punk

The wide-spread basic understanding/definition of “punk” includes a basic wanting to be different, is who is different. A “real punk” will never stereotype themselves. To put this in perspective, have you ever heard a cheerleader say “Oh my god, I’m SO prep, that girl over there dressed in all pink is SUCH a wannabe poser.” … I doubt it…if you have, I pity you…greatly….for even knowing OF such a person. When someone’s says “Oh my god, look at that POSER!!!!” Does that honestly make them “punk” and therefore “cool?” The name also came from punk rock. A form of hard-driving rock 'n' roll originating in the 1970s, characterized by harsh lyrics attacking conventional society and popular culture, and often expressing alienation and anger. Rock music with deliberately offensive lyrics expressing anger and social alienation; in part a reaction against progressive rock. (there are other definitions of this on this site way better than this one) This is what started the whole thing. But punk rock goes AGAINST stereotyping, (that would be the conventional society and popular culture) and calling oneself “punk” is just that. There are “real punks” and posers. They ARE two separate categories. The above just proves that there are a LOT more posers then there appear to be. First of all: “real punks” “Real punks” are technically punk rockers. A performer or follower of punk rock music. However, in today’s hypo-heterogeneous music gene pool, there is hardly any real punk music, as a definition. It’s always “punk rock,” “punk pop” whatever. They all count. Punk (as defined above) is a type of music defined by LYRICS and ATTITUDE. This means that punk rockers are listeners of punk music, with punk music categorized by the message the band is sending. This is how we get posers. “Punks” tend to dress a little crazy (crazy to “normal” people, the rest just think blue hair is cool) but it never really became a “fashion” until certain celebrities started calling it that. (Avril, Hilary) Yes. Sadly, all those old school, before it became popular, punks were screwed over by, you guessing it, POPULAR CULTURE. Suddenly it became “cool” to be “punk.” To dress different, and do crazy things with ones hair and makeup. This is not to say that everyone who does this, even younger people (and by younger I’m referring to people who couldn’t possibly have been punk rockers before, as in they weren’t born in the 1970’s,) are posers. You are a punk rocker if you listen to punk music. It doesn’t matter what you dress like. How you DRESS has NOTHING to do with being punk. It means that either A) you honestly like the clothing style that has been termed “punk” and you wear it because of that or B) You’re a POSER trying to be cool and you think your clothes will do that for you and you’re no better than preps who obsess with clothes to become popular and think that other people’s clothing defines them just like it will define you as “punk” and “cool.” Punks by definition, both above and social don’t WANT to be cool. They want to be themselves and rebel against anything they feel is suppressing them. Posers are much easier to define them punks. Posers are people who pretend to be “punk” because they think it’ll make them “cool” What I really want people to see is that by calling yourself a “punk” how much of a loser that makes you look. Claiming to be “punk” and calling other people “posers” does NOT mean you are a poser, I never said that, but if you think that it makes you “cool” to be “punk” and call other people “posers”, then you are. Realize that punk is NOT A FASHION STYLE, AND CLOTHING MEANS NOTHING WHAT-SO-EVER. Anyone who basis any judgment what someone is wearing and labels them from that is either a poser themselves or just a fucking rude and ignorant person. The determination of punk vs. poser is not in CLOTHES or anything like that, but someone’s TRUE music preference and mindset regarding society and life.