University, Life and Questions

Hello dear readers! I know I haven't been posting much recently, and I wish to apologise. At the end of last year, I applied to university to study Architectural Technology, and last month I had my interview. Overall, the interview was positive, but because I am entering as a mature student and did not do all of the required subjects at school and college (they weren't even an option where I studied!) I am now having to work very hard to put together a digital technical drawing portfolio to prove I can do what is necessary to keep up with the course. This has to be my priority, so please be understanding that between now and May (when I have a second interview, present my portfolio and take an exam) that I will be extremely busy and not posting much on this blog. I really, really hope I get in; all my long-term readers will know I have a real passion for architecture (that leaks over into everything else I do) and now that I have a proper opportunity to study, I really hope that I can take it. 

In the meanwhile, please note that I am still accumulating material to post over the summer, and making the first motions of some travel plans for the summer, and plans for blog content. I am also always happy to answer questions (just note that there might be a delay in my answering comments and questions) and while my blog is partly here to communicate my experience as a Romantic, Goth, Witch and alternative person, I think it is very important that I am helpful and informative. I like helping less experienced Goths who are just getting started, I like helping other Goths who are just looking for resources, and I like helping non-Goths to learn about what Goth is really like. I recently got an e-mail from a student who was doing a project involving writing about Goth, and I was really happy to be asked, and shared not just what I'd written, but lots of links and other resources (books, there's plenty of good books!). I will help with what I can help with, but I will also be upfront if I don't know the answer to something. 

<mini rant> I get a bit annoyed with bloggers who get angry when people ask them reasonable questions; if you put yourself out there and share your experiences via a publicly viewable blog accessible to anyone with access to a search engine, you do not get to control your audience and have it only of people who know as much as you. If you want to control your audience, use something like LiveJournal and have only certain people you select able to see your blog. With any blog, there will be people who want to know more, and people who will ask you questions, even if your blog is primarily an online diary. It is not only polite to respond kindly, even if it is with "I am sorry, but I do not know the answer" or "I am not the best person to ask; please refer to <insert resource here>  as they may be able to help you better", but being rude alienates people who are clearly interested in your field/subculture/topic/etc. and makes you look like a bad person, and the community associated with whatever you are blogging about look bad, like they are cold and unwelcoming people, as people tend to generalise based on the first people of a group they have significant interaction with.  One could argue that in typed conversation online, where there is no tone of voice, no physical proximity, and only emoticons and gifs to display the nuances of facial expression and body language, that it is even more important to be clear and polite in your communications. </mini rant>. 

Paganism, Fantasy and Life

Originally posted to LiveJournal on March 16, 2008, 14:10 - this one is a touch ranty! 

I have slowly distanced myself from modern paganism, as I see to much focus being placed on the mythology, fantasy and ‘dressing up’ aspect, too much focus on the legends, regarding them as reality rather than symbolism, and too many people turning up to rituals in elaborate costume, fairy wings, pointy ears and all. What is with turning up to rituals in fantasy gowns? I have nothing against self expression and more exotic clothes - I've my fair share of flowing gowns and anachronistic clothes, and I love expressing myself through my dress sense (I have even taken part in a stereotypically witchy photoshoot that I instigated)- but I think there is a time and a place, and there is a line between expressing oneself through one's dress sense, and walking around in fantasy-fulfillment, and I think some of it IS fantasy fulfilment. 

Paganism is path that means you HAVE to face reality, because at least in my path, the Universe is the divine, and to run from reality is to run from the divine. If one is running around as if one is Lord and Lady Sparklemoonrainbow of Avalon, in diaphanous gowns and knightly attire, that is all well and good if you're at the Renaissance Faire, or if it's a bit of role-playing, something fun to do once in a while, but it's no good if you are trying to live a fairy-tale in the real world twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, three-hundred and sixty-five days a year. There is enough wonderment in the natural world without needing to add to it.

There is a difference between injecting some colour and spice into one's life, and trying to improve one's actuality, and running from one's life into a fantasy. I've fled into escapism, and I can say from experience it's a really unhealthy road to run down, because it is burying one's head, like the ostrich* supposedly does, in the sand when the lions are getting nearer, and as the lions get closer, the distance between you and reality has to get larger for them to seem further away.

Paganism is a theology, a disorganised religion. It is one path of spiritual development and it is no more a fairy-tale than an any of the organised religions, perhaps less for those who do not believe in a specific mythos or anthropomorphic deities (Mind you, to an atheist, it is all a fantasy). Many Pagans bitch about organised religions, but organised religions actually take themselves seriously - even if some members are a bit out-there, but every group has it's percentage of the less-than-grounded-in-reality- and most use their religion as a framework to try to understand reality rather than escape it. 

Fantasy and science-fiction are a big part of my "geeky" life. I have nothing against fantasy, it serves as a lens with which to talk that which is beyond everyday life, as well as functions as escapism from reality, but it is NOT reality, and I see too much of it in Paganism. I don't even think escapism is always bad, as sometimes it is good, but in moderation, but not if it takes over one's life, and religion should not be a form of escapism, but for too many it is

If Paganism is meant to be a path of spirituality, then surely it should be concerned with the real, and not be an escapist hobby. Paganism may in many aspects deal with concepts like magic and spirits, and things not mundane (which I tend to approach half with skepticism and half with belief), but it is meant to about the real world, the one we live in, and should be focused on that, not on some escapist ideal world of maidens and bards and such. Pagans live everyday lives, with everyday jobs, and their faith should be a part of that, not an escape from it. Everyday reality can often be very bleak, but it is better to improve it with faith than to escape to faith, because then that faith is not faith at all, but fantasy.

So much Pagan merchandise is decorated with dragons, fae, unicorns, elves, griffins, and other mythological beings, and very many Pagans really believe in these entities, and it seems as if nothing is being done to promote an understanding of what these creatures are –metaphors, symbols, and old superstitions, meaningful, but not necessarily literally real. I don’t have any dragons or fairies on my altar. I don’t think they’re real, and I don’t see having lots of unreal things in a practice about the very real world around us as a help. I have had daffodils, daisies, roses, leaves, plenty of plants on my altar, but they are real, they are of this world, and are parts of nature. I think too much fantasy can get in the way of really connecting, really being part of the world -because it becomes a way of escaping the world.

We still live in the 21st century, and have the knowledge that brings us. I think it very foolish for people to reject modern science in favour of old superstitions. Things are not necessarily right just because they are old. Humanity is now at a standpoint where it can view old myths, legends, folklore and superstition, and instead of taking it all literally, understand what it means. I do not think we should reject old things because they are old either –things are also not necessarily wrong because they are old- but look at them carefully. There is great power in tradition, in old things. Things gain momentum with time, and meaning, and something of a ‘spirit of time’ like a ‘spirit of place’, and that is not something to be ignored, but that is not to say that to connect with it one has to take everything literally. Mythology is powerful not because of what it says, but what it means  beyond the centaurs and Old Gods and heroes.

I think there needs to be a more general re-assessment of fantasy in Paganism, and the role of fantasy. I accepts that a lot of the modern world is not pleasant, but life has had its dark side in every era, and we cannot improve the world by running from it.

*I know ostriches don't really bury their heads in the sand.

Subcultural Appropriation

When Goth Gets Appropriated

Cultural appropriation is usually talked about in the context of mainstream Western culture appropriating elements of other cultures, and using them as shallow exoticism or as a commercialised trend with no reverence or respect to their original context, and I wrote about it here. Goth, while it certainly isn't liked by the mainstream, and does receive a lot of mistreatment, spanning things like the murder of Sophie Lancaster and the attribution of school shootings to a Goth influence, to the regular street harassment of those who dress differently in public and bullying of children and some employers not wanting to hire Goths, this is not on the same scale as racism nor homophobia (although I do think murdering someone on the basis of what subculture they belong to is equally evil to murdering someone on the basis of what culture they belong to). 

Goth is a subculture, and the prejudice against it is more similar to religious intolerance in so much that belonging to a subculture or a religion is choice, whereas what race or sexual orientation you are is an inherent trait. Goth, to many of us (but not all), is quite a central aspect of our life, and perhaps defines as much of our lives as our national culture might, or more, in the same way religion can. I certainly see parallels between how my religion and my subculture impact my life. 

Also, whereas cultural appropriation is linked to the colonial past of Western countries, and therefore to the atrocities committed, while most Goths will account to having been harassed, faced prejudice and possibly faced beatings and violence for their differences, most of us, as Goths (not as other facets of our identities, such as Goths of colour, or transgender Goths) are not, have not, and will not be the target of institutionalised attempts at eradication or enslavement (except perhaps in Russia, where the government HAS put in place sanctions against what has been perceived as dangerous youth movements). 

Anyway, every time Goth-influenced fashion becomes popular in the mainstream, there are cries of "hey, but that's OURS" and contradictory mixture of offence at the commercialisation and glee at the availability of Goth-suitable fashion. I felt like dissecting that a bit.

⚜ Four Reasons Goth-Influenced Style Becoming Trendy Bothers Me

Firstly when Goth influenced fashion becomes trendy, it can make it difficult to visually tell a Goth from someone trying to follow a tend. Of course, this can be clarified by talking to them. Goths  in areas where there are not many other Goths can feel a bit disappointed when in their search for kindred spirits with similar interests they encounter what looks like promising signs of a like-minded individual, only to find that this person has temporarily and shallowly co-opted the Goth aesthetic as part of an 'edgy' trend. It also  becomes annoying if the Goth-as-a-trend-types then behave in a way that isn't appropriate in public (as unfortunately some do) and then it reflects badly on the Goth community because it's not just Goths who can't tell them apart, but outsiders.

Secondly it is infuriating to see the very same people who have insulted you in public for your fashion choices suddenly appropriate your style choices, and they themselves receive little negative attention for it because they are not really associated with the Gothic subculture (and all the negative stereotypes associated with it), they are just following a trend, it's just fashion, nothing deeper. Now, I don't want to tar all hipsters and trendy people as mockers of Goths, because that just isn't the case (some of my friends are hipsters!); being mainstream, trendy or even a hipster does not make one automatically hate Goths or be rude to them, but I have seen literally the same people who once mocked me now wearing studded leather jackets, faux-Doc Marten's and unnatural hair-colours and leggings with inverted crosses on them because this is all trendy now. 

Thirdly people are wearing things that were dear to us without the same appreciation we hold for them. I have met teenagers wearing Bauhaus t-shirts who are barely aware that the band exists, but have never listened to the music (and probably have no idea that it is also an architectural style...) and probably never will (even though I did say they were good and that they should have a listen as they might like them; maybe I am being cynical and they went home and looked them up on iTunes or something.) - if I see someone wearing a band t-shirt, I'd like to think that they like the band, and aren't just wearing the t-shirt because it was black and they thought the design looked cool. 

Fourthly, the Goth aesthetic is often used as visual code for 'edgy' and 'transgressive' - we are certainly different, but I think this plays on some of the negative stereotypes of Goth - if Goths were seen as just other people with different tastes instead of rebellious, scary, potentially violent, obsessed with death, depressed, etc, would using the Goth aesthetic as a visual code for 'edgy' still work? Probably not. 

⚜ Four Good Things About Goth-Influenced Style Being Popular

Firstly, the availability of Goth-friendly items in mainstream stores suddenly sky-rockets. Yes, there will be a lot of cheap fake leather and poorly-attached studs in the shops at the moment, but the better shops will sell medium quality items at prices still less than those of big Goth brands like Raven, and while upmarket shops like Marks & Spencer will carry items that are at their usual upmarket price ranges, they are also likely to be rather nice. A good section of my wardrobe has come from Marks & Spencer via charity shops and eBay, from collections when black velvet, lace and Victoriana have all been fashionable. Everything that is in fashion right now will go out of fashion again soon, and will turn up in charity shops as their current owners change to the latest trend. 

Secondly, it allows those who want to experiment with the aesthetic, but are not ready to commit, to wear clothes they like with less likelihood of being taunted for it. Nobody need suspect that they are not just following the trends if they don't tell anyone and don't take it to the point where it is obvious that they are committed to the subculture. There will also be those who do take it up as part of the trend, but decide that when the trends change again that they will in fact stick with this one, and stumble across something they like via the trend. There will be those who actually look into what the real Goth subculture and aesthetic is about, and perhaps discover something they come to love. 

Thirdly, people may be less likely to judge someone based on their aesthetic choices, both in terms of fashion, and in terms of the music and the rest of the subculture, if they have dabbled on the fringes themselves and found that it did not drag them to Hell or turn them into psychopathic murderers, or make them all depressed - it may, for a few, grant them just enough insight to become more accepting people. Perhaps someone will mistake them for a Goth, and call them an insult in the street, and they will realise how much that insult hurt and never do that to someone themselves. Perhaps it may not change the minds of many, but even if a handful of people come to have a better opinion of Goth, then that is a good thing. 

Fourthly, every now and again mainstream fashion will come out with a Goth-inspired idea that is actually quite good and has not been done much within the subculture, or which has been done, but was not very popular, and which suddenly gets much more exposure. I have seen a lot of all-lace shirts within Goth, but shirts with lace backs and opaque fronts seem to have become quite popular with the Nu-Goth and Goth-inspired hipsters, and I had not seen many of them before, the same with collar-pins - I had seen them within Visual Kei and Rockabilly fashion, but not much amongst Goth, and now I see studs and spikes for collars with chains between them for sale in mainstream accessory shops. Another trend is detachable collars - originally in more 'hipster' styles such as beading, pastel sequins and suchlike, and are now available with things like faux-fur and studs. 

✥⚜✥

Obviously, not everyone who wears trendy clothes does so ONLY to be trendy, and it is unfair to judge someone on sight, and to infer from what they wear that they are wearing them for the wrong reasons. There will be quite a few people who are actually wearing trendy items because they actually genuinely like the item - they may be aesthetic butterflies who do not want to commit to one aesthetic, but they may still genuinely wearing a studded leather jacket because they like leather and studs, and think it looks good, and not to appear 'edgy' or shallowly follow a trend, and they may have never mocked a Goth person in their life and have an accepting and live-and-let-live attitude. Goth itself is about doing things because you genuinely like them, so there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with mainstream people wearing Goth-inspired or Goth items without fully committing to the subculture if they are wearing them out of an appreciation of the item. 

Also, in the end, it is but fashion, clothes, and yes, while our subculture means a lot to us, and the hypocrisy of those who would mock us with one hand and then take their styling tips from us with the other is galling, it does not do any material harm - it is not the same as say, throwing stones at someone or denying someone a job because of their subcultural affiliation. There needs to be some level of perspective. The mainstream fashion industry commercialising our fashion and aesthetic does not stop us from enjoying our own subculture, it does in no way prevent us from still seeing a Bauhaus t-shirt as a way to appreciate the band or from studding our leather jackets ourselves, it just blurs the significance of things to those on the outside. 

I would not judge someone else on what they are wearing, nor presume them to have any of the above motivations on the sole basis of their clothes. That is just as silly as assuming that all Goths look the way we do to actively rebel. I would also not tell anyone what they can and cannot wear. If you live in a country where there are no laws restricting your fashion choices, then you are free to wear what you like, and the same freedom that allows Goths to wear Goth clothes extends to non-Goths wearing Goth clothes. 

As always, I recommend never approaching others with pre-concieved notions of what they might be like before knowing them, and being polite even with those whom you disagree with, and that extends to people who are wearing your favourite band t-shirt but don't know who, say, Siouxsie and the Banshees, actually are.

⚜ Goth Hallowe'en 'Costumes'

We are a subculture, not a costume. It is not acceptable to dress up as a terrorist Muslim, it is not acceptable to dress up as a 'Squaw' (that word, by the way, is an insult to Native North American women) and it is not acceptable to dress up as a Chinese person with taped eyes and a coolie hat because these are all reducing groups of people to flat and sexualised or negative stereotypes and perpetuating those stereotypes. 'Goth' costumes often present a sexualised (sexy-fied) stereotype of Goth, and one that errs on the 'Goths are people who think they are vampires' and 'Goths are slutty and into kinky sex' stereotypes a bit too much for comfort. There are also those who, like those who wear the racial stereotype costumes, wear them to mock those stereotypes, people who wear Goth costumes in a way that deliberately mock what they think Goths are. THAT really annoys me. 

I live the Goth subculture 24 hours a day; even my dreams run to the same aesthetic as everything else I do, even my work clothes err on the Gothic. I have Joy Division and Dead Can Dance on my headphones when I sit on the bus. I have spider-web loo-roll and black plates. To say I am passionate about my subculture is a bit of an understatement, and to know people use Hallowe'en as an excuse to mock us is... well irritating to say the least. Especially when Hallowe'en is often quite dear to Goths. 

Now, wearing a Goth outfit at Halloween isn't inherently inappropriate. I've actually helped a friend put together a proper Goth outfit at Halloween, but it consisted of clothes that would actually be considered Goth (from her wardrobe and mine) rather than a tacky and cheaply-made, store-bought costume, and she wore Goth makeup rather than white and black face-paint. Her intention was not to mock Goths, her outfit was based on what is authentically Goth in consultation with a Goth, and she wore her outfit as an opportunity to explore a different way of looking for a night. Yes, the idea that it can still be considered a 'costume' could still be grating to some, as to her it was something different to wear for a night and not a form of expressing her permanent inner self and subcultural affiliation, but I don't think that this was not done in any  malevolence and what she wore was actually Goth and not a tawdry parody of Goth.

✥⚜✥

At some point I will write some musings about Goth and teenage rebellion, and where the lines between exploring identity and using Goth as a tool for shock value get blurred. 

The Synthetic Aesthetic & Hypocrisy

Recently, Amy of ::Stripy Tights and Dark Delights:: wrote ::this:: post on Goths that denigrate people of a certain popular aesthetic (Essex Girl in the UK, Jersey Shore to an American, I would guess that a lot of places have their equivalent) for being "fake" because of the fake tan, fake eyelashes, bleached hair, fake nails, hair extensions, heavy makeup, bust augmentations, etc. etc. I am probably repeating what she said here, but it is an important message, so I feel like reiterating it in my own words on this blog 

A lot of Goths and other Alternative types are just as "fake". I certainly go around with a corseted waist, a wig, fake eyelashes, heavy makeup, a pallor that is partly nature and partly makeup (more to even it out than make me paler), high heels, piercings etc. My waist is not naturally that thin, my hair is is not actually red (not even by dye), my eyelashes are pretty long, but they don't come with feathers, and I got all those jewellery-attachment-points through having someone poke holes through me! I go to great lengths to achieve a particular aesthetic, and that is all that these 'Essex Girls' are doing. There are people who have had far more extensive body mods than me; more piercings, elaborate tattoos, and even fangs, pointed ears and horns, all in search of a particular aesthetic. This is certainly a synthetic aesthetic, one that is created through artistry overlaid on nature. 

Usually someone comes in with the justification of something akin to 'oh, but they are following a trend, to them it's about fitting in and appealing to men and getting attention, they must be really insecure! We do it in the pursuit of our own personal aesthetic!' 

Who are we to judge? 

Unless you know someone well enough to have good estimation of their real motivations, you have no business judging someone. It is the same sort of prejudicial assumption as when mainstream people assume that we dress and look the way we do for attention or to rebel against our parents or to opt out of decent society. Considering the time and money and effort spent on a lot of these women's looks, I would say that there has to be a significant proportion who really are chasing their dream aesthetic. Yes, there certainly are those who follow that aesthetic to be trendy, to get attention, to impress men, because they are insecure with who they are under the fakery, etc. but there are also people who co-opt the Goth aesthetic in order to get attention, to impress men, to be rebellious, to try and shock people, because they are insecure with who they are under the fakery, etc. It is unfair to judge a group by the action of individuals who are not necessarily representative. It is easier to distinguish a Goth from someone co-opting the aesthetic, because there is some broader definition of Goth, but the 'Essex Girl' aesthetic is just an aesthetic (the party animal lifestyle, drinking, etc. are not inherent; plenty of people who don't follow this look behave like that, and not all who follow this look behave like that); there is no co-opting it away from a broader subculture. 

Basically, this is an encouragement not to judge; instead take people on their individual merit, on their own actions and behaviour. How somebody looks is not necessarily and indicator of what they are like, as we should all well know. A dose of humility and an open mind are good things to have. 

Goth, Hate and Ignorance

☠ WARNING: RANT AHEAD ☠

I am in foul mood, and a rant is ahead - you have been warned. 

Amongst the slurs aimed at Goths, I have noticed a trend - I think a lot of the people who hate us have only met those amongst Babybats who are perhaps the least representative of the subculture, not even representative of Babybats, and are more in it for the shock factor and to seek attention than Goth being a true representation of themselves.

The Negative Stereotype

Goths are sullen, moody teenagers. We're white, from a middle-class background, and complain without reason in the face of a privileged life, or are always depressed. We dress the way we do to "rebel", we think we are special snowflakes, unique and individual and soooo non-conformist. We listen to Marilyn Manson, Evanescence and My Chemical Romance. We self-harm, and self-harm for attention. We wear white-face makeup and lots of chains. All male goths are gay, or transvestites, and all female goths are lesbians. Goth girls are promiscuous and all goths are into fetishes. We live with our parents, will either grow into sad, unemployed adults or give up looking weird at college. We're rude, anti-social and cliquish, and we think we're a cut above the rest. Goths are either anorexic or morbidly obese. They're ugly, using their freakish style to try and hide behind, etc. Goths are Nazis, or shoot up schools. Etc. etc. 

This is the view I see come across in various goth-bashing post on the internet; on YouTube, on forums, in the comment sections of various pages. I'm pretty sure if you've seen a Goth video on YouTube you'll have come across some of this sort of nonsense in the comments section. It's also surfaced in real life situations where people have expressed their intolerance towards Goths. You might have noticed the latent homophobia and sexism, and also the fact that it is self-contradictory. The self-contradictory nature is probably because it is coalesced from a variety of hatred spewed forth on the internet and real life (although there are quite probably people who hold these self-contradictory views too). Anyone who has spent any time in the subculture or is friendly with actual Goths will see this as nonsense far removed from the actual nature of the subculture, but this is the stereotype that remains.

Mostly, it is ignorance, closed-mindedness and an intolerance for people who are different, but somewhere in there I think there's people who have had bad experiences with those they think are Goths. Now, I don't doubt that there are few adult Goths who are neither young nor Babybats who give the subculture a bad name and act deplorably - especially as I have met a few - but the majority of these stereotypes reflect the behaviour of the more obnoxious younger pseudo-Goths; not a reflection of Babybats as younger members of the subculture or as those just starting out in the subculture, or even as those meandering through subcultural identities in search of their own, but a reflection of those people who use the subculture as a means to play the rebel or seek attention or who seem so caught up in the false stereotypes of the subculture that they become living embodiments of them. 

Goths are not all depressed, but this is a common stereotype. There is this concept that we are indulging in melodramatic angst when there is nothing really wrong with our lives. Most Goths I know are actually relatively happy people, they have their ups and downs, and I think are more likely to be open about when they are down than those in the mainstream, but are not, on the whole, particularly miserable people. Maybe it exists because Goth music has been dark and a bit depressing since the days of Joy Division, and this has probably been around for as long as the subculture. In recent years this has been worsened by the conflation of Goth with Emo, and the negative portrayal of Emo being all about depression, or worse, affected depression for attention.

Goths and Emos are often conflated in hate comments, and there seems to be a genuine lack of distinction made between the two, although one would think that on looking at a Goth and an Emo that they even look vastly different. This conflation is really annoying me, especially when perpetuated by the media., and so do people conflating Goth and Punk. It's like not being able to tell the difference between deer, sheep and goats. Lots of people have already written about the differences between Goth and Emo and between Goth and Punk and suchlike, so there is no need for me to go into it here.

The stereotype of the sullen teenager writing angsty poetry, acting in a melodramatic manner exists for a reason. Teenage years are complicated, confusing times which make a lot of young people unhappy, especially in a modern world where so much pressure is put on young people to have flourishing social lives, be sexually active, and keep up to date with trends as well as deal with the sorts of issues that come with puberty and with secondary education and whatever may be happening in their family lives. A lot of teenagers seek release in various subcultures, and sometimes do so in less than advisable manners, but that is no fault of the subculture, and while the teenagers who do this do need to be held responsible, there should be full acknowledgement of how even with all modern technology and trained adults, that the teenage years will always include mistakes, mistakes we should learn from to become better adults. That is what being a teenager is about.

The part that does, however, get to me, is the part where people do things for attention. Self-harm is a serious issue, real mental illness is very serious too, but there are people who fein mental illness for attention, and will even go as far as to self-harm for attention, or to emotionally manipulate people, and this causes a lot of problems for people who do have self-harm problems and mental health issues. I had mental health issues as a teenager, and self-harmed, but it was often pushed aside with me merely being an 'attention-seeker' in the eyes of those I was trying to seek help from and my subcultural interests I think did not do anything to sway their opinions in my favour. This sort of behaviour causes real harm to people.

There are also those who use  Goth, among other subcultures as a method of getting attention - these are the people who wear all the "gothiest" things at once regardless of whether or not they clash, that claim that they really are vampires to everyone in their school, threaten to curse people, or even threaten to shoot their fellow pupils, say rude things about "preps" or "chavs", claim to be Satanists while ignorant of actual Satanism, graffiti things with scrawled pentagrams, think Marilyn Manson is shocking, and generally try and act like they are spookiest, most evil thing to ever go to secondary school/high school/college/etc. They want to shock, they want to get attention, and they don't necessarily realise that they are embarrassing themselves and making the subculture look bad, and if they receive negativity for their behaviour, claim it is discrimination on account of their subculture. Attention seekers often think of themselves as special snowflakes, too, and are people who try and gather to themselves labels that set them apart from the majority, to make themselves ever more esoteric, and Goth can be a convenient label.

If someone is seeking attention then they are making a determined effort to be noticed, and it is these attention seekers that are therefore more likely to stick in people's minds. Those who are particularly negative in one way or another are also more likely to be remembered than those who behave politely and decently.

I have explained before how Goth is not an act of rebellion, simply a set of differing tastes, a subculture rather than a counter-culture. We are not trying to be "nonconformist". 

The mental image that many have of a Goth, as someone with white-face makeup, badly done or over-done eye-makeup, lots of chains and the sorts of clothes and accessories that were available in Hot Topic in the early '90s or in Claire's Accessories now (although I admit I have bought gloves, socks and  earrings from Claire's, as there are some nice things in amongst the tat, but my experience has usually been of things of low quality and over-priced), trying very hard to act the spooky part, perhaps being sarcastic and cliquish, or acting with pretension and superiority (such as referring to non-Goths as "mundane mortals" in seriousness) is not a representative of Goths, it is representative of Babybats and Mallgoths, who either are just learning in their subcultural beginnings or are going through a phase. Most people do not think of the many talented artists and musicians in the scene, or the elaborate outfits of Whitby Gothic Weekend or Wave Gotik Treffen, or of anything representative of just how amazing, well-done and classy Goth can be.

The homophobia, sexism, heteronormative bias, and suchlike inherent in the sort of hatred that says "Goth guys are gay because they wear makeup" or "all goth girls are dykes because they wear combats and have piercings and listen to angry music" and similar is a representation of just how inculcated into mainstream Western culture these attitudes have become. I am not here to write about gender and sexuality and society; there are reams of articles already in existence on these topics, and I am not going to paraphrase people who are far more studied and eloquent on the topics than I am. 

A lot of people who have, for one reason or another, felt uncomfortable looking "normal" have found Goth and other alternative-looking subcultures helpful to them. There are certainly Goths with eating disorders of various sorts. There are also Goths who are not traditionally "pretty" or "handsome" and suchlike. Some people find being able to create their own appearance through creativity and artifice a whole new way to be beautiful when not happy with the way they naturally look, and that is a) not necessarily a bad thing and b) not unique to Goth. There are Goths of all shapes, sizes and Goths of all colours, from paler than pale to goths of colour who are more than just black in terms of their clothes. Goths are vastly variant in appearance and body-type. 

A lot of Goths remain so long into their adult years and have successful careers, often in careers that require a significant amount of education and are certainly respectable, and often well-paying. Just look at blogs such ::Siouxsie Law:: or ::Sophistique Noir:: or ::The Dancing Maenad::  (previously ran Le Professeur Gothique) for proof of well-educated and successful adult Goths (as well as really interesting blogs). 

The last three paragraphs are things that members of the subculture already know, but yet somehow elude those outside of it, as do many of the ways in which the stereotype differ wildly from the actuality of the Goth subculture. As to the BDSM community confusion, ::this article:: at The Everyday Goth should be helpful, and as to the "goths are Nazis that shoot up schools", most of the blame can be put on the shoulders of the media coverage of the Columbine massacre. 

I am not blaming Babybats or even Mallgoths for the discrimination Goths face - only the people who discriminate against us are to blame for their actions. Babybats are not bad people, they are not deliberately giving Goth a bad name, and a lot of them are simply new to the subculture and people judging Goth by the efforts of Babybats are as misguided as people judging the whole of archery by the people who do it for an afternoon on an adventure holiday. Even attention seeking pseudo-Goths are not to blame, however annoying they may be, for the actions of others. People are ultimately responsible for their own actions. 

The Babybats a person meets at secondary school, or the Mallgoths lurking in the local shopping-centre may be the only Goths and Goth-like people that a lot of people outside the subculture interact with, partly because they are the most numerous as those for whom Goth is a phase will often have it as a teenage phase, and partly because a lot of older Goths tend to keep their subcultural affiliation fairly quiet. 

I do think, though, that more needs to be done to show the positive side of Goth, to show what the subculture is really about. The resources are there, but somehow both the mainstream and younger Babybats are not getting them, because the stereotypes remain, and even people who are interested in Goth seem to be getting stuck at the level of these stereotypes. I think the answer is for ordinary Goths to stick their heads above the parapet a bit more, for all the beautiful, creative, and wonderful sides of the subculture to be allowed to outshine all of the flawed characters and fringe members and things that just go a bit wrong that come with it being a subculture made of real human people with all of their human strengths and weaknesses, and for the subculture to encourage the best in its members and make it clear what Goth is really about, so that however much the term is abused by people twisting it for their own ends, that such abuses are infinitely outweighed. 

Tea And Coffee

Caffeinated HouseCat

☕ You only ~have~ to drink tea & coffee if you actually like them. ☕

I've noticed a trend of people drinking tea to seem more Lolita or more like Emilie Autumn or even more Goth. Sometimes they video themselves drinking tea really awkwardly. It seems strange and sort of pretentious behaviour. They are clearly trying really hard to look like they are enjoying their tea and their tea-party, and while they might be enjoying the rest of the tea-party, they are trying very hard not to grimace at the actual tea. 

(An aside: I know that tea is an everyday beverage in the UK, and that there are places where tea being made with hot water, a tea-bag and possibly milk and sugar is something of a rarity, but it is a very simple process, and should be quite hard to get wrong.) 

Anyway, this is not about getting making tea wrong, this is about people trying too hard to be quaintly British-esque in search of being more subcultural. I am inherently quaintly British so have never had that as something I wish to become, and can't exactly see the reason why people so desire to be like this. The only motivation I can see is an idealisation of Victorian society and a belief that all Victorian people did is sit around on sunny afternoons drinking tea, playing croquet and, if female, doing embroidery. Victorian life was not actually like that. 

Maybe it is a reaction to the culture of youth binge-drinking, with drinking tea being a stereotypically "civilised" thing to do, and I quite agree that afternoon tea is far superior to evening drunkenness, but there are plenty of soft drinks that are not tea to drink if you dislike tea. There are exceedingly elegant and refined tea meals and ceremonies, and yes the 1840's Afternoon Tea, earlier 18thC tea and of course various Tea Ceremonies from the Orient are all elegant and refined occasions, but that requires more than simply the act of consuming tea from pretty containers or of eating cake off a tiered stand. And engaging in any of the above activities for the purpose of becoming 'more Lolita' or 'more Goth' is silly and a bit appropriative. 

Not drinking tea does not make one any less goth, in the same way that drinking tea does not make one any more goth. I'm not sure why this has become a hugely 'Goth' thing to do, any more than why drinking coffee black was a hugely 'Goth' thing to do when I was a teenage babybat. 

☕ "Give me coffee, black, black as my soul!" ☕

I happen to rather like coffee, but I have a caffeine intolerance and get a little too wired if I have anything other than decaff, and I like lattes. This does not make me less Goth. I also like frappuccinos. Most of all, I like rose milkshakes with real vanilla ice-cream, whipped cream on top, served in a tall glass with a straw and marshmallows. Hideously pink, calorific, and decidedly fabulous. Aesthetically one would look fitting in the hands of a Sweet Lolita, but food should not be about what it looks like, or which culture it is from, but about the taste. Really, only drink or eat things because you like them. This does not just apply to tea and coffee, but to sushi and other Japanese food, absinthe, red wine, snakebite & black or anything else that is edible and related to a subculture. 

Be yourself. Eat and drink what you enjoy (in healthy moderation, of course). 

Cultural Appropriation, Eclecticism and Subcultures

Today I have been reading about cultural appropriation. It started out with reading ::this post:: at This Is Corp Goth, about how mainstream fashion appropriates outward signifiers of Goth sub-culture, stripping it of the meaning it has to market it to masses, especially to those who are looking to be "edgy" and distinguish themselves slightly from the mainstream in pursuit of a bought "individuality", not because it reflects their inner aesthetic preferences (if they have developed a core set of aesthetic preferences), but because it is the current trendy way of seeming interesting; they want to be seen as "different" and "interesting" and "individual", but dare not do anything that endangers them to being thought of as "freaky" and "weird" or "not normal", distancing themselves from the originating subculture and the roots of what they have adopted.

This is an issue that has been much talked about in the Goth community, but there is another issue that is not talked about, or at least that I have not seen talked about: do members of the Goth community appropriate things from other subcultures, cultures and traditions, and are our inspirations being used in a way that is cultural and subcultural hybridisation, or in a way that is simply adopting something because it looks nice or is popular amongst other goths, without thinking of the origins of these things.

I routinely see things aimed at Goths that are marketed as "Celtic", "Gypsy" and "Japanese" which are either based off stereotypes or have nothing to do with those people, or even worse are based off hugely erroneous romanticisations of those people with vast historical and anthropological inaccuracies. There is, for example, a difference between the interlace animal designs of the Vikings and Pictish crescent designs and ancient Bronze Age spiral designs, and the interlace designs of Irish monasteries, but all get marketed as 'Celtic knotwork', despite not all of them actually including knots, or being from a group called 'Celts'. This is taking a broad an inaccurate view of what the word 'Celtic' means, and ignoring a lot of history to market something to people who have only a vague knowledge of the term. Often this is pandering to those seeking something exotic, and conflating something being exotic with it somehow being better with what is usual simply because it is different. 

It is not wrong to appreciate the artistic styles of another race or nationality or culture, but to genuinely appreciate something you have to understand that more than just words and obvious symbols are signifiers of meaning, and that some things that we think are merely art or decoration have long and deep traditions as something deeply personal and meaningful to many people in their originating culture, and to them it as vexing to see us appropriate those signifiers and unintentionally strip them of meaning as it is for us to see non-Goth people wear obviously Goth-inspired fashion and then denigrate Goth and Goths.

That said, I do not think it is wrong to wear or have or make things inspired by other cultures and traditions, as long as the inspiring items/traditions are understood, and as long as it is not too direct a copy, more a new creation with artistic ties, because one is not directly copying a symbol or item, but appreciating the aesthetics and then combining them with whatever else lurks in the designers brain and producing something new and appreciative and therefore not taking a specific symbol or item and re-using it stripped of its meaning.  A lot of it comes down to understanding what a specific symbol or item means, and the context in which it is used in its originating culture, something that can easily be learnt with a bit of research, and avoiding using that symbol or item in a way that would be disrespectful to that culture, and if you do wish to use something outside of its proper context, changing it enough so it is clear that you mean no accidental insult or sacrilege, and are merely being aesthetically inspired. 

For example, walking down the street wearing a feather in a band in the same way a Native North American people would do in the context of a feather earned by a warrior would be a bit like walking down the street wearing a medal that would normally be earned by a soldier when you haven't earned it yourself, compounded by being from the people who fought against those who would have earned it, but wearing a different type of feather in a different way altogether would just show an appreciation for that feather. 

It is also important to remember that just because something happened a long time ago, it does not mean that the event or culture is no longer relevant to people today.  A lot of people are very proud of their ancestors, and very connected to their roots, and historical events that caused harm to large swathes of certain cultures have not been forgotten or relegated to the history books, so be careful when using symbols from times past.  A red ribbon around someone's neck meant something specific in the French Revolution, and there are definitely people around who still know what that means, and whose ancestors did end up killed on the guillotine. Even more pressing, there are cultures who still feel the repercussions of historic events, and if you happen to come from the culture they feel has injured them, wearing their symbols could be seen as a grave insult. 

I think this is an important issue for us to bear in mind as creative people and people interested in fashion, especially as people whose tastes are likely to be more eclectic and to draw on things outside of western culture, or from different historical periods. It is basically a case of being aware of what symbols and items mean before using them, and of doing the research. We are a magpie people, who spot something and want it, but sometimes we have to acknowledge that, no, we can't have that exact thing, and then use it as an opportunity to be creative and create our own thing, which will mean so much more as something made by oneself. 

Cliques, Judging and Subcultures

Most goths, at some point, will have been judged for how they look. At the darkest end there are things like when people get beaten up and even killed for how they look, and at the other there's assumptions made such as "goths are rude and pretentious" etc. We don't like being judged for being goths. We shouldn't do it to other groups. Just because someone wears fashionable clothes, that doesn't make them snobby and elitist about those who don't. Just because someone wears over-sized plastic-rim glasses and plimsols does not make them vacant and pretentious. Just because someone is wearing tracksuit bottoms and hooded jumper, that does not make them rude and violent (maybe they're going to the gym!). Just because someone wears skinny jeans and has dyed black hair does not mean they are histrionic attention-seekers. Goths aren't inherently nicer than everyone, that's why I have to make this post. 

Really, there is no reason for me to elaborate this into a vast wall of text. Yes, there are a disproportionate amount of certain types of bad behaviour in certain groups which is why some of these stereotypes exist in the first place, but even if there are more thugs that wear tracksuit bottoms and hooded jumpers than wear designer jeans, that doesn't mean that wearing a tracksuit makes someone a thug. That same logic goes for the other things. I may not LIKE any of those other styles, and think that a lot of them look terribly hideous, but I deal with that by NOT WEARING THEM and wearing things I don't think look hideous. I do not hate other styles, although I do think they are sometimes rather amusing (like when people wear logo or slogan t-shirts and have no idea what they represent, or when they walk around with their trousers halfway down their rears) but I also realise I'm probably amusing trying to run for the bus in platform boots. Other people are entitled to the same freedom of expression as we are. 

For a less text-intensive experience, watch ::this:: video by BatcaveDilemma