web
analytics

In-Depth Bants

Sociopolitical Issue thread

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by hmm » Wed Nov 09, 2016 4:28 am

As an australian who lived through bloody tony abott's prime ministership, i feel like im in groundhog day uhhhh jesus
There are so many issues of trumps that i hate (super protectionist, sexist, racist, transphobic and homophobic) but i feel like the absolute worst thing is he will reverse even the little things we have done for the environment- it took 8 years of obama to get the paris accord, after 4 years of trump it will take decades to even begin reversing climate change. Our planet is fucked. :sideeye:
hmm
drama llama
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 12:36 am
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by IckleMissMayhem » Wed Nov 09, 2016 10:48 am

Image
User avatar
IckleMissMayhem
full-time internet hobo
 
Posts: 1891
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 11:59 pm
Location: UK
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by azara » Wed Nov 09, 2016 12:47 pm

Putin DID have a party! Complete with a translator and lots of ornate gold ceilings:

Edit: not sure how to do the Youtube embed thing. Here's the link instead, sorry https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOD9oAtZeEw
azara
squish
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sat May 28, 2016 11:17 pm

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by hannah » Wed Nov 09, 2016 12:56 pm

azara wrote:Putin DID have a party! Complete with a translator and lots of ornate gold ceilings:

fixed it for you :D (just delete the "s" in https and put the link inside of two bars :
[youtube]link here[/youtube]
User avatar
hannah
butt chair
 
Posts: 88
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 7:11 pm

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by azara » Wed Nov 09, 2016 1:50 pm

Thanks, hannah! I did use the square brackets, but didn't delete the 's'.

Not sure many people here are all that interested in global power politics, as opposed to social change/election, but Putin's comments about being willing to return to normalised relations with the US (which he happily blames America for, lol) struck me as quite interesting. He's been pushing very anti-American rhetoric for the last couple of years in particular, so this was a bit of a surprise, especially in such a short speech. I wonder how much of what he was saying is true. I notice he was careful to point out how difficult it would be, several times, so definitely not committing himself to anything.

Thoughts?
azara
squish
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sat May 28, 2016 11:17 pm

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by mio » Sat Jan 14, 2017 6:00 am

I've been thinking about this topic since this video was posted on the main thread


It's such a load of bullshit to make up fancy words like "post-empire" to basically say "I'm rich and white and I don't care about real life issues and I will stop treating people with respect".
Why do so many pretend so called "political correctness" will be the end of the world, when all people claim is simply basic human decency. Is it that hard??

(It doesn't help that Bret Easton Ellis is pretty much the worst and people named in that video for being "raw" and "real" are just fucking assholes like Charlie Sheen)
But OH NO we need to protect the rights dick creators to continue making stupid jokes. That's SO MUCH more important than the real lives of millions of actual people.

ALSO this whole theory makes no fucking sense, like since when did we live in a society ruled by oppressive PCness for the last 60 years? You mean the same period where in many "western" countries woman weren't allowed to vote, there was still segregation in place, and being gay was a crime you could go to jail for? Yes right.

I'd appreciate people being more open about their feelings and opinions without worrying about their material existance. But in which world is that something that is happening right now?
When a single tweet can cause a global shitstorm or (talkign about ordinary people's problems) the things you share on facebook can get you fired or never get a job in the first place.

The "empire" is still in place, just like it has been since the beginning of modern society and the commercialization of every aspect of our lives. Nowadays we just all work for it for free.
~ IT'S A HORSE SUSAN ~
User avatar
mio
#relatable
 
Posts: 356
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 2:48 am

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by Catallena » Sat Jan 14, 2017 7:45 am

mio wrote:I've been thinking about this topic since this video was posted on the main thread


It's such a load of bullshit to make up fancy words like "post-empire" to basically say "I'm rich and white and I don't care about real life issues and I will stop treating people with respect".
Why do so many pretend so called "political correctness" will be the end of the world, when all people claim is simply basic human decency. Is it that hard??

(It doesn't help that Bret Easton Ellis is pretty much the worst and people named in that video for being "raw" and "real" are just fucking assholes like Charlie Sheen)
But OH NO we need to protect the rights dick creators to continue making stupid jokes. That's SO MUCH more important than the real lives of millions of actual people.

ALSO this whole theory makes no fucking sense, like since when did we live in a society ruled by oppressive PCness for the last 60 years? You mean the same period where in many "western" countries woman weren't allowed to vote, there was still segregation in place, and being gay was a crime you could go to jail for? Yes right.

I'd appreciate people being more open about their feelings and opinions without worrying about their material existance. But in which world is that something that is happening right now?
When a single tweet can cause a global shitstorm or (talkign about ordinary people's problems) the things you share on facebook can get you fired or never get a job in the first place.

The "empire" is still in place, just like it has been since the beginning of modern society and the commercialization of every aspect of our lives. Nowadays we just all work for it for free.


Like I said in the main thread, I've noticed a trend. It's not only a thing among YouTubers either. These are all people who previously held the exact same fucked up beliefs and values about minorities as they do now. They used to be open about this. Then later when the left side did really break through on the internet (popularizing leftist movements like feminism), to save their own asses and careers, they became more progressive for the public but never actually held any of these beliefs.

Now that the alt-right (look it's another made up word, they're just neo nazis and white supremacists) are rising up and that moldy old cheeto got into the White House though, they suddenly feel safe and validated again. They no longer feel like they have to be ashamed for their backwards views and will openly express them. And their years of frustration about not being the center of the universe for once and actually having to acknowledge women, LGBT+ers and PoC has only made them more extreme. They were previously so used to everything and everyone catering to them that they actually think that by that not being the case 1 out of 10 times, they're just as oppressed as minorities. They literally don't see their own privilege. No one calls people out on their bullshit anymore because 'think of the poor cishet white people ;_; they'll be upset if you call them racist and that makes you the bad one!'

I think the worst thing is that this is being normalized by media who are so blinded by staying 'unbiased' that they'll let stuff like this go. Trump was also normalized by media who were trying to find a reason for his success and then came up with the 'working class white people are poor' excuse + Jimmy Fallon and SNL giving him spots on their shows that made him seem nice, fun and sympathetic. I guess you could call that 'false positivity' (though that's obviously not the actual part the makers of this video are against, they're just against the left side of narative) but people like Philip DeFranco went the other way and made Trump and Clinton to be just as bad as the other which was obviously untrue and just more ~unbiased~ bullshit. But hey, at least it makes the Trump fans come back to your videos giving you more sweet YouTube money to live in your privileged white bubble with. :thumb: :sideeye:

i feel like this post was an mess but i'm tired and have a lot of feelings. my tolerance for bullshit like this went from low to below zero these past few weeks.
Stan is only one letter away from Satan.
Image
User avatar
Catallena
cat whiskers
 
Posts: 911
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 10:56 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by sia » Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:08 pm

Look at me, posting controversial stuff when nobody asked for it in the middle of the night :lol:

As it became evidently every time Dan mentions flirting with veganism, there are people with strong opinions about veganism among us and I was doing some research about it today and discovered something that swayed my neutral opinion about veganism as valid lifestyle. So just in case there is somebody who thought of going vegan but didn't really do their research, I am leaving here this link, which basically says that; humans are not able to naturally survive on plant based diet; I want to believe everyone going vegan knows this, but you can't have a vegan lifestyle without supplements of B12, there is absolutely no way of getting B12 naturally in body without eating an animal product, and B12 in vegan supplements is produced with use of bacteria cultures, mainly one found in cheese and other synthesised from soil Propionibacterium shermanii and Pseudomonas denitrificans and deficiency of B12 has some pretty terrible side effects. So now I am really baffled, why would anyone believe, that veganism is superior diet, you literally can't function without supplements, that have a pretty non vegan origin (I mean they are produced in labs, without using animal products, but they had to find them somehow first, right?), to the point that most store-bought vegan products nowadays already come with artificially added B12 (fortified), just to prevent uninformed people to become ill.
https://www.vegansociety.com/resources/nutrition-and-health/vitamins-minerals-and-nutrients/vitamin-b12-your-key-facts/what-every-vegan-should-know-about-vitamin-b12
Very low B12 intakes can cause anemia and nervous system damage. The only reliable vegan sources of B12 are foods fortified with B12 (including some plant milks, some soy products and some breakfast cereals) and B12 supplements. Vitamin B12, whether in supplements, fortified foods, or animal products, comes from micro-organisms. Most vegans consume enough B12 to avoid anemia and nervous system damage, but many do not get enough to minimize potential risk of heart disease or pregnancy complications.

...B12 is the only vitamin that is not recognised as being reliably supplied from a varied wholefood, plant-based diet with plenty of fruit and vegetables, together with exposure to sun. Many herbivorous mammals, including cattle and sheep, absorb B12 produced by bacteria in their own digestive system. B12 is found to some extent in soil and plants. These observations have led some vegans to suggest that B12 was an issue requiring no special attention, or even an elaborate hoax. Others have proposed specific foods, including spirulina, nori, tempeh, and barley grass, as suitable non-animal sources of B12. Such claims have not stood the test of time.

....This amount should be sufficient to avoid even the initial signs of inadequate B12 intake, such as slightly elevated homocysteine and MMA levels, in most people. Even slightly elevated homocysteine is associated with increased risk of many health problems including heart disease in adults, preeclampsia during pregnancy and neural tube defects in babies.

...In adults typical deficiency symptoms include loss of energy, tingling, numbness, reduced sensitivity to pain or pressure, blurred vision, abnormal gait, sore tongue, poor memory, confusion, hallucinations and personality changes.

...Infants typically show more rapid onset of symptoms than adults. B12 deficiency may lead to loss of energy and appetite and failure to thrive. If not promptly corrected this can progress to coma or death. Again there is no entirely consistent pattern of symptoms. Infants are more vulnerable to permanent damage than adults. Some make a full recovery, but others show retarded development.

...The risk to these groups alone is reason enough to call on all vegans to give a consistent message as to the importance of B12 and to set a positive example. Every case of B12 deficiency in a vegan infant or an ill informed adult is a tragedy and brings veganism into disrepute.

...If for any reason you choose not to use fortified foods or supplements you should recognise that you are carrying out a dangerous experiment - one that many have tried before with consistently low levels of success. If you are an adult who is neither breast-feeding an infant, pregnant nor seeking to become pregnant, and wish to test a potential B12 source that has not already been shown to be inadequate, then this can be a reasonable course of action with appropriate precautions. For your own protection, you should arrange to have your B12 status checked annually. If homocysteine or MMA is even modestly elevated then you are endangering your health if you persist.

If you are breast feeding an infant, pregnant or seeking to become pregnant or are an adult contemplating carrying out such an experiment on a child, then don't take the risk. It is simply unjustifiable.


but what do I know (you absolutely can disagree but I would love to see some sources) :cactus: :cactus: :cactus: :cactus:
sia
living flop
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon May 16, 2016 10:00 am

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by nephilimcat » Mon Feb 06, 2017 2:38 am

sia wrote:
Look at me, posting controversial stuff when nobody asked for it in the middle of the night :lol:

As it became evidently every time Dan mentions flirting with veganism, there are people with strong opinions about veganism among us and I was doing some research about it today and discovered something that swayed my neutral opinion about veganism as valid lifestyle. So just in case there is somebody who thought of going vegan but didn't really do their research, I am leaving here this link, which basically says that; humans are not able to naturally survive on plant based diet; I want to believe everyone going vegan knows this, but you can't have a vegan lifestyle without supplements of B12, there is absolutely no way of getting B12 naturally in body without eating an animal product, and B12 in vegan supplements is produced with use of bacteria cultures, mainly one found in cheese and other synthesised from soil Propionibacterium shermanii and Pseudomonas denitrificans and deficiency of B12 has some pretty terrible side effects. So now I am really baffled, why would anyone believe, that veganism is superior diet, you literally can't function without supplements, that have a pretty non vegan origin (I mean they are produced in labs, without using animal products, but they had to find them somehow first, right?), to the point that most store-bought vegan products nowadays already come with artificially added B12 (fortified), just to prevent uninformed people to become ill.
https://www.vegansociety.com/resources/nutrition-and-health/vitamins-minerals-and-nutrients/vitamin-b12-your-key-facts/what-every-vegan-should-know-about-vitamin-b12
Very low B12 intakes can cause anemia and nervous system damage. The only reliable vegan sources of B12 are foods fortified with B12 (including some plant milks, some soy products and some breakfast cereals) and B12 supplements. Vitamin B12, whether in supplements, fortified foods, or animal products, comes from micro-organisms. Most vegans consume enough B12 to avoid anemia and nervous system damage, but many do not get enough to minimize potential risk of heart disease or pregnancy complications.

...B12 is the only vitamin that is not recognised as being reliably supplied from a varied wholefood, plant-based diet with plenty of fruit and vegetables, together with exposure to sun. Many herbivorous mammals, including cattle and sheep, absorb B12 produced by bacteria in their own digestive system. B12 is found to some extent in soil and plants. These observations have led some vegans to suggest that B12 was an issue requiring no special attention, or even an elaborate hoax. Others have proposed specific foods, including spirulina, nori, tempeh, and barley grass, as suitable non-animal sources of B12. Such claims have not stood the test of time.

....This amount should be sufficient to avoid even the initial signs of inadequate B12 intake, such as slightly elevated homocysteine and MMA levels, in most people. Even slightly elevated homocysteine is associated with increased risk of many health problems including heart disease in adults, preeclampsia during pregnancy and neural tube defects in babies.

...In adults typical deficiency symptoms include loss of energy, tingling, numbness, reduced sensitivity to pain or pressure, blurred vision, abnormal gait, sore tongue, poor memory, confusion, hallucinations and personality changes.

...Infants typically show more rapid onset of symptoms than adults. B12 deficiency may lead to loss of energy and appetite and failure to thrive. If not promptly corrected this can progress to coma or death. Again there is no entirely consistent pattern of symptoms. Infants are more vulnerable to permanent damage than adults. Some make a full recovery, but others show retarded development.

...The risk to these groups alone is reason enough to call on all vegans to give a consistent message as to the importance of B12 and to set a positive example. Every case of B12 deficiency in a vegan infant or an ill informed adult is a tragedy and brings veganism into disrepute.

...If for any reason you choose not to use fortified foods or supplements you should recognise that you are carrying out a dangerous experiment - one that many have tried before with consistently low levels of success. If you are an adult who is neither breast-feeding an infant, pregnant nor seeking to become pregnant, and wish to test a potential B12 source that has not already been shown to be inadequate, then this can be a reasonable course of action with appropriate precautions. For your own protection, you should arrange to have your B12 status checked annually. If homocysteine or MMA is even modestly elevated then you are endangering your health if you persist.

If you are breast feeding an infant, pregnant or seeking to become pregnant or are an adult contemplating carrying out such an experiment on a child, then don't take the risk. It is simply unjustifiable.


but what do I know (you absolutely can disagree but I would love to see some sources) :cactus: :cactus: :cactus: :cactus:


Yeah, I knew that. Still wanting to go vegan :shrug: I don't think the argument makes much sense because what does "naturality" even mean?

Honestly, nothing really is natural anymore. Meat is full of antibiotics that are bad for your health. And don't get me started on milk, it's not natural at all that humans drink milk and use milk products (except for the milk of your own mother). Humans eat way more meat than they would in natural conditions. We eat so much shit every day, often without knowing it, B12 supplementing really isn't the issue here, imo. My point is: a natural diet isn't possible nowadays - unless you go out in the wild, occasionally hunt an animal and eat the plants that grow in your vicinity, you aren't eating natural food.

If you want to eat vegan, you are forced to educate yourself. Of course not all vegans know everything or educate themselves properly, but I am pretty sure the majority read a lot about veganism before they try it. Often this is the first time in a person's life that they even start thinking about what they need to survive and whether they get enough of it. Meat eaters grow up with the food their parents give them and often don't ever think about what they need in order to function properly. Which leads to many of them eating very unhealthy food without even knowing it. Many - not all of them!

Humans have something that other animals don't have: a very complex brain. And my brain can't live with the thought of eating an animal. It just can't. I still eat animal products because I currently live with my family (again) and it's difficult but I already eat as few as possible of them. And I am going to become vegan. If that means I have to supplement B12, so be it. It's not any less natural than the shit that enters my system through various ways on a daily basis. With the difference that it is actually good for me.

Is veganism the superior diet? From an ethical viewpoint, yes. From a natural viewpoint, no. When it comes to health, however, you can't give a universal answer because vegan doesn't equal vegan. And I also think it depends on the person because everyone has different needs and some people have health problems.

What viewpoint is the most important one for you? For me, it's the ethical one, making vegan the superior diet. Climate and my own health are very important as well. If it is the natural one for you, then you are going to have a hard time. If it's health for you, then you have to find the diet that is best for you personally. Might be veganism, might be something else.
pulvis et umbra sumus
User avatar
nephilimcat
ar·tic·u·late
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 4:52 am
Location: Germany
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by LeftHandedism » Mon Feb 06, 2017 9:19 am

About veganism:

I've been a vegetarian since I was a teenager (quite some time ago :lol: ), but I've never been a vegan. It's interesting to me that these days people seem to want to move directly to veganism from a "standard" Western diet--that's really hard! It seems to me that starting out with vegetarianism can be a good intermediate step; for one, as long as you're eating other animal products (e.g., milk, eggs), you don't have to worry as much about vitamin B12.

It's worth pointing out that people are subject to lots of vitamin deficiencies: for example, if you "don't go outside" and use sunscreen when you do, you're likely to be deficient in vitamin D. Sunscreen isn't natural, but is probably a good idea.

What is natural for humans is (occasionally) eating meat. (And occasionally eating bird eggs, even with half-developed chicks inside :yuck: .) I became a vegetarian because I couldn't stomach ingesting animal flesh.

I've never given up milk products or eggs (I try to buy organic--which at least in the US includes rules about how the animals are treated--or free-range/cage-free in the case of eggs). This is partly because I like them and partly because I make a lot of my own food and milk and eggs are really good ingredients. Not that you can't make delicious food without them, but it does limit the options.

tl;dr Yes, you should probably educate yourself before drastically changing your diet; no, it's probably not feasible today to have a completely "natural" diet, but there are lots of "good" options; and I'd suggest to anyone heading to veganism to start with vegetarianism as a step along the way. :2thumbsup:
"If you're left-handed, ask a friend."
"Why am I left-handed?"
"Everybody makes mistakes."
User avatar
LeftHandedism
procrastinator
 
Posts: 314
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2016 2:16 pm
Location: California
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by teamug » Tue Feb 07, 2017 7:42 am

I am unable to go 'full' vegetarian (vegan is beyond my ability), and that is due to my fussy body that does not take kindly to vegetarian protein sources (amongst other too many to name problems), and being vegetarian would restrict my food intake unhealthily. I don't eat out, making my own food means I can control every ingredient, which makes my slight ocd very happy, and there is less worry about 'unfavorable' digestive reactions to foods.
I try to go for organic when I can, but it is usually very expensive, so it depends. I focus on domestic products (I'm from a small country, so footprints are usually low anyway). But I always read the labels on every product, check the ingredients, palm oil seems to be in everything and I will try to avoid products that use it.
Every purchase is a choice, every purchase supports something, I respect those who are vegan/vegetarian, I don't appreciate the guilt trips or disgust thrown at me (not here) when I mention that sometimes going vegan/vegetarian is not feasible, and maintaining my health by popping vitamins and supplements to compensate for 'actual' food is not a choice a will make.
If anyone is offended by my meat eating, good for you. I'm happy you can be what you eat. Sometimes life deals people crap bodies and few choices.
teamug
living flop
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 2:41 am

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by sia » Tue Feb 07, 2017 2:02 pm

I appreciate all the mature responses :platonic: I wholeheartedly agree that people should better educate themselves about where does their food come from if nothing less than from ecological standpoint, and that we should minimise meat and processed food consumption but starting this education from vegan diet can be often pretty backwards I think, especailly for people in western world, mainly because a lot of products (that are essential to the diet because of high protein value) like palm oil and soy are not exclusively grown around here but are instead directly replacing rain forests and other much less polluted places with bigger biodiversity than places around here (and yes I know that much bigger consumers than vegans of this things are cattle, but I never said I support big industrial meat production) and I agree that antibiotics in meat are definitely a huge problem,

I should point out I also come from place where finding small farmers and locally grown food is very easy, in fact I know a lot of people that practice raising animals and slaughtering them once a year in a process that includes the whole family and is sort of a celebration, I really wouldn't say they lack any kind of compassion it is just something that they are used to, so maybe feeling sorry for the animals is also partially cultural, and to go further on this ethical thing (and to prove that I am in fact a robot :lol: ) I wonder where would one draw the line, ok lets say that bunnies are universally cute to humans, although the reasons for that are probably very primal and come from the fact that babies are cute, so what about seashells, are they even neurologically able to feel pain, should one feel sorry for them, what exactly makes plants the lesser creutures that they can be eaten guilt free instead of animals, we already know that plants also respond to injury in a lot of different ways, they do lack the neural capacity in comparison to most animals but does this hurting them make it more humane, I don't know, I just always feel that a lot of this arguments come from androcentric point of view, one could say that veganism is a good start for people to start thinking about all this, but I just feel that some trend as widespread as veganism that would just lower the consumption of meat and instead promote locally grown food would benefit the couse (to not destroy the earth) even more
sia
living flop
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon May 16, 2016 10:00 am

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by LeftHandedism » Tue Feb 07, 2017 3:18 pm

sia wrote:to go further on this ethical thing (and to prove that I am in fact a robot :lol: ) I wonder where would one draw the line, ok lets say that bunnies are universally cute to humans, although the reasons for that are probably very primal and come from the fact that babies are cute, so what about seashells, are they even neurologically able to feel pain, should one feel sorry for them, what exactly makes plants the lesser creutures that they can be eaten guilt free instead of animals, we already know that plants also respond to injury in a lot of different ways, they do lack the neural capacity in comparison to most animals but does this hurting them make it more humane, I don't know, I just always feel that a lot of this arguments come from androcentric point of view, one could say that veganism is a good start for people to start thinking about all this


I always found that line (for vegetarianism) pretty easy and clear: don't eat animals. That means eat nothing in the animal kingdom. It excludes plants, as well as yeasts and molds (and algae). What makes an organism an animal or not is usually pretty clear. (I find it weird when people drawn a line like between "animals with a face" and "animals without a face"; I just roll my eyes :roll: and don't consider that person a vegetarian--though they are obviously thinking about what they eat! :thumb: )

To distinguish animals is a little androcentric, but we are in fact animals, so I don't think it's completely out of line to think that animals are a special sort of organism. :dog:
"If you're left-handed, ask a friend."
"Why am I left-handed?"
"Everybody makes mistakes."
User avatar
LeftHandedism
procrastinator
 
Posts: 314
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2016 2:16 pm
Location: California
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by jhamba » Wed Feb 15, 2017 8:59 am

Thought this belonged here, being social topic

from here
malday wrote:There is nothing from this subculture that conveys any of this (bolded parts).

If you want a feminine trend close to a counterculture look at the Ganguro trend in Japan (though it was still just a trend).


Actually, there is. Pastel is short for pastel punk. If you look up pastel punk models, you'll find a lot of women smoking cigarettes, and a lot of times, people who have pastel aesthetic blogs have a pretty depressive, 2000s emo mindset. And, if you take a look at the singers I mentioned here, you'll notice that the kind of themes they have mostly relates to feeling helpless, depressed, and taking power back into their hands.

The Ganguro trend is very different, because, they are going for the exact opposite of what is considered ideal beauty in japan. This is reclaiming femininity and beauty, and using it to feel powerful, not rejecting it to the point of becoming the antithesis, the way ganguro does.

Birdie wrote:jhamba: I never thought about the whole issue like this and your post was really informative. But I think what Dan meant and what I actually agree with was that there is no pastel subculture like there is a punk subculture or the emo subculture or whatever. Pastel is a pretty new thing and it’s mostly used for aesthetics on tumblr or to enhance the styles of other subcultures (lolita, mainly soft grunge) so it’s not really it’s own subculture. I too think it’s a stretch to call it that. Maybe it will evolve into a subculture with time, who knows, but as of now? Nah.

jhamba wrote:And, it even has it's own music, which is a lot more hyper feminine than punk could be. Artists like Halsey, Melanie Martinez, and even Marina and the Diamonds could be considered pastel singers. The style of music is very muted, feminine, and the topics are usually feminine depression.


I’m not sure about Marina because she was indie pop from the beginning and still is and I frankly think it’s weird how she’s being grouped with Halsey and the likes on Tumblr since their music is nothing alike but Halsey and Melanie are basically grunge. There’s been a 1990s grunge revival lately and both their styles fit into that very neatly, especially into soft grunge. I don’t really think “pastel” in itself is a subculture, a music genre etc? It’s more like… an aesthetic some people belonging to other subcultures use in the way you described but is it really its own thing? I don’t think so.

So in conclusion I'm pretty sure Dan didn't say pastel wasn't a thing because he hates women and thinks a subculture consisting of mostly women isn't valid, he said pastel isn't a subculture because it isn't. It's part of a few other modern subcultures though. It's also important to remember that Soft Grunge is tumblr made. There's no denying this, it's an internet thing and it was designed for the aesthetics around the start of the 2010s. I see why you would connect it to feminism and I like the idea of that but I don't think it's the same as other subcultures. :shrug:

(Can I also just say that I'm a bit uncomfortable with you excluding trans women like you did? I'm not sure how I'm supposed to understand that and I'm sure you meant no harm by it, but why would this pastel thing only concern cis women? Not trying to start anything here, it just ... seems weird to me.)

@trashqueen: Agreed. I think Dan is still growing as a person and still learning and that's okay. It's pretty clear he wants to learn and be better and he's already come so far. He'll get there.


"internet made". Internet is a part of culture, friend. There is clearly something about this aesthetic that makes women feel powerful.

Also, the reason I excluded trans women is because, as I mentioned, I think the reason trans women would want to be a part of this subculture is for different reasons that cis women, and I don't feel comfortable enough to address that, considering I am not a trans woman. If a trans woman wants to give her own opinion, I welcome that, but I don't feel like I have a right to talk for them.
jiggly wrote:dalel is dead, phalel lives.
User avatar
jhamba
hobbit hair
 
Posts: 285
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 7:00 am
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by jhamba » Wed Feb 15, 2017 9:18 am

jaej wrote:as a sociology/criminology student too, a trend isnt really the same as a subculture. the culture needs the music, cinema, photography and events plus the media response. and if its a counterculture specifically, it needs to actually counter the norms, not just be a paler version. there isnt really anything to consider pastel a ~culture~ when all it has is like... a couple ddlg enabling singers, pictures of bubble tea and being anything else thats relatively popular but paler. something like vaporwave or seapunk was super short lived (because it was quickly taken by big names like rihanna) but still seen as a subculture because it had the whole scene, not just some tumblr edits. hippie culture had a lasting impact because it was more than long hair and vegetarianism.

and the misogynist interpretation is odd tbh. punk and goth were both primarily founded by women, and i'm sure it wouldnt take long to find other subcultures equally or more populated by women. and neither are really masculine so much as a rejection of traditional gender norms. male punks and goths were very feminine at large tbh.
it's odd to argue that punk is more important to women because it allows a deviation from femininity, but also then that pastel isn't more important for men because... it allows women to be like more childish feminine things? singing about feeling weak and smoking doesnt seem like anything trend specific or specifically empowering for women in western culture? idk


"punk and goth were both primarily founded by women". I did not know this, and I find it very interesting. But, tbh, I don't associate it with women at all. I associate those subcultures with angsty white men who feel oppressed. Not because I don't think it's feminine, but just because that what the popular picture is. In the same vein, I can imagine a lot of women feeling alienated by that image.

And, I can appreciate not respecting pastel punk as empowering women. But, I think a lot of women feel empowered by pastel punk, which is something that's important in a social movement.

And, imo, while pastel punk isn't really a subculture in that it's cohesive, I think it's a subculture in that it's pretty well defined, and throughout the media which is based on pastel colours, there's a similar theme going on.

Apart from the singers I mentioned, I'd also argue that steven universe is a part of that theme. It's primarily in muted pastel colours, it's emotional and there's a lot of anti authoritarian sentiment, as is common in counter cultures (a similar theme to the singers that I mentioned).
jiggly wrote:dalel is dead, phalel lives.
User avatar
jhamba
hobbit hair
 
Posts: 285
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 7:00 am
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by Katka » Wed Feb 15, 2017 9:34 am

I’ve written a long post in the main thread but I’m just going to repeat the essence of it here because you’re right, it doesn’t belong in the main thread (edit:You've quoted my original post now but I'll still submit this). Basically what you call “pastel punk” is soft grunge which was invented around 2010 to counter actual 1990s grunge but it copied a lot of grunge aesthetics. The thing is, pastel punk is still punk. It’s a subculture of a subculture but it belongs together. Soft grunge was meant to be a cleaner aesthetic than actual grunge and it’s a Tumblr thing. It was made on Tumblr and Tumblr is basically were it stayed. It might evolve into something more in the future. It might die. We don’t know.

jhamba wrote:And, if you take a look at the singers I mentioned here, you'll notice that the kind of themes they have mostly relates to feeling helpless, depressed, and taking power back into their hands.


I’ve said this in the main thread too but I’ll repeat it: You mentioned Halsey and Melanie Martinez, who I would agree are soft grunge artists. They’re happening mostly on Tumblr and at least in Halsey’s case I know that she was heavily influenced by the website. You’ve also mentioned Marina and the Diamonds and to be honest that’s ridiculous. Just because Marina’s music has some empowering messages doesn’t mean she’s pastel punk. She’s always been alternative pop ever since she first came on the scene in 2007. You might think she’s “pastel punk” because of her old Hollywood and 80s aesthetics for the “Electra Heart” era but she’s moved on from that and went full 1970s glam for “Froot”.

So what does that make her now? Is everything pastel punk as long as the lyrics are sad and empowering? Does that even make sense? Another artist I constantly see grouped in with “pastel” is Lana del Rey and that just baffles me. As jaej said on the main thread a subculture or counter culture needs a scene, it needs its own music etc. You can’t just group artists who’ve been making music before “pastel” was even a thing together and call that the “subculture’s” music. The music is supposed to develop from inside the subculture and the only one I can think of that really fits this criterion is Halsey and I don’t really think one is enough to call something a scene or a subculture. As I’ve said, this might be the start of a new teen subculture or it might forever stay on tumblr and die out again. We’ll have to see.

tl;dr: Soft Grunge or Pastel Punk, as the names already suggest, aren’t subcultures in itself, they’re branches of already existing subcultures: Grunge and Punk. You can’t just put the “pastel” label on any female artist with somewhat empowering lyrics and pretend like it’s a scene. This is not how actual counter cultures develop.

jhamba wrote:"punk and goth were both primarily founded by women". I did not know this, and I find it very interesting. But, tbh, I don't associate it with women at all. I associate those subcultures with angsty white men who feel oppressed.


Okay but you associating these movements with something else doesn't change their actual historical background so what is this argument even?
(used to be Birdie)
User avatar
Katka
cheeky #spon
 
Posts: 212
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2016 12:22 pm

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by jhamba » Wed Feb 15, 2017 9:42 am

Birdie wrote:
jhamba wrote:"punk and goth were both primarily founded by women". I did not know this, and I find it very interesting. But, tbh, I don't associate it with women at all. I associate those subcultures with angsty white men who feel oppressed.


Okay but you associating these movements with something else doesn't change their actual historical background so what is this argument even?


Me associating these subcultures with the stereotype I mentioned means that I'm probably not the only one. And if I'm not the only one, then there are others who feel similarly to me. That means that a lot of women feel alienated from these subcultures, and will try to find a niche that is more accepting towards them.

Birdie wrote:I’ve written a long post in the main thread but I’m just going to repeat the essence of it here because you’re right, it doesn’t belong in the main thread (edit:You've quoted my original post now but I'll still submit this). Basically what you call “pastel punk” is soft grunge which was invented around 2010 to counter actual 1990s grunge but it copied a lot of grunge aesthetics. The thing is, pastel punk is still punk. It’s a subculture of a subculture but it belongs together. Soft grunge was meant to be a cleaner aesthetic than actual grunge and it’s a Tumblr thing. It was made on Tumblr and Tumblr is basically were it stayed. It might evolve into something more in the future. It might die. We don’t know.

jhamba wrote:And, if you take a look at the singers I mentioned here, you'll notice that the kind of themes they have mostly relates to feeling helpless, depressed, and taking power back into their hands.


I’ve said this in the main thread too but I’ll repeat it: You mentioned Halsey and Melanie Martinez, who I would agree are soft grunge artists. They’re happening mostly on Tumblr and at least in Halsey’s case I know that she was heavily influenced by the website. You’ve also mentioned Marina and the Diamonds and to be honest that’s ridiculous. Just because Marina’s music has some empowering messages doesn’t mean she’s pastel punk. She’s always been alternative pop ever since she first came on the scene in 2007. You might think she’s “pastel punk” because of her old Hollywood and 80s aesthetics for the “Electra Heart” era but she’s moved on from that and went full 1970s glam for “Froot”.

So what does that make her now? Is everything pastel punk as long as the lyrics are sad and empowering? Does that even make sense? Another artist I constantly see grouped in with “pastel” is Lana del Rey and that just baffles me. As jaej said on the main thread a subculture or counter culture needs a scene, it needs its own music etc. You can’t just group artists who’ve been making music before “pastel” was even a thing together and call that the “subculture’s” music. The music is supposed to develop from inside the subculture and the only one I can think of that really fits this criterion is Halsey and I don’t really think one is enough to call something a scene or a subculture. As I’ve said, this might be the start of a new teen subculture or it might forever stay on tumblr and die out again. We’ll have to see.

tl;dr: Soft Grunge or Pastel Punk, as the names already suggest, aren’t subcultures in itself, they’re branches of already existing subcultures: Grunge and Punk. You can’t just put the “pastel” label on any female artist with somewhat empowering lyrics and pretend like it’s a scene. This is not how actual counter cultures develop.


A lot of people feel like there's a similar theme, and I think that's an important part of what makes a genre. And, you don't have to find something empowering for others to find it empowering. It's still a movement, and it's a movement which has gained a traction.

And, idc about marina and the diamonds. Anyway, a few of her songs could be arguably put into this category, which doesn't make her firmly an artist for this, but I'm not trying to label artists, I'm trying to point out that there is a movement over here. I mean, maroon 5 used to be considered an emo band, and now that they're making mainstream pop music, does that mean that they weren't a part of the emo movement?

I think artists who people feel similarly towards, and have similar aesthetics and themes could be grouped into a single category.
jiggly wrote:dalel is dead, phalel lives.
User avatar
jhamba
hobbit hair
 
Posts: 285
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 7:00 am
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by malday » Wed Feb 15, 2017 9:48 am

jhamba wrote:Thought this belonged here, being social topic

from here
malday wrote:There is nothing from this subculture that conveys any of this (bolded parts).

If you want a feminine trend close to a counterculture look at the Ganguro trend in Japan (though it was still just a trend).


Actually, there is. Pastel is short for pastel punk. If you look up pastel punk models, you'll find a lot of women smoking cigarettes, and a lot of times, people who have pastel aesthetic blogs have a pretty depressive, 2000s emo mindset. And, if you take a look at the singers I mentioned here, you'll notice that the kind of themes they have mostly relates to feeling helpless, depressed, and taking power back into their hands.


What i see searching pastel punk is pastels mixed with black and punk-inspired accessories.
There's nothing "muted" about that, it's just punk with a pastel spin.
Image
User avatar
malday
long-time wanker
 
Posts: 533
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2016 10:56 am

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by jhamba » Wed Feb 15, 2017 9:50 am

malday wrote:
jhamba wrote:Thought this belonged here, being social topic

from here
malday wrote:There is nothing from this subculture that conveys any of this (bolded parts).

If you want a feminine trend close to a counterculture look at the Ganguro trend in Japan (though it was still just a trend).


Actually, there is. Pastel is short for pastel punk. If you look up pastel punk models, you'll find a lot of women smoking cigarettes, and a lot of times, people who have pastel aesthetic blogs have a pretty depressive, 2000s emo mindset. And, if you take a look at the singers I mentioned here, you'll notice that the kind of themes they have mostly relates to feeling helpless, depressed, and taking power back into their hands.


What i see searching pastel punk is pastels mixed with black and punk-inspired accessories.
There's nothing "muted" about that, it's just punk with a pastel spin.


yes, but, that doesn't stop it from being relatively "edgy", which was my original point?

I mean, yeah, it's an offshoot of emo, but emo was an offshoot of grunge, which was an offshoot of punk? That's how countercultures work? Certain aspects get accepted into mainstream, so it evolves into another counterculture
jiggly wrote:dalel is dead, phalel lives.
User avatar
jhamba
hobbit hair
 
Posts: 285
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 7:00 am
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by jaej » Wed Feb 15, 2017 9:54 am

re: branches of subcultures tho, branches can evolve into their own thing. goth is just a branch of punk really. emo/scene/visual kei are branches of that. i just think the pastel stuff is like... modern fashion with tinges of other influences, not really enough of a thing. i mean, there's fairy kei as an extreme pastel style, but thats not really what this pastel style is and is itself a kind of super toned down decora-lolita combo with generic kawaii music

jhamba wrote:"punk and goth were both primarily founded by women". I did not know this, and I find it very interesting. But, tbh, I don't associate it with women at all. I associate those subcultures with angsty white men who feel oppressed. Not because I don't think it's feminine, but just because that what the popular picture is. In the same vein, I can imagine a lot of women feeling alienated by that image.

And, I can appreciate not respecting pastel punk as empowering women. But, I think a lot of women feel empowered by pastel punk, which is something that's important in a social movement.

And, imo, while pastel punk isn't really a subculture in that it's cohesive, I think it's a subculture in that it's pretty well defined, and throughout the media which is based on pastel colours, there's a similar theme going on.

Apart from the singers I mentioned, I'd also argue that steven universe is a part of that theme. It's primarily in muted pastel colours, it's emotional and there's a lot of anti authoritarian sentiment, as is common in counter cultures (a similar theme to the singers that I mentioned).


well, the "oppression" goth tends to repel for men is overt masculinity. though it's largely about dark aspects, there's a big focus on being emotional and not particularly violent. aside from stuff like nu-goth/industrial stuff (and even then tbh) the fashion is often feminine either through "female" cut clothes, loose shapes or traditionally submissive bdsm aspects. goth subculture is interesting in particular in terms of gender when you get into things like perceptions of the behaviour - the associations of goth to white boys in trench coats shooting up schools, hating women who rejected them and wanting some kind of revenge was a totally media made image! someone had to be blamed for stuff like that, and goth was the big angsty marilyn manson subculture in the early/mid 90s so it got the blame. the TERRIBLE documentary bowling for columbine only furthered these kinds of stereotypes when no one involved with that was interesting in goth stuff. they did like right wing industrial music and nazi memorabilia, but nazis dont exist so we cant call them that of course!!!

to go off topic, the extreme could be something like visual kei, which WAS a very male filled space, but for the reason that it was for men to reject masculinity. vk community is pretty welcoming of women as far as japanese subcultures go and has its own female only spaces within in to counteract the misogyny found in any group but because of the way it is, the actual clothing/music style is more often done by men while the women are more like followers of the style.

punk also was against these views of masculinity, but in a way more fueled by anger at the idea of men being very properly presented and being the one to get jobs and provide for families.
punk was maybe more traditionally masculine in its associations with violence, but aside from that its never really been male. with goth, it's always been a male represented thing but a badly represented thing. neither really embrace masculinity or femininity so much as reject cultural and societal norms as a whole.

source for this: was a (wannabe) visual kei kid and is working on uni research on moral panics, mainly the satanic panic of the 80s/90s. i get too excited talking about this stuff and never get to.
my name is jaejmine masters and i have something to say. dan and phil have fucked up japan.
User avatar
jaej
procrastinator
 
Posts: 344
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 6:27 am
Pronouns: they/he

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by jhamba » Wed Feb 15, 2017 10:04 am

jaej wrote:re: branches of subcultures tho, branches can evolve into their own thing. goth is just a branch of punk really. emo/scene/visual kei are branches of that. i just think the pastel stuff is like... modern fashion with tinges of other influences, not really enough of a thing.


This brings up a question, though. When can a trend or movement be called a proper subculture? imo, The fact that there is a small amount of people who associate themselves with pastel punk and the ideals have a certain amount of cohesiveness, which makes it enough of a subculture to me. It's definitely part of counter culture, considering the rejection of the power dynamics, but counter culture includes literally anything which rejects aspects of the dominant culture.

I'm not trying to argue that the goth, punk and other counter cultural subcultures are a part of patriarchy or not feminist, just that some people might feel alienated because of the image, so they might find pastel more welcoming.

The stuff about visual kei is fascinating. I'm very interested in how your dabble into visual kei went
jiggly wrote:dalel is dead, phalel lives.
User avatar
jhamba
hobbit hair
 
Posts: 285
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 7:00 am
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by jaej » Wed Feb 15, 2017 10:26 am

jhamba wrote:The stuff about visual kei is fascinating. I'm very interested in how your dabble into visual kei went

i plucked my eyebrows really thin and had some bad eyeliner. backcombed my hair a lot and had a one week crop top/waistcoat experiment. was gently advised to not walk around glasgow like that and was confined to a purple hoodie and a sad fringe :( when i left the house. "mum its not ~bijuaru~ enough!!"
mixed opinions on it overall as a culture. like a lot of the kind of goth offshoots it has serious associations with terrible male body image (and the way power in japan works means the actual BANDS are a bit dodgy sometimes) but i appreciate having extreme non-masculine inspirations as a 13 year old to then go onto incorporate femininity and skirts and cropped clothing in a way i actually liked once i was about 17


personally i think i kind of always saw the pastel type things as like... a transition, post-phase style? not always ofc but its like how a lot of former emo white boys now have the same beard, slicked hair and checked shirt combo. when i came out of my visual/emo phase (the jeans were expensive, how did proper emo kids keep it up) i still dressed pretty similarly to other young teen former alternative kids who kind of missed the boat on myspace and stuff but hadnt gotten their own thing yet. kind of like 2010/11/12 :D&P: i guess? there was no real subculture but it also wasnt entirely the societal norm - but it WAS what most people who acted like them 5 years previously were wearing
my name is jaejmine masters and i have something to say. dan and phil have fucked up japan.
User avatar
jaej
procrastinator
 
Posts: 344
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 6:27 am
Pronouns: they/he

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by trashqueen » Wed Feb 15, 2017 10:46 am

i don't feel educated enough to argue about what is and isn't a subculture but i find the conversation fascinating so please go on, what i do have to say is that i thought punk started as a worker movement in the uk? as in by dudes who used to work in factories and constructions and shit like that and really weren't feeling it? and that's why doc martens became a punk thing? what did women have to do with it? (genuine question as i said i think i have very basic knowledge)

on the other hand i do have Opinions™ on things being disregarded as 'not real' because they are happening mainly online *pulls out communication student card*

to put it shortly, that's just bullshit

more lengthy explanation as to why i believe this (and you know, smarter people than me that actually write papers about this shit)

the internet has been since its origins an ideal place for counter culture things to exist because it allows people with a similar mindset to find each other even though there might be few and hundreds of miles away, it also allows ideas and concepts to be spread globally, quickly and by the creators of said concepts and ideas themselves without having to depend on mass media outlets to control what gets and doesn't get said, also government control and general legislation is barely there in most places

so to me, a movement starting and/or staying online doesn't take away from it, i'd argue it makes it more of a subculture than one that originates in 'real life' and therefore is limited to certain nations and cultures (until it becomes mainstream and is appropriated by the capitalism system)

this also applies to online activism in the way that movements like that are also encouraged to exist online by the same conditions, activism (unlike subcultures*) do have to reach real life at some point to achieve their goal of changing things, but the idea spreading side of it is much more effectively done online nowadays

*correct me if i'm wrong but subcultures are about self expression and social critique right? they can be related to social movements and activism but not necessarily?

i feel like i have more to say about this but it's not coming to me now, there might be a part two of this post later today lol
Image
Dan Howell wrote:'[someone] just sent me a message saying 'Phil'..... same'
trashqueen
ar·tic·u·late
 
Posts: 419
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 5:46 pm
Location: south america
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by melon lord » Wed Feb 15, 2017 11:00 am

*peeks in the thread*

I just want to preface I am not a sociology student but by god I wish I was, anyway. I am part of - and many, many of my friends are part of - the metal community, which shares its seat with goth and punk, so don't take my post as gospel truth, more like an observation from my perspective :ribena: Also this post is probably useless and not worth the calories I burned typing so I'm sorry for that

I feel the need to give some context: I met my friends through a forum for the band Nightwish. If you don't know them, they are a symphonic metal band with female vocalists. It's a prevalent genre, you can look up Epica, Delain, Within Temptation, etc for more examples off the top of my head. These genres of metal are very focused on either grand storytelling lyrics about nothing in particular, or very emotional, personal raw lyrics about loss (usually in love). Nightwish specifically have a very thematic arc of the loss of innocent and childlike purity, and love. Combined with bombastic metal riffs, orchestra and usually a classically trained opera singer, you can understand it's very theatrical.

And as you may suspect, it's considered by lots of people even within the metal community to be "sissy" and "emo". They don't take it as seriously as other subgenres of metal. A combination of the female vocalist, the lyrics and even the bloody orchestra. Imagine, an orchestra threatening your masculinity. :2thumbsup: The word "gay" used in a derogatory manner has been uttered more than once by some people, let's put it this way.

Goth can be very feminine and it's easier to slide into than punk. Almost every female vocalist in a metal band (with the exception of Arch Enemy which has screaming and very aggressive music) has worn corsets and lace and big dresses. It has a lot of Victorian inspiration, very delicate fabrics, doll-like. A lot of black hair, lots of black smokey makeup, but it's nonetheless pretty easy to slide into goth in a way that's comfortable for you. Whether you prefer band shirts and leggings with boots or decking up in corsets and frills, there is an outlet of expression for most people.

Interesting anecdote, one of the vocalists for Nightwish had no metal background, so when she joined the band she dyed her hair black and wore all the big dresses and corsets and top hats. A couple of albums later she went from black to light blonde and she started wearing pinks and florals and flat shoes and basically looked like she made a wrong turn from an indie folk pop group. You can imagine the hurt some people had at the nerve of a female not fitting into the stereotypical image of a goth/metal performer and instead choosing to express herself in a way she found more comfortable :tu:

Also interestingly, a LOT of my female metal friends branch off into retro/vintage aesthetics. Some take a more alternative, rockabilly look which is also a nice combination of the edginess of tattoos and piercings and bright hair with the forms of pinup/vintage, and a lot of us make floral quilts and embroidery or prefer to sit down with a cup of tea and knit. Whether it's the years softening our edges or just us developing as people and not giving a fuck about what we should and shouldn't like - as metal fans - is still to be determined.

For my male metal friends, what I've noticed is that from all the long haired ones, the ones that have calmed down from wearing band tees and black jeans have also cut their hair now. All the male friends I have from that subculture that have long hair still, after all those years, are people still involved in music, whether for a profession, or they are in a band. Long hair is accepted and very common in metal but outside of it, long hair is also apparently emasculating. Imagine, your masuclinity defined by hair length :bigthumbsup:

A lot of us share some punk aesthetic but it's less tartan overalls and safety pins and more leather jackets, studs and "aggressive" items of clothing. I myself often wear lots of spiked collars, spiked bracelets and I give off a vibe like "touch me and I'll hurt you". I'm like a walking warning sign to stay away. Sometimes the juxtaposition of looking scary and also being one of the softest, un-threatening people you'll ever meet is very amusing. I also have short, shaved undercut and tattoos and piercings. While I do recognise that it's not traditionally feminine, I am having a battle with myself that I feel most feminine when I feel powerful, and I feel powerful when I'm confident, and I'm confident when I wear what I want. Whether one day it's giant goth platforms and spikes, or another day it's floral dresses and oxford shoes.

I fully apologise for the useless drivel~
:lights: :lights:
Image
:lights: :lights:
melon lord
morning quiff
 
Posts: 473
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:47 am
Location: post-baking universe
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Sociopolitical Issue thread

PostPosted by Katka » Wed Feb 15, 2017 11:53 am

jhamba wrote:This brings up a question, though. When can a trend or movement be called a proper subculture? imo, The fact that there is a small amount of people who associate themselves with pastel punk and the ideals have a certain amount of cohesiveness, which makes it enough of a subculture to me


I think what we’ve been trying to get at is that pastel punk relies too heavily on grunge and punk to be it’s own subculture. Jaej had also mentioned things like a scene, a definite music style, films, novels even, media coverage… Pastel punk doesn’t have any of this (yet) and we’ll have to wait and see whether or not it will develop or vanish. Of course subcultures and counter cultures always influence each other but as far as I can tell pastel punk is basically punk with a few more colours thrown in, soft grunge was meant to be a cleaner, prettier version of 1990s grunge. I’m still not sure if they aren’t interchangable too because all the “pastel punk” stuff I see looks exactly like Tumblr soft grunge to me. It’s an aesthetic I actually really like but I don’t see in what way it could be understood as its own subculture because I don’t see the political connection you see and I also think it’s still too close to just being regular grunge or punk to “count”.

jhamba wrote:I'm not trying to argue that the goth, punk and other counter cultural subcultures are a part of patriarchy or not feminist, just that some people might feel alienated because of the image, so they might find pastel more welcoming.


Yes, I can see that but I also think that these people still are drawn in by punk, goth or grunge in the first place. They’ve formed their own style within these communities because they didn’t like everything about them. I think that sums up what I was trying to say nicely: Pastel is a community within the punk/grunge/goth communities, not its own counter culture alongside them. Counter cultures evolve all the time, they change and they branch out and I think pastel is one small branch within the punk and grunge communities. Emo started out like this too in the late 1990s and then changed drastically and became bigger, developed its own musical style, aesthetics and “rules”. Pastel might do that but I don’t think it has yet.

I think we can’t really compare today’s subcultures to those of the past anyway. Back then, in the 1960s and 1970s, it was different because it was a completely new thing. The Mods, Punk etc., it had never happened before. It’s not new anymore and being counter culture has in some way become mainstream. It’s not that scandalous, different or political anymore, anyone can do it and in some way everyone does it. So subcultures keep branching out to form always newer, smaller “cultures” because people want to be different. But I personally think it’s a good thing we’ve come far enough as a society that being punk or emo or whatever is mostly socially accepted.

trashqueen wrote:on the other hand i do have Opinions™ on things being disregarded as 'not real' because they are happening mainly online *pulls out communication student card*


I think this might’ve been directed at me? As I said: I’m not saying it’s not real. I’m saying it’s not an actual subculture or even a counter culture because it is small, new and hasn’t developed into one yet. It still leans on punk too heavily to be its own thing and even though jhamba has mentioned a political connection, I can’t really find it even though I believe her it’s there for her of course. I didn’t mean to invalidate pastel as a way of life, I just think it’s not comparable to actual counter cultures for the reasons stated above. Yet. We’ll see were it will go in the future. Halsey has been mentioned a lot and she’s the epitome of soft grunge, I think, in the way that it seems to be something she actively connects with whilst other artists that get labeled “pastel” don’t. This might be a start of something or it might die down again, we’ll have to wait and see!

PS: I’m not as passionate about this as my posts make out, lol. I’m sorry if I’m being obnoxious or anything, I just think this is really interesting. I haven't studied sociology but I have worked with social history and I love the history of counter cultures and stuff, so interesting.
(used to be Birdie)
User avatar
Katka
cheeky #spon
 
Posts: 212
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2016 12:22 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

The 2017 Dan and Phil Survey!