got it

"like that"

again

subjective

that's not a proper classification

I’m not sure it’s possible to classify those people.

exactly

subjective? we're talking about seeminly well adjusted people that suddenly turned into near-skinheads, with metal shoved through every orifice and claim they're a Quad-gendered octopus

are we digging into lives the people of the article specifically or people you would subjectively put into the same boat of crazies

in which case

elaborate it

you know, the new "right wing boogeyman"

or else your opinions (on that group) are useless

@ping your arbitrary "comment guidelines" are useless

so the point of this is that you're confused because i made a statement about a clearly depicted group of people, mentioned them and explained how they are generaly resembled

and you find that too broad, and therefore its a strawman

no, the "those people have no structure and control over life, have no meaning to their existance, and have no personality, so they define themselves by some pre-writen identity"
and "nah its just attention seeking, these are people who hate themselves for not being unique enough, so they just go with whats considered awful and rebelious"
is the strawman

they are 😮

having your opinion on a group is fine

but it doesn't make any sense if the group is loosely defined

so you're saying that "rebelious youth" are not defined just that way?

there i branded it for you

Rebelious Youth
Sponteneous Young Freaks
Attention Seekers
Misguided Children

lul you just pulled a cathy newman

lmao, he did not

you said the group i defined, was loosely defined

I wish gifs were postable in this one, popcorn.gif

so, rebelious youth

They are trying to be unique by acting the way they do so expecting us to define them as something specific is near impossible. Most we can do is group them by the tendencies most of them have.

Younglings that act like stereotypes

i don't think having a rebellious personality means they have no personality and define themselves by a pre-written identity

unless thats not what you said

except thats how you worded it

i didn't say they have a rebellious personality

i said they define themselves by the current status of "rebel" which in the normie society is a freak with pink-hair and metal all over cuz thats the most common opposite of a normal man/woman in a suit, proper natural hair and a clean face

it's a paradox in that, by acting as such they are defining a "new wave" of beauty where colloquially-defined beauty itself doesnt matter, and then go on to post glamorous pics of themselves thinking they are the new colloquially defined beauty?

which is because they want to belong somewhere, but don't feel like they have enough individuality, so they just join a "brand identity" because then they are part of something

I’m not sure it’s possible to explain using logic.

@Dr.Wol so you are switching from the common notion of "Rebelious Youth" to people that identify as a rebel?

no

i'm saying that in order to have something they can proclaim themselves as, they go with what current society brands rebellious

they don't have a personality thats rebellious

if any of them didnt have some form of cognitive dissonance, there wouldnt be glamor shots of them

it seems to me