people are drawn to the music prevalent amongst a given subculture, and, yes, some people are drawn into something for the sake of being different.  Usually it's a combination of all three.  

Note also that we are dealing with children when we talk about adolescents.

As to your last statement, it will be a cold day in hell before I make my children conform to some amorphous "normal" look for the sake of them being "normal" at the risk of alienating them further should they find they are attracted to a certain fashion style that may be unconventional.  The vast majority of people who partook in what you call "nonsense" grew out of it as they got older.  And those who did not know full well that they haven't "grown up" and are quite okay with that and certainly are at a point in their lives where they do not need your or anyone else's approval.

[ytterbiumanalyst]

If a person's whole purpose is being different for the sake of being different, that appears extermely childish and shallow. That's what I see in Goth kids. If I were to have children it would be a cold day in hell before I would let them take part in this nonsense.

I understand what you're saying, and I respectfully disagree with you. I think it's important for children to be childish and shallow, and to explore what identity feels most comfortable to them. Then, once they've faced their identity crisis, they can come out of it a stronger person, knowing who they are and why they are that way. I see a lot of adults still facing identity crises, and I believe a good portion of the reason is that they improperly faced an identity crisis as a teenager.

[BoredMeeting]

Several years ago, I saw this group of tattooed and pierced teens walking through the mall. Several of them wore T-shirts from a tattoo parlor with the slogan "You laugh at me because I'm different. I laugh at you because your all the same."

One kid, right in the center of the group, who had no visible tattoos or piercings was also wearing the shirt but was glancing about the rest of the group with an amused look on this face.

I happened to make eye-contact with him and we both started laughing as it was apparent that none of his friends were getting his joke.

[ytterbiumanalyst]

Several years ago, I saw this group of tattooed and pierced teens walking through the mall. Several of them wore T-shirts from a tattoo parlor with the slogan "You laugh at me because I'm different. I laugh at you because your all the same."

One kid, right in the center of the group, who had no visible tattoos or piercings was also wearing the shirt but was glancing about the rest of the group with an amused look on this face.

I happened to make eye-contact with him and we both started laughing as it was apparent that none of his friends were getting his joke.

That's brilliant. The greatest thing about working with kids is that they see the world so much differently than we do. I think we have as much to learn from them as they do from us.

[Papist]

Several years ago, I saw this group of tattooed and pierced teens walking through the mall. Several of them wore T-shirts from a tattoo parlor with the slogan "You laugh at me because I'm different. I laugh at you because your all the same."

One kid, right in the center of the group, who had no visible tattoos or piercings was also wearing the shirt but was glancing about the rest of the group with an amused look on this face.

I happened to make eye-contact with him and we both started laughing as it was apparent that none of his friends were getting his joke.

LOL. Love it!

[Schultz]

Several years ago, I saw this group of tattooed and pierced teens walking through the mall. Several of them wore T-shirts from a tattoo parlor with the slogan "You laugh at me because I'm different. I laugh at you because your all the same."

One kid, right in the center of the group, who had no visible tattoos or piercings was also wearing the shirt but was glancing about the rest of the group with an amused look on this face.

I happened to make eye-contact with him and we both started laughing as it was apparent that none of his friends were getting his joke.

Even I'll laugh at this.   

[Iconodule]

\
If a person's whole purpose is being different for the sake of being different, that appears extermely childish and shallow. That's what I see in Goth kids.

I was a goth kid because I liked H.P. Lovecraft, Siouxsie and the Banshees, and black clothing. There are certain elements of the subculture that attract people, irrespective of what happens to be mainstream at the moment. Some people in these subcultures don't spend enough time among "normal" people to feel different- they can become very insular. So I observed when I was involved in the anarchist subculture, where many people only seemed to live and interact with other people who dressed like them and listened to the same music. 

[Papist]

\
If a person's whole purpose is being different for the sake of being different, that appears extermely childish and shallow. That's what I see in Goth kids.

I was a goth kid because I liked H.P. Lovecraft, Siouxsie and the Banshees, and black clothing. There are certain elements of the subculture that attract people, irrespective of what happens to be mainstream at the moment. Some people in these subcultures don't spend enough time among "normal" people to feel different- they can become very insular. So I observed when I was involved in the anarchist subculture, where many people only seemed to live and interact with other people who dressed like them and listened to the same music.  

Exactly why I have a problem with the whole Goth subculture. It frightens me that this over emphasis on being different will only foster teenagers' delusions of self-importance which psychologists have shown is one of the delusions that accompanies adolescences.

[BoredMeeting]

Arrghh! I can't believe I put "your all" instead of "you're all" in that! 

[Schultz]

\
If a person's whole purpose is being different for the sake of being different, that appears extermely childish and shallow. That's what I see in Goth kids.

I was a goth kid because I liked H.P. Lovecraft, Siouxsie and the Banshees, and black clothing. There are certain elements of the subculture that attract people, irrespective of what happens to be mainstream at the moment. Some people in these subcultures don't spend enough time among "normal" people to feel different- they can become very insular. So I observed when I was involved in the anarchist subculture, where many people only seemed to live and interact with other people who dressed like them and listened to the same music.  

Exactly why I have a problem with the whole Goth subculture. It frightens me that this over emphasis on being different will only foster teenagers' delusions of self-importance which psychologists have shown is one of the delusions that accompanies adolescences.

But could not the same be said for, say the "normal" nerdy kids, in school?  Or the "jocks"?  Or any other social group which, for all intents and purposes, functions exactly like any subculture only is not labeled, as such?  Why pick on "goths" or "punks" or whoever when every striation of adolescence functions the same as any other?  

I would also point out again what Mr. Y said.  People who did not have identity crises as children will most likely have them at mid-life when they have far more responsibility to tend to.  What's worse, a 16 year old kid who likes Siouxie and the Banshees and wears bad eye make-up and keeps to his friends or the 48 year old "straight" who wakes up and decides he's wasted his life on his wife and 2 children and leaves them to buy a Ferrari and date a 23 year old woman?

My money's on the latter.

[Rosehip]

I don't get "goth" culture in the least, and am a bit sorry that more young people aren't more imaginative and original in their affectations.

[Papist]

\
If a person's whole purpose is being different for the sake of being different, that appears extermely childish and shallow. That's what I see in Goth kids.

I was a goth kid because I liked H.P. Lovecraft, Siouxsie and the Banshees, and black clothing. There are certain elements of the subculture that attract people, irrespective of what happens to be mainstream at the moment. Some people in these subcultures don't spend enough time among "normal" people to feel different- they can become very insular. So I observed when I was involved in the anarchist subculture, where many people only seemed to live and interact with other people who dressed like them and listened to the same music.  

Exactly why I have a problem with the whole Goth subculture. It frightens me that this over emphasis on being different will only foster teenagers' delusions of self-importance which psychologists have shown is one of the delusions that accompanies adolescences.

But could not the same be said for, say the "normal" nerdy kids, in school?  Or the "jocks"?  Or any other social group which, for all intents and purposes, functions exactly like any subculture only is not labeled, as such?  Why pick on "goths" or "punks" or whoever when every striation of adolescence functions the same as any other?  

I would also point out again what Mr. Y said.  People who did not have identity crises as children will most likely have them at mid-life when they have far more responsibility to tend to.  What's worse, a 16 year old kid who likes Siouxie and the Banshees and wears bad eye make-up and keeps to his friends or the 48 year old "straight" who wakes up and decides he's wasted his life on his wife and 2 children and leaves them to buy a Ferrari and date a 23 year old woman?

My money's on the latter.

First, I don't think that Jocks, nerds, preps, etc, etc, etc are anything like the Goth subculture. The former exist because of people's particular tastes and personalities but they don't exist soley for the purpose of "being different". The Goth culture, on the other hand, appears to be an infantile attempt to be different for difference's sake. I don't think this is healthy and I think it can be a bit self centered.

Again, why must a person have a serious identity crisis in their teens in order to avoid one when they are older? I Don't think that this necessarily follows.

[Papist]

I don't get "goth" culture in the least, and am a bit sorry that more young people aren't more imaginative and original in their affectations.

Exactly!!!

[ytterbiumanalyst]

\
If a person's whole purpose is being different for the sake of being different, that appears extermely childish and shallow. That's what I see in Goth kids.

I was a goth kid because I liked H.P. Lovecraft, Siouxsie and the Banshees, and black clothing. There are certain elements of the subculture that attract people, irrespective of what happens to be mainstream at the moment. Some people in these subcultures don't spend enough time among "normal" people to feel different- they can become very insular. So I observed when I was involved in the anarchist subculture, where many people only seemed to live and interact with other people who dressed like them and listened to the same music.  

Exactly why I have a problem with the whole Goth subculture. It frightens me that this over emphasis on being different will only foster teenagers' delusions of self-importance which psychologists have shown is one of the delusions that accompanies adolescences.

But could not the same be said for, say the "normal" nerdy kids, in school?  Or the "jocks"?  Or any other social group which, for all intents and purposes, functions exactly like any subculture only is not labeled, as such?  Why pick on "goths" or "punks" or whoever when every striation of adolescence functions the same as any other?  

I would also point out again what Mr. Y said.  People who did not have identity crises as children will most likely have them at mid-life when they have far more responsibility to tend to.  What's worse, a 16 year old kid who likes Siouxie and the Banshees and wears bad eye make-up and keeps to his friends or the 48 year old "straight" who wakes up and decides he's wasted his life on his wife and 2 children and leaves them to buy a Ferrari and date a 23 year old woman?

My money's on the latter.

First, I don't think that Jocks, nerds, preps, etc, etc, etc are anything like the Goth subculture. The former exist because of people's particular tastes and personalities but they don't exist soley for the purpose of "being different". The Goth culture, on the other hand, appears to be an infantile attempt to be different for difference's sake. I don't think this is healthy and I think it can be a bit self centered.

Children are naturally self-centred. It takes a long time before they learn to see things from someone else's perspective.

Again, why must a person have a serious identity crisis in their teens in order to avoid one when they are older? I Don't think that this necessarily follows.

There's some good psychology to back up this assertion. Foremost in the field is Erik Erikson.

http://www.haverford.edu/psych/ddavis/p109g/erikson.stages.html

[Rosehip]

I don't see anything wrong with wanting to somehow distinguish oneself from the masses, but what I don't understand is why must there only be two choices-average all-american teen, or "goth"? In my mind, all-american is complete dullsville and goth is just plain silly. With so many centuries of interesting fashions and artists to emulate, why are only two interpretations of style considered as forms of personal expression? That to me shows a terrible lack of creativity and imagination.

[Schultz]

\
If a person's whole purpose is being different for the sake of being different, that appears extermely childish and shallow. That's what I see in Goth kids.

I was a goth kid because I liked H.P. Lovecraft, Siouxsie and the Banshees, and black clothing. There are certain elements of the subculture that attract people, irrespective of what happens to be mainstream at the moment. Some people in these subcultures don't spend enough time among "normal" people to feel different- they can become very insular. So I observed when I was involved in the anarchist subculture, where many people only seemed to live and interact with other people who dressed like them and listened to the same music.  

Exactly why I have a problem with the whole Goth subculture. It frightens me that this over emphasis on being different will only foster teenagers' delusions of self-importance which psychologists have shown is one of the delusions that accompanies adolescences.

But could not the same be said for, say the "normal" nerdy kids, in school?  Or the "jocks"?  Or any other social group which, for all intents and purposes, functions exactly like any subculture only is not labeled, as such?  Why pick on "goths" or "punks" or whoever when every striation of adolescence functions the same as any other?  

I would also point out again what Mr. Y said.  People who did not have identity crises as children will most likely have them at mid-life when they have far more responsibility to tend to.  What's worse, a 16 year old kid who likes Siouxie and the Banshees and wears bad eye make-up and keeps to his friends or the 48 year old "straight" who wakes up and decides he's wasted his life on his wife and 2 children and leaves them to buy a Ferrari and date a 23 year old woman?

My money's on the latter.

First, I don't think that Jocks, nerds, preps, etc, etc, etc are anything like the Goth subculture. The former exist because of people's particular tastes and personalities but they don't exist soley for the purpose of "being different". The Goth culture, on the other hand, appears to be an infantile attempt to be different for difference's sake. I don't think this is healthy and I think it can be a bit self centered.

We will have to disagree on this very fundamental point regarding adolescence.  I see them as very much the same, and I say this as someone who was (and still is, to a large degree) a "nerd", a "jock" and a member of a subculture.  I've been through them all.  Perhaps it is because of this that I have a vastly different perspective from you.  As I often struggle to explain the intense anger I felt at the world when I was 16 (and how it clung to me for a decade or so) to those who did not, I will most likely struggle to explain my point of view to someone who has not been down a similar road.

But, I will point out that, in most subcultures, there are, to use the mod terms of the early 60s, the "faces" and the "tickets".  The faces are the movers and the shakers, the originators and the innovators, of a particular style.  The tickets are the followers, the hangers-on, the ones who, to use your terms, feel the need "to be different for difference's sake".  Faces are constantly changing what it means to be X while the tickets are almost always languishing far behind and end up a parody of the original look.  To continue in mod terms, the original modernists of 1961-1963 had moved on by the time the British press got hold of their fashion revolution and, by 1964 when the entire British urban world was "mod", the look had become an unoriginal and copy of itself, an idea that went against the primary aesthetics of the originators.  

The same goes for "goth".  The original aesthete, exemplified by Dave Vanian of the Damned and Siouxsie Sioux, was an incredibly original look in its day, a pastiche of Victorian mourning dress and punk rock flair.  Soon enough, that became parody of itself and degenerated into a just an "all-black look" with too much eye-makeup all the time and a rather uninteresting morbidity, much the same way the original punk rock look went from a shockingly original fashion statement to the spikes-and-leather-with-mohawk-layabout-thug image of the early 80s.

While I will certainly concede that most of what passes as "goth" these days is trite and unoriginal, it's all just a part of growing up in the 21st century.  I think my main point is that people make far, far too much of the obvious superficial aspects of someone's personality and search for identity and fail to see the person underneath it all.  

I also think to call youth subculture childish is redundant and, frankly, stupid.  It serves only to boost one's own ego at how superior he is to those silly kids with the funny clothes.

Again, why must a person have a serious identity crisis in their teens in order to avoid one when they are older? I Don't think that this necessarily follows.

I'm not saying that one must follow the other, but it has been my admittedly anecdotal experience that there is a greater risk for the stereotypical mid-life crisis for those who did not explore their identity in their youth.  

[Schultz]

I don't see anything wrong with wanting to somehow distinguish oneself from the masses, but what I don't understand is why must there only be two choices-average all-american teen, or "goth"? In my mind, all-american is complete dullsville and goth is just plain silly. With so many centuries of interesting fashions and artists to emulate, why are only two interpretations of style considered as forms of personal expression? That to me shows a terrible lack of creativity and imagination.

I can whole-heartedly get behind this.  Then again, my own fashion sense is more like (and no, that's not me):



as opposed to:

[Papist]

I also think to call youth subculture childish is redundant and, frankly, stupid.  It serves only to boost one's own ego at how superior he is to those silly kids with the funny clothes.

Let me clarify. I believe that it fosters what is worst about adolesence, the things that we should be encouraging people to grow out of. Don't get me wrong, there are many great things about teens. But their delusions of self-importance are not those things.

[Quinault]

I was a goth kid, I will readily admit it. The "darkness" appealed to where I felt I was at that point in my life. I felt like I was surrounded by fake "shiny happy people." You grow up being told that high school is one of the best times of your life. Being a teen is difficult at best. You are shifting from childhood to adulthood. You want more respect and less accountability. You feel like adults treat you like a kid, but expect you to act like an adult. You have adulthood staring you in the face and you don't really know what to do next. Adolescence feels like standing on a cliff in the fog getting ready to jump. After you jump you realize that it wasn't that far/bad, but preparing to jump is pretty scary/sad for some. I had people telling me to smile all the time. I really got tired of being told that I should cover up how I felt because it was more socially acceptable.

[Schultz]

I also think to call youth subculture childish is redundant and, frankly, stupid.  It serves only to boost one's own ego at how superior he is to those silly kids with the funny clothes.

Let me clarify. I believe that it fosters what is worst about adolesence, the things that we should be encouraging people to grow out of. Don't get me wrong, there are many great things about teens. But their delusions of self-importance are not those things.

Fair enough. However, you should know by now that children, especially teenagers, are not, as a whole, going to listen to what their elders tell them, especially when they look around and see how those elders are screwing everything up, from their marriages to the financial health of the world.  Adolescence is something that simply must be experienced with all its warts and pimples.  The vast, vast majority of kids who do time in a subculture grow out of it.  Those who stay behind, particularly those who revel in being "old school", are the minority who oft times invite derision upon themselves by the very people they think they're leading.  It can be quite amusing.

As for helping people grown out of it, the best thing you can do is just be the cool older guy who lets kids be kids.  When they see that you're a real mensch, so to speak, perhaps they'll see that being "normal" doesn't have to mean being everything they hate.

[Papist]

I was a goth kid, I will readily admit it. The "darkness" appealed to where I felt I was at that point in my life. I felt like I was surrounded by fake "shiny happy people." You grow up being told that high school is one of the best times of your life. Being a teen is difficult at best. You are shifting from childhood to adulthood. You want more respect and less accountability. You feel like adults treat you like a kid, but expect you to act like an adult. You have adulthood staring you in the face and you don't really know what to do next. Adolescence feels like standing on a cliff in the fog getting ready to jump. After you jump you realize that it wasn't that far/bad, but preparing to jump is pretty scary/sad for some.

I guess maybe part of my problem with this Goth thing is my own inability to relate to it. I didn't find adolscene to be scarry at all. In fact, I had a wonderful time in High School. I think that its what you make of it.

[Quinault]

Respectfully- high school is not what you make it. I had problems with teachers and peers. As a teacher (since I am fairly sure you are speaking from the POV of a teacher and not a peer) you can be firm in regards to behavior but understanding regarding feelings. Most goth kids I knew were overachievers in school. The few that did poorly in school (ahem....me) did so because of outside factors. So the last thing they needed was judgemental teachers. Goth is more about your view of the world than the clothing. Although the goth clothes to rock

I did grow up in one of the most skinhead abundant areas in the NW as a minority, so that likely had a good deal to do with my angst.

[Quinault]

My home state still has many "Jim Crow" type laws on the books. And the sentiment of the teens at my high school was pretty similar. I attended the "rich" school and a person from a family on the poverty level as well. So either I was "cool" for being a minority or I was a "savage" that needed to be "saved." My brothers had an easier time because they "look" less indian so they can pass.

http://www.jimcrowhistory.org/scripts/jimcrow/lawsoutside.cgi?state=Oregon

[Schultz]

Respectfully- high school is not what you make it. I had problems with teachers and peers. As a teacher (since I am fairly sure you are speaking from the POV of a teacher and not a peer) you can be firm in regards to behavior but understanding regarding feelings. Most goth kids I knew were overachievers in school. The few that did poorly in school (ahem....me) did so because of outside factors. So the last thing they needed was judgemental teachers. Goth is more about your view of the world than the clothing. Although the goth clothes to rock

I did grow up in one of the most skinhead abundant areas in the NW as a minority, so that likely had a good deal to do with my angst.

You most certainly did.  I know plenty of SHARP-types our age who used to regale me with stories of the pitched battles between them and the boneheads.  I just found out not too long ago that Portland, of all places, was a "sundown town" until very recently, which totally is at odds with its current image as a liberal mecca, of sorts.  Then again, one of my wife's friends was visiting his brother and it took him a few days to realize that he had not seen one African-American on the streets when he was walking them; being from Baltimore, that's quite a culture shock!

[ytterbiumanalyst]

My home state still has many "Jim Crow" type laws on the books. And the sentiment of the teens at my high school was pretty similar. I attended the "rich" school and a person from a family on the poverty level as well. So either I was "cool" for being a minority or I was a "savage" that needed to be "saved." My brothers had an easier time because they "look" less indian so they can pass.

http://www.jimcrowhistory.org/scripts/jimcrow/lawsoutside.cgi?state=Oregon

That idea would be funny if it weren't so real. There are a couple of Hispanic students in my school whom my students say don't "look Hispanic." I sometimes ask them, "What does Hispanic look like?" Usually their response is "You know," to which I usually reply, "Do you?"

The sad fact of American life is that light-skinned people, regardless of race, are treated better than dark-skinned people of any race. We haven't killed racism yet.

[Papist]

Respectfully- high school is not what you make it. I had problems with teachers and peers. As a teacher (since I am fairly sure you are speaking from the POV of a teacher and not a peer) you can be firm in regards to behavior but understanding regarding feelings. Most goth kids I knew were overachievers in school. The few that did poorly in school (ahem....me) did so because of outside factors. So the last thing they needed was judgemental teachers. Goth is more about your view of the world than the clothing. Although the goth clothes to rock

I did grow up in one of the most skinhead abundant areas in the NW as a minority, so that likely had a good deal to do with my angst.

When I talk about having a great time in HS and enjoying one's experience, I am speaking from actually having had experienced this in high school myself. I had a great time because I worked hard, behaved myself, and took part in activities like Choir, Drama, National Honor Society, Speech and Debate, etc. etc. You see, by keeping myself out of trouble, and choosing to be involved in HS, I ended up really enjoying myself. The kids who didn't do these things, well they always seemed to be miserable. So yes, HS is what you make.
Now as a HS teacher, I am seeing the same thing. The students choose to study hard, involve themselves in activities, and generally keep them selves out of trouble, they seem to be the ones enjoying themselves. But the kids do don't do these things don't enjoy high school.
BTW, a little secret of our society is that people in our society do judge a book by its cover. When you decide to dress up like a Goth kid to show the world how "different" you are, then you are just putting a target on your back so that you can be outcast. Its like a vicious circle.  A person decides that he or she is different (usually because of the adolescent delusion of self importance) and so decides, I am different so I am going to be a Goth Kid. This makes them look even more different, so they behave even more differently. It goes on and on and on.

[Quinault]

I tried to be a SHARP, but they wanted me to cut my waist length hair. I refused to cut my hair so I was allowed to hang out, but I wasn't allowed to be a full part of the group. I once ended up dating a skinhead in middle school. He kept telling me it was "ok that I was a minority because indians were here first." But then he preferred that I wear the white goth type face paint over my natural olive color.

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Other Topics (Moderator: username!) > Topic: Goth hates utterly the bray of bragging tongues.