Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.
The stages of geeks vs. punks.
Stage one:
Childhood:
In this stage you are either a punk kid or a geek kid which is good.
Var. 1: punk kid: mischievous, annoying and sometimes stupid.
Var. 2: Geek kid: already in touch with technology and science.
Stage two:
Teenage years:
In this stage there are three out come staying punk (bad) or staying geek(good)
Var. 1: punk teens: Loves to party and does it all the time, also has a high chance to work on a crappy day job.
Var. 2: geek teens (*cheer*): Already could use a computer well and is in love with it.
Var. 3: punk geek (*choke*): Does not know what path to take may know something about computer but prefers popularity over awesomeness.
Stage three:
Adult
Var. 1: Normal Joe: Punk kids become regular “Joes†over time they are know the regular asshole you see on the street.
Var. 2: geek: Masters of awesome can already write code and generally kicks ass on anything.
Childhood:
In this stage you are either a punk kid or a geek kid which is good.
Var. 1: punk kid: mischievous, annoying and sometimes stupid.
Var. 2: Geek kid: already in touch with technology and science.
Stage two:
Teenage years:
In this stage there are three out come staying punk (bad) or staying geek(good)
Var. 1: punk teens: Loves to party and does it all the time, also has a high chance to work on a crappy day job.
Var. 2: geek teens (*cheer*): Already could use a computer well and is in love with it.
Var. 3: punk geek (*choke*): Does not know what path to take may know something about computer but prefers popularity over awesomeness.
Stage three:
Adult
Var. 1: Normal Joe: Punk kids become regular “Joes†over time they are know the regular asshole you see on the street.
Var. 2: geek: Masters of awesome can already write code and generally kicks ass on anything.
Comments
For whatever reason, this reminded me of a quote from the great movie "SLC Punk!"- "Competition, fighting, capitalism, government, THE SYSTEM. That's what we did. It's what we always did. Rednecks kicked the shit out of punks, punks kicked the shit out of mods, mods kicked the shit out of skinheads, skinheads took out the heavy metal guys, and the heavy metal guys beat the living shit out of new wavers and the new wavers did nothing. What was the point? Final summation? None. "
As well SLC Punk, while entirely about Punk culture (actual punk culture from the 80s, not this new pop punk trash) points out a lot of the logical failings and wrongheadedness of being a part of the culture.
So its kinda relevant. Kinda sorta. Not really.
This is essentially how the world (at least my dim, American view of it) works:
Most people grow up as punks. They care mostly for popularity, and their favorite activities are highly social ones, such as clubbing, bar-hopping, and sports.
Some people grow up as geeks. They are all of above-average intelligence. Most very smart people find it difficult to relate to ordinary people as children. (Is that so odd? How do you suppose truly slow people relate to ordinary people? Not so well in most cases? Well, now, that makes a little more sense.) They gravitate instead toward virtual worlds, more and more as such things become prevalent. In the old days, comics, novels, and TV had to suffice. Now, there is so much more. Thank our geek mothers and fathers for making it for us.
Normal people meet a lot of other normal people in the course of all these social events. Thus, they end up getting married, having children, and being unable to participate in most of those activities. They still get together with their peers on occasion, such as sports parties (Monday Night Football), family get-togethers (kid's birthday, Christmas, etc), and work outings. More power to 'em.
Geeks in today's world can meet each other online, and, (far, far) more importantly, in real-life geek-meccas like college, and thus integrate geekery into their lives. If they are smart (well, truly I mean "wise"), they will marry another geek. If you're a geek, and you married a non-geek, SHAME ON YOU. She isn't that pretty. (Forgive the gender assumption, I'm assuming all geek girls are wise enough to marry the best-mannered, most socially adept, responsible geek men they can find).
Thus, geeks can avoid having their livelihood taken out from under them, if they choose partners carefully. They can even integrate geekery into their work! I work in a geeky profession, and can read and discuss geek-related information on the web while at work with no repercussions. All of my friends are geeks. Awesome.
Normal people, by contrast, have an awfully difficult time integrating sports, bar-hopping, and clubbing into their work. Generally--stereotypically perhaps, but for a good reason--such people's spouses tend to deny them the keepsakes of their old pastime, as well as the opportunity to continue pursuing it with dedication, in favor of work and child care.
So, to normal people, I say: ha ha.
I do hope all the account executives and project managers out there are having a good time. I plan to enjoy a life of world-altering, technology-advanced work, mixed with an abundance of geek-filled leisure.
I just don't get how someone could stand to be romantically involved with a person who couldn't/wouldn't share in their interests, or couldn't get along with their other friends.
So many people seem to separate the two and compartmentalize their lives. Work friends vs Family friends vs Bar friends. Girlfriend/Wife vs Friends vs Business associates. No one just -lives- anymore.
Well, except geeks ^_~
Inquiring minds want to know!
...I think that you and I have different definitions for punk. When I think punk, I think mohawks, piercings, tattoos and the Sex Pistols, not popularity and club-hopping.
Attention, all kids under 14: (none of whom can actually legally be participating in this forum anyway)
The cool barrier is broken. Coolness is no longer the strict purview of the young. Thank our parents (not yours), who invented cool in the 60's and 70's, and thank technology, for bringing personalized music to the masses. Basically, everything's been done in music already, and in our time, so, well...we're cool, and you're not.
The new thing in music will not come from the world of whiteys, young or old. We're tapped out. And black culture will be dominated by hip-hop for a long time. Look to new ethnic groups--hispanic, asian, and beyond--to provide the new thing. Even the hardcore hip-hop listeners will say "what is this shit", and then that shit will be #1-100 on the charts just like hip-hop is now.
By the way, our generation also invented hip-hop. Plus we got techno, which was this awesome genre of music that was born and died entirely within our youth.
Suck it, kiddies. The true punks are all 30 now.
>=)
Also techno is far from dead. It's just matured to "electronica" with many sub-genres like trance, industrial, etc. If you like "techno" I suggest you listen to the podcast "Derek the Bandit's Sound Republic". http://www.soundrepublic.co.za. He's a really famous DJ/musician from South Africa who turns out some pretty amazing stuff.
I like to think some genres like Punk (to continue the plant metaphor) have mutated into something more akin to a potato plant or somesuch. You try and eat that top part, the stuff you see sticking above the ground, and it's nasty shit. True disgusting vomit-inducing crap. It tastes like freaking leaf. And leaf is not good eats.
But ha! You dig down deep past that top part, to the roots of the plant, and you eat what you find there? That's good stuff. That's potato, and a good potato's a fine thing indeed.
Mr. Period: added paragraphs
When you consider the music history of Jazz and R&B, you'll realize that this isn't really a new thing.
Racism is making a judgment about a member of a race based only on your knowledge of the race, not your knowledge of the person. For instance, if I said "black people invented hip-hop", that would merely be a statement. If I said "black people like hip-hop", that would be a quasi-racist generalization. If I said "that black guy over there, whom I have never met, must like hip-hop because he is black", that is definately racist.
Racism is not harmful because people make statements about a race. It's harmful when people make assumptions about individuals. "Oh look! An ethnic person! He must be dangerous, because I believe in my bigoted mind that all members of that ethnicity are dangerous!" That's real racism, and it goes on every day, though it's not really stated as such very often.
As for the history of music, I concentrated in music theory and history in college (aka took random classes and retroactively cobbled a concentration together), so I'm well aware of the evolution of music. Most of what America has done with music would not be possible without black people. John Philip Sousa would be just about our crowning achievement. Dvorak's New World Symphony would be our national theme music--and it wasn't even written by an American.
European groups brought us a lot of "our" modern music. Techno itself is bigger in Europe than it ever was here (though Detroit likes to lay claim to its invention).
What I really mean to say is that the introduction of new cultures will spur the greatest change (of many) to come in music, as did the introduction of black culture over the previous couple of centuries. The ethnicity isn't the important thing, but the culture itself.
...I think that you and I have different definitions for punk. When I think punk, I think mohawks, piercings, tattoos and the Sex Pistols, not popularity and club-hopping.
-------
-------chemical bass
That's old school punk, not the pop-punk we are talking about here.
-------
-------TheGothfather
Huh... I must be old. I call those other kids Emo.
-------
-------chemical bass
Emos are sad bastards who can't get a life and cut themself...I got force to write about them once
-------
Well, I guess I'm more old school than either of you becuase I used to call us... ahem! I mean "Them" "goths".
And "punks" are basically anyone that is A- younger by at least five years from me
AND (not OR) B- not only has little regard but rather an active negative regard for all thing geeky.
Mainstream shit has little to do with it. I know many punks that are very anti-establishment. I like their spunk but both laugh and cry at their disregard or outright scorn of tech and / or mainstream things they can hack to their advantage.
It's like some stupid adherence to some ancient ideals that could benefit them immensely if they were able to shed the retard filter they see the world through...
Hope that makes sense.
These social subcultures are born from inate personas in various people that have been galvanized through the culture shift of popular music. Punk music was originally an outcry against the vast commercial establishment and exploitation of disco and other forms of rock and sought to expand in an opposite direction from its predecessors. They stripped down chords, took the focus away from a more musical progression to one of pure emotion. It was the minimalism of rock in many ways. The entire vibe of anti-establishment that spurned it became a strong undercurrent of the punk movement, later becoming an even more defining characteristic than the music itself.
Technically, goth was born from the genre of gothic rock that was itself an offshoot of the post-punk music scene. Many of its roots are in the punk and postpunk subculture, but as time progressed, goth further defined itself into what are considered its defining characteristics today.
Emo is something more complex, and hell I'm not even entirely sure where it is today. Technically it started as an offshoot of hardcore punk called emocore that died in the late 80s. A second offshoot came in the 90s that relabeled itself indie emo. The popularity of indie emo began to suck in other bands with similar sounds that weren't technically emo at all. Take Weezer for example. Okay, so that plays out, the defining emo bands move on to other subgenres, prog-rock and the like. The current brand of emo is born with the 'naughts though the original underground of emo is essentially dead. Its mostly carried on by the remnants of the last wave of emo like Jimmy Eats World.
From what I can figure and what I can glean from wikipedia, what is currently emo is essentially a clumping together of various different bands with similar sounds by major record labels (think grunge with Nirvana, Pearl Jam, etc) and a style is coalesced from various styles worn by their respective fans.
*coughs* That's how I define them, really, though the subcultures really have grown far beyond the bindings of their musical heritage.
Mr. Period: added paragraphs
It's analogous to breeds of dog, or serotypes of microorganisms.
People from the Mediterranean or whose ancestors have come from there are susceptible to thalassemia. The trouble with the term race is that it implies a group that is rigid. However, race as it is on forms and such is usually "caucasian," "black," "Asian," etc. But someone from Africa and an indigenous Australian are both "black," but are they of the same race? Is someone from India "Asian," or are they something else?
The trouble is that race theory is a new area of study, and the term race still has use in medical research, but it comes with a judgement attached. While the term race is useful in genetic research, it is not a binary "black/white" thing, while people who have descended from certain parts of the world have similarities, they aren't in groups that are rigid.
Race exists. To deny such is not the way to defeat racism.
Race and racism have played a major role, for better or worse (well, really, for worse), throughout civilization. Racism is an extension of tribal feuding dating back before the dawn of civilization. That is just an extension of one animal fearing another, the general fear of the unknown ingrained into all life--again, for better or worse.
America is a very racist country. We come from every race, and have mixed together for centuries to blur the distinction...and yet some distinction yet remains. Racism always finds a distinction.
The difference between America and regions of the third world in which people kill each other over race is not the existence or nonexistence of racism, but the way in which we deal with it.
Racism was not eradicated in a generation. Tolerance, however, has been greatly advanced in this country, at escalating speeds, since its inception. Other, similar countries have made similar gains. It is through understanding of other races that racism can be truly defeated. When racism is defeated, a synergistic joining of races, rather than mere assimilation, can occur, to create something more than what existed before.
But to deny race exists, that it is a mere social construct, is to deny racism.
I don't feel incredibly strongly about this, I just think it's an interesting conversation. =)