From: omixochitl2002@yahoo.com   
      
   "FixinDixon"  wrote in news:1107527705.087464.111370   
   @z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:   
      
   > To summarize, the question as to whether or not we are selling out   
   > depends on who we ask.  The concept of selling out is defined by who we   
   > are, our morale viewpoint and what we consider to be "ethically   
   > immoral" - what goes against our own ethical views?   
      
   Good point.   
      
   >>From my point of view, selling out would be buying all your clothes   
   > from corporate stores (GAP, Topshop etc), only drinking coffee from   
   > Starbucks, not watching anything that isn't promoted by "the man"... in   
   > other words, not thinking for yourself.  I suspect many of us share   
      
   And in some other words, thinking for yourself and deciding not to spend   
   so much of your time shopping.   
      
   For examples, who of these 4 (if any) are selling out?   
      
   - A spends 8 hours buying clothes at department stores because she wants   
   to make a very mainstream fashion statement with her outfits   
   - B spends 10 hours visiting thrift shops and hole-in-the-wall boutiques   
   and sewing stuff because she wants to make a very non-mainstream fashion   
   statement with her outfits   
   - C spends 1 hour buying clothes at department stores because she feels   
   she has better things to do (and stronger statements to make in other   
   media) with the other 7 to 9 hours than worry about outfits   
   - D spends 5 hours buying clothes through catalogs and sewing stuff   
   because her mother-in-law feels mainstream clothing is immodest and wants   
   to make a traditional statement with D's outfits   
      
   > similar views, or at least promote free thought, not following   
   > everything the establishment says and generally doing what we want to   
   > rather than feeling constrained by public/government opinion.   
      
   Exactly.  I don't let public opinion control my life either way.   
      
   If I wanted to obey all public opinion, or wanted to disobey all public   
   opinion, then I'd have to constantly keep track of public opinion in   
   order to know what to obey or disobey.  That's a constraint right there.   
      
   > However, the masses will always have the deciding vote.  And the masses   
      
   Deciding vote?  Why?  Personal style is personal, there's no reason it   
   needs majority rule.  ;)   
      
   > tend to stick to the things they like - which tend to be the   
   > corporations.  How else could the sudden proliferation of corporations   
   > be explained?  It's the McDonald-isation of the world - everyone like   
   > to have a shop that they can walk into, no matter which city (or even   
      
   I suspect part of the megacorps' success also comes from the people who   
   are neither 100% nor 0% conformist (not all Titanic tickets were sold to   
   people who shun indie flicks, etc.).   
      
   Now I wonder what would happen if *only* the 100% conformist types bought   
   from these corps...   
      
   > country now) and think "Ah yes, I know exactly what I'm buying, how I'm   
   > buying it and what it will be like".  So, in my mind, they've already   
   > sold out and we're stuck out on the fringes of society with the other   
   > anti-establishment groups (not that I'm complaining about this - I have   
   > no special desire to look like everyone else, all acid washed jeans,   
   > brown jackets and white trainers, MP3 player blasting out R&B and Pop   
   > which all sounds the same, stylish "grande" coffee cup in one hand).   
      
   Wait a minute.  Ever since the 2nd paragraph all you're talking about is   
   labelling people for how they dress, what they eat, and which genres they   
   like.  Aren't those rather petty factors?  Dismissing someone for wearing   
   Gap and liking rap isn't any less superficial than dismissing someone for   
   not wearing Gap and disliking rap.   
      
   > Hence my question: Do we "take sides" in the anti-establishment   
   > tradition?  I'm not suggesting that we should be "at war" with the   
   > establishment - indeed, cooperation will achieve more than aggression   
   > and I totally agree with the sentiment of changing the societal   
   > mechanism from the inside.  However, does this mean that in the eyes of   
   > others we are selling out, betraying our anti-establishment roots?  Do   
      
   Of course we are in their eyes - and if we do something else, we're   
   selling out in someone else's eyes.   
      
   This seems to be especially true for women and girls.  If I earn a   
   salary, wear trousers, spend little time on clothes, or whatever then I'm   
   selling out ("imitating The Patriarchy!!!").  If I become a housewife,   
   wear a skirt, spend tons of time on clothes, or whatever then I'm selling   
   out ("submitting to The Patriarchy!!!").  How much of this do men and   
   boys get too?   
      
   > we care - hell, if we're doing our own thing, then why bother what   
   > anyone else thinks of us?   
   >   
   > Which brings us to an identity crisis - if we're not anti-establishment   
   > (in that we're not taking their side) and we're not pro-establishment,   
   > then what are we?  Do we actively promote change?  Do we merely sit on   
      
   Then we're genuinely thinking for ourselves, instead of just having a   
   kneejerk reaction in either direction.  ;)   
      
   > the sidelines, taking notes?  Or are we the man on the street who's   
   > billboard no longer says "The End is Nigh" but rather "I Told You So"?   
      
   A bit of that too.   
      
   > Omixochitl wrote:   
   >> "FixinDixon"  wrote in   
   > news:1107335301.692593.140040   
   >> @o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:   
   >>   
   >> >> It's more that unless you "sell out" you can't be happy, State or   
   >> >> no State.   
   >> >   
   >> > Not true...  I've got a friend who's an artist currently studying   
   >> > in Florence.  She's really happy over there, living the life, being   
   >> > who she wants to be.  Has she "sold out"?  No.   
   >>   
   >> Do we think she's sold out?  Of course not.  Would someone else out   
   >> there accuse her of selling out?  Probably.   
   >>   
   >> > I'm planning on joining the police in the UK in an Information   
   >> > Analyst position - I've kinda dreamt about this career path ever   
   >> > since I understood psychology.  Working for the man?  Yes.  Selling   
   >> > out - Hell no!   
   >> >   
   >> > Selling out means giving life and soul to the man, letting the   
   >> > state run your life for you, becoming a wage-slave.  But if we   
   >> > strive to better ourselves, re-creating our world to become   
   >> > something better, striving for change... that's not selling out.   
   >>   
   >> Whether or not you're selling out all depends on who you ask.   
   >>   
   >> Heck, several years ago Mom said I'd be selling out if I used tampons   
   >> (since then she's realized I'm old enough to get cervical cancer and   
   >> now recommends pap smears instead of worrying about my hymen).   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)