[ SECRET POST #6386 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6386 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 39 secrets from Secret Submission Post #913.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

07. https://i.imgur.com/WeixrAH.png

[(Anonymous)]

Well...in that example, as long as you do actually listen to goth music. Otherwise yes, that is the definition of poser.

[(Anonymous)]

Shouldn't liking the aesthetics be enough reason to buy the clothes? Why is liking goth music a requirement to not be dismissed as a poser? What if someone likes goth music but isn't into goth clothes?

[(Anonymous)]

I went through a long goth fashion phase. I'd say from about age 16 to late 20s I was all dressed up. It was all about the fashion and the vibe for me. And I not once got called a poser or a fake by my other goth friends. The idea that you have to like every aspect of a genre to be accepted is so silly. Fashion or aesthetics is enough. If you only like the music but don't dig the clothes, that's enough. You are all valid!

Now if you are only buying the albums or clothes etc to fake fitting in for whatever reason, then yeah you're a poser.

[(Anonymous)]

The only thing that makes someone a Goth is listening to the music. It's a music subculture not a fashion one. Or at least it originally was. Instagram and tick tock changed that for younger generations. There are clothes that can be associated with the culture, but if you listen to Goth and wear nothing but pink you're still Goth.

[(Anonymous)]

Goth was primarily a fashion and aesthetic subculture as far back as the 80s! The music is part of it but far from the only part. It's an umbrella term for a whole bunch of subcultures hanging out together, mostly peacefully. Personally, I was into the music and the alt comics and books side of the culture more than the fashion, but other Goths never gave me shit for that. Nor did they shit on people who weren't into the music, or that one guy who was solely into Gothic tattoos and if you saw him in his work clothes you'd never know. Goth perfumiers, Goth candle makers, Goth artists...

[(Anonymous)]

No, goth fashion has been around for much longer than modern social media, and dismissing it as a lesser part of the subculture is elitist bullshit. Some folks like gothic literature, some like goth clothes, and they're just as goth as the music lovers.

[kamino_neko]

This. Like, if you're wearing band merch without liking the band, then I'd understand 'poser' (though still roll my eyes - sometimes merch has a great aesthetic, despite the band not clicking), but the fashion and the music, while sharing an origin, are not the same thing.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT
Wearing office clothes doesn't stop someone from being goth. But yes, if you wear the clothes but don't like the music, you are not goth. Metalheads who don't like metal are not metalheads. Easy as. If you wear the clothes, you're alt, sure. But not goth, by most standards.

Been in the subculture for years and years, and I'm tired of all the tiktok "goths", goodness. You can listen to other music and still be in the subculture, but you're not in the subculture if you don't listen to the music. Everything revolves around that.

[(Anonymous)]

I disagree

[(Anonymous)]

NA

I don't know, since Gothic Rock itself is inspired by gothic literature, I feel like there's another way into goth culture.

[meadowphoenix]

I can see the capitalist framing when corporations set genre definitions, sure. I think that's much less convincing when the genre conventions are set by the audience however, and it's general human nature to like closed groups. It may be taken advantage of capitalism, but it isn't sourced from it.

[(Anonymous)]

Goth music fans can be so fucking annoying about this sometimes. Like, goth fashion and goth music are clearly different things, you can be into one and not the other, it's fine, it literally does not matter.
I don't care enough about it to die on this hill but I still haven't seen any good arguments why a person can't call themself goth if they're a fan of goth stuff other than the music. The word has been around far longer than the music, and it still describes a lot of other things, aesthetics, literature, etc. Why should the music people get sole ownership.

[(Anonymous)]

Music fans can be the worst gatekeepers.

[(Anonymous)]

Agreed!

[tabaqui]

Unless someone is making your life miserable over being (or not being) a 'poser'....who cares? Like what you like, wear what you want. Fuck 'em.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm going to disagree, because I think most subcultures that use the word poser have valid arguments in that there are people interested in having the look of a lifestyle without actually living it or making any connection to it (honestly, Drake came to mind lol). Capitalism does market on these communities to people outside them though, no disagreement there.

I also think it's funny though how mad people get about being called posers when they admit they are only into the aesthetics of a group. Like bro, it's not that deep, just like your interest in the actual community.

[(Anonymous)]

But liking the aesthetics doesn’t make someone a poser as they’re actually into that part of it. If they said they were into it but deep down they only did it for outward validation or popularity then they would be a poser as they don’t actually like the thing in question. Genuinely liking a part of something means someone isn’t a poser.

[(Anonymous)]

Liking the aesthetics is fine, I'm saying if that's the only thing that makes a person "part" of the community (it doesn't), then that's posing. If youre in the community, you should be able to hold convos about it. If you're only in it for the clothes, what are you talking about exactly? Where you shopped, where you thrifted? That's so lame. Look at skaters, skate culture was huge even in mainstream in the 90s/2000s, and lots of people were wearing "skater" clothes. But if you can't name names, can't talk about technique, can't even skate, but you wear the clothes? Posing.

Capitalism makes money off the next cool thing and has people thinking that if they wear the clothes they can buy an in into the culture. That's not true. You can look the part but if you don't engage beyond that then the people in the community are going to know.

And it's cool if youre fine with that. Wear the clothes, it's your life, do what you want. Just don't get mad if you get called a poser, is what I'm saying.

OP

[(Anonymous)]

There’s a reason I picked goth instead of punk for this. Punks at least theoretically have a leftist political ideology (though I’ve heard The Ramones called conservative punks.) Goth ideology is more found in overlaps, e.g. a goth who also has an ideology of sexual freedom.)

Re: OP

[(Anonymous)]

Trying to pin a political ideology to the Ramones is... complicated. Johnny was a conservative, Joey was a liberal, Dee Dee (who wrote most of their songs) was fucking insane. So it's kind of hard to pin them down politically. You have songs with no discernible ideological point (the love songs/boredom songs), songs about Joey and Dee Dee's fucked up mental health, songs that use Nazi aesthetics but holy shit it's complicated (between Dee Dee's weird relationship with Nazism from growing up in West Germany and Joey and Tommy being Jewish, it's a whole can of worms), songs where Joey's trying desperately to bring politics into the band, and "53rd and 3rd".

In general, punk really got political in the second major wave - the first wave New York and London bands were all over the map, some had a genuine political angle, some kind of gestured in that direction, some were really into Nazi aesthetics in a way that wasn't as weird and complicated as the Ramones and therefore less understandable/somewhat forgivable. The second wave wound up very quickly centering around hardcore, which tended to be more political and, uh, reactionary - this is where you get both legitimately leftist bands like Minor Threat and Reagan Youth but also legitimate skinheads (as opposed to the "yeah we use Nazi aesthetics but we're actually fairly normal" of the first wave).

[(Anonymous)]

Liking both goth shit and Taylor Swift doesn't make someone a poser. However, I have seen a truly mind-boggling amount of swifties creatively redefining the concept of punk and insisting that Taylor Swift is punk, and throwing massive temper tantrums when anyone tries to explain how and why this is extremely incorrect/how and why it is also incorrect to claim to be punk on the grounds of liking Taylor Swift. I would absolutely call those folks posers, because not only do they not understand what the thing they're claiming for themselves even is, they've redefined it to specifically apply to something that is antithetical to its original definition in order to claim it for themselves without making the slightest effort to engage with the actual item.

[(Anonymous)]

The deliberate act of pushing back against what is societally expected of oneself is something that resonates heavily with a broad array of people, very much including women who present as mainstream and not overtly rebellious or countercultural.

It may not be punk, but I understand what people mean when they describe that kind of pushback as punk.

[(Anonymous)]

Man I'm so glad I never cared about labels. Got called goth all the time as a teen because I wore black and looked like a spooky kid, but was into every kid of music and still am. Probably did like goth music, but was definitely more into numetal/emo and j-pop at the time.
It does feel like the attitude around the goth label has changed over time maybe I was around more laid back people back in the day, but its seems a lot more strict and gatekeepy for whoever is a goth now than back then.

[(Anonymous)]

I used to have a similar attitude (not caring about labels). Oddly, I've started to care more the older I get, mostly because I'm conforming to age norms less than many of my middle aged peers.