So, get this
Meh Dave likes them more then me.
I'm more a NIN, Manson, white zombie/rob zombie type
I'm more a NIN, Manson, white zombie/rob zombie type
Last edited by Narren7 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 12:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I feel that way myself about his newer stuff :/
All sound the f'ing same -__-
VAST & Era= <3
All sound the f'ing same -__-
VAST & Era= <3
Last edited by Narren7 on Sun Jun 08, 2008 1:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
His older stuff was good, and a few tracks on The Golden Age of Grotesque was okay. I do like most of Korn's music though, again mostly the older stuff.
I'll stick to my electronic music for now, as you can tell I've been listening to alot of The Orb... I <3 punk music.
I'll stick to my electronic music for now, as you can tell I've been listening to alot of The Orb... I <3 punk music.
Last edited by Squirrel on Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
Lol that's like saying that majority of pedophiles are under 24. To me that is bullshit. Alot of the pedophiles that are shown in the papers look alot older than 24. Maybe they listen to Gary Glitter? On a serious note it's one debate I don't want to get in to.
They're is nothing wrong with nu-metal. What annoys me is the people that claim to be goth because they listen to Korn or Marilyn Manson. Oh yeah ya so goth cause you listen to these bands, whilst I listen to Depeche Mode and Aliean Sex Fiend. /end sarcasm -_-
They're is nothing wrong with nu-metal. What annoys me is the people that claim to be goth because they listen to Korn or Marilyn Manson. Oh yeah ya so goth cause you listen to these bands, whilst I listen to Depeche Mode and Aliean Sex Fiend. /end sarcasm -_-
-
- Scavenger
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 3:22 pm
Pedophiles tend to look "off" on their photos. There's just something that you know is creepy with them, even if you didn't know that they were a pedo beforehand.
Also, nothing wrong with goths or anything... but the people who go "all out" on any alternative social group have some identity crisis. Goths are one group but they aren't the only group. It's ok to stray a bit from the social conventions of an alternative group, ya'll!
Also, nothing wrong with goths or anything... but the people who go "all out" on any alternative social group have some identity crisis. Goths are one group but they aren't the only group. It's ok to stray a bit from the social conventions of an alternative group, ya'll!
While it can be true that alot of alternative people do have some sort of "identity crisis", as you call it. Other alt people are sick of following the sheep, so choose to follow an alternatice lifestyle. However, you do get people who spoil it everybody else.Grip of Death wrote:Also, nothing wrong with goths or anything... but the people who go "all out" on any alternative social group have some identity crisis. Goths are one group but they aren't the only group. It's ok to stray a bit from the social conventions of an alternative group, ya'll!
Example, someone listens to Korn. Nothing wrong with that, or listening to any nu-metal band. What does not gel with me is that some people believe that they are "goth" because they listen to Korn. They don't take the time to look into that subculture or any goth music (like Sisters of Mercy, Depeche Mode or Siouxsie and The Banshees). The most annoying thing is that, if someone tells them that Korn isn't a goth band, they go friggin nuts.
Also on the other side of the spectrum, there are goths who take a "gother than thou" approach. Which, IMHO, is even more annoying. If you don't fit in their goth little world, you aren't worth bothering with. Sad but true. These people are often known as ubergoths. What is worse they bitch about others behind their backs, insult, gossip and manipulate.
Sadly, these kind of attitudes give goths, and anybody else from other altenative subcultures (alts), a bad name. Alot of alts, DO take stuff from another alternative subcultures. That's how one subculture can grow from another.
I never understood why being part of a subculture had to have a direct relation to a certain kind of music myself.
I'd much rather it be defined by life style first with musical choices coming in last, if at all.
music is important, but as the kind of person who enjoys all music, I dont think it should define anybody.
Of course you have to realize my real issue may come from the inability (or lack of need/want) to define myself.
I'm all of these, and none of them.
afrocentric, black militant, gangta, hip-hop, goth, hippie, beatnik, maybe even emo, punk, indie, country ,rivithead, steampunk, cyber, gamer....
and some of those seem direct opposites or even impossible to coexist with one another.
kaos cannot be boxed.
I'd much rather it be defined by life style first with musical choices coming in last, if at all.
music is important, but as the kind of person who enjoys all music, I dont think it should define anybody.
Of course you have to realize my real issue may come from the inability (or lack of need/want) to define myself.
I'm all of these, and none of them.
afrocentric, black militant, gangta, hip-hop, goth, hippie, beatnik, maybe even emo, punk, indie, country ,rivithead, steampunk, cyber, gamer....
and some of those seem direct opposites or even impossible to coexist with one another.
kaos cannot be boxed.
Last edited by kaos on Sun Jun 15, 2008 10:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
That is true. However, I am talking about my personal experiences.Lastwolf wrote:Whilst I understand your point, that statement could be said of any society or social grouping of more than 3 people.
To be defined by music may seem to shallow to some, but to me, it means alot. A certain person's music taste says about of that person. To some people, I listen to wierd and obscure stuff, for example. To them, I am wierd and obscure. Truth is, I just listen to alot of genres and styles (and maybe punk rock more than anything else). I cannot function without my daily dose of music, I'd go insane.kaos wrote:I never understood why being part of a subculture had to have a direct relation to a certain kind of music myself.
I'd much rather it be defined by life style first with musical choices coming in last, if at all.
music is important, but as the kind of person who enjoys all music, I dont think it should define anybody.
Of course you have to realize my real issue may come from the inability (or lack of need/want) to define myself.
What seems shallow to me, is that people think that your certain style, or fashion sense reflects who you are. To me, that is absurd because that is just allowing the image over being. Yes music is very much apart of an image. But to me, it's part of the being as well. I suppose it's just matter of opinion.
-
- Scavenger
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 3:22 pm
I like Johnny's views on this.
I don't agree that music is a part of being. Music is a part of a person's image to me. There's a lot of ways you can pinpoint what image a person has. Heck, you can dig through a person's trash and discover what their "image" is, because objects give us clues to the person's lifestyle/world but a person doesn't have to be defined only by the stuff they own. Music, in my definition, is a consumable good that you can buy/own so it would be just another item to me.
Being-ness, to me, on the other hand, is the stuff you create, or the actions you make. It's not the stuff that you consume. You can't purchase a being-ness.
And this is why it makes sense to me that the "ubergoths" and other people fixated on presenting one alternative identity only are the most insecure with their own identity/or are extremely searching for their own niche.
Some of these same people who are insecure with their own identity try very hard to be a "unique snowflake", and in the process more often than not, just conform very rigidly to an alternative group.
I don't agree that music is a part of being. Music is a part of a person's image to me. There's a lot of ways you can pinpoint what image a person has. Heck, you can dig through a person's trash and discover what their "image" is, because objects give us clues to the person's lifestyle/world but a person doesn't have to be defined only by the stuff they own. Music, in my definition, is a consumable good that you can buy/own so it would be just another item to me.
Being-ness, to me, on the other hand, is the stuff you create, or the actions you make. It's not the stuff that you consume. You can't purchase a being-ness.
And this is why it makes sense to me that the "ubergoths" and other people fixated on presenting one alternative identity only are the most insecure with their own identity/or are extremely searching for their own niche.
Some of these same people who are insecure with their own identity try very hard to be a "unique snowflake", and in the process more often than not, just conform very rigidly to an alternative group.
As I say, everyone has their own opinions on them. Personally, I like to get to know people better on a one to one level rather than at first glance. Is it really a matter of do first appearances matter? To me they don't. However, I hold no grudgement to people that think they do. It is their opinion after all.
What someone thinks of me, because they haven't spoken to me one to one, and on a direct level, I couldn't give a shit. I have other things to worry about than what I come across to someone.
What someone thinks of me, because they haven't spoken to me one to one, and on a direct level, I couldn't give a shit. I have other things to worry about than what I come across to someone.
Last edited by Squirrel on Mon Jun 16, 2008 7:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.