Conformists -vs- Non-Conformists.

[Stavros]

Source: Thread on Peer Pressure and Conformity

I was reading a thread in one of my favorite Comic forums (8-bit Theatre) and it really got me thinking: Are the terms "conformist" and "non-conformist" really just abstract thoughts?

After thinking on the topic for a few minutes I thought I'd post my thoughts. I think conformity is a paradox. Conformity, in it's purely aesthetic form does exist. Look at buisness men (office workers) they wear suits, thus they conform. I think that conformity as a principle is flawed. When people try to rebel against "conformists" then aren't they conforming to rebel?

To sum my beliefs I'm going to quote a particularly well stated argument:

Quote by Archbio of NuklearPowerForums.

There is no such thing as conformity and non-conformity.

That is substantially different than:

There is no such thing as conformists and non-conformists.

I really don't see how the former statement can be argued seriously. The concepts of "conformity" and "non-conformity" don't imply in themselves any specific importance, interpretation or value to the concepts. But their existence is undeniable. As soon is a convention (be it vestimentary or otherwise), and someone either conforms to it or don't, creating an example of conformity or non-conformity.

As for the latter statement, that's more problematic. Yet, I think it's pretty obvious the concepts has a reality. That reality can be as flexible as the reality of resistant/collaborator in Vichy France, but it's there. Some people attribute to comforming to the most superficial conventions a specific value, and others feel the opposite way. These might be your conformists/non-conformists. It might also be that you can name conformist someone who adheres to conventions more often than not and who tend to let them win over their personal tastes. That would be a sliding scale. That you can't divide a population into two groups, with either side pure conformists and on the other pure non-conformists, doesn't mean that the concepts have no reality.

Less importance and value can be given to the label. As for the fact that no one should be stoned because of their choice of clothes, well, that's rather obvious on its own (same thing goes for "subjecting goths to ridicule", but that's a whole other problem in itself).

Now, I want your views on this subject.

[LaBlueGirl]

IMHO, it all boils down to the age old question: "What is "normal" "?

Society dictates what is "proper" behavior. Who dictates society? Governing bodies combined with the bahvior of the majority of the populace.
Any society has to agree (but don't always) on a standard set of rules/laws. The rest is dictated by the people.

Being a non-conformist is, in a way, conforming. But not to the "average Joe" type of societal values, modes of thinking, dressing, etc etc.
If we choose to go against the grain, we are as a group, conforming to non-conformity.

Again, IMHO, abberant or deviant behavior (and sometimes counter-culture but not sub-culture) constitutes non-conformity.

After all, even though one may reject mainstream society's dress code (for example), we still conform to the standard laws (like murder is illegal so we don't do it). We still know how to function in society, although we choose a different way of going about it.

With "deviant" behavior (serial killers, severe psychological illnesses), there is little hope for conformity. It is either by choice (counter-culture -think Neo-Nazi's perpetrating hate and/or violence) or by illness (a mentally ill person unable to function in society).

Just my .02 eurocents

[DNR]

Reality is also subjective, your perception is not the same as mine.
What is the standard to measure conformity? Who makes those standards, and are they applied strictly across the board?

Trying to fit in, or keep up with your community standards, is futile. A waste of time.

I am not denying that basic rulesets like "Thou shall not Murder" and "Don't fux other people over, les it be done unto you too" are important.

Stay focused on the big picture and just be yourself.
Unless you are a cannibal, rapist, identity thief - then stop it, be someone else.

Have a nice day*

*as defined in current standards of 'niceness'

DNR

[Necrix]

I pretty much think that it's inevitable to "conform" in one way or another.

There IS such a thing as a Conformist of non-conformity.

In the end..it's not best to make decisions on whether or not you're conforming..but wether or not your ultimate decision will be without regret.

[FrankB]

... There IS such a thing as a Conformist of non-conformity....

Indeed. One is always not conform to the norms of another or the others are rarely entirely conform to your norms.

But the "conformist/ism<->anti-conformists/ism" is a paradigm in disguise like saying :
"All numbers are either negative or positive".
It has never been proven to be correct or wrong but it was decided as an irrelevant statement by mathematicians and logicians like Godel.
After all, a positive number can be the result of an operation of two other numbers ;
-> something conform can be the result of an evolution between two ant-conformist movements : "a catholic homosexual Che Guevara eating at Mc Donald's reading the Financial Times whille booting a 'designed for Windows XP' computer in Linux with a Japanese fontset, dipping his French fries in a cup of mayonnaise that stands next to an ashtray where he just extuingished a joint with Morrocon pot, all that in a non-smoking zone".

Or something ant-conformically conform like that.

Be different !

--
FrankB.n00b(this,true)

[DNR]

Non-conformity can be measured because laws, rules, and regulations are clearly and legally defined. Non-conformity is also based on location (country), religion of self or where you live, and even your sex.

Things were said in this thread, all true:
"All numbers will either be negative or positive"
_For true geeks, the saying applies "All bits will either be on or off"_
The problem is society needs to categorize you as "on or off" because society is based on rules, laws, and regulations. It has trouble trying to define the grey areas

"Conformity is inevitable." In a way true, otherwise, the system will make you conform via prison and mental hospitals. In some countries, non-conformity means torture, rape, and undeserved execution on some back road. Today, children are given medications because their behavior is non-conforming to the parents needs.


Non-conformity is inevitable too, as long as intellects are learning freedom of thinking and speech, as well as compassion for his/her fellow creatures, there will always be an opposing thought or a new outside-of-the-box idea. As long as rules are broken by anyone, as long as people decide to place themselves above other people's right, health, or well-being, there will always be rebels. Rebels are people that are offended and are willing to make a stand for social justice. Rebels are vital to society, they keep the politicians and crooks in check. Try to steal an old lady's purse around me, you'll get your ass beat down - before the cops come and get'cha. Try to make a law that taxes my TV? I'll riot to wake up the people to vote. If that doesn't work, I'll at least promote an underground movement for freedom of TV..

The whole point is worrying about _what is conformity_, rather than the issue of _why_ there is non-conformity. As long as there is non-conformity, there is an injustice some where, a voice crying to be heard. Something is wrong, this ain't Eden....

Stand up

DNR

[d10b]

It's all a matter of perception.

Punk is just a trend now, everything is just a trend now... the mainstream sucks everything up, chews it up and spits it out!