Just because you support an idea that your state puts upon the table, doesn't mean that you support the way, the goals and the superordinate agenda that it wants to achieve through it.

You can't keep touring with the principles that have been set decades ago.
Even the far right recognized that, and even if it's only for cover. But success is on their side.
The left never reconsidered if that what they claim still is appropriate to the circumstances of their time. They still scream "refugees welcome" and "women don't have equal rights as men", without even noticing the situations from back then when those slogans were originally created are not present anymore.
Admittedly, some items on the agenda didn't change. The whole worker's rights movement, for example, still needs its support because the attitude of the masters didn't change, and still they try to undermine every kind of progress on the paper and carried out in practice.
The rights movement of those who are physically or psychically sick and therefore are not useful for society in the meaning of generation of profit also still needs to be kept up. It's a different matter if they get to decide if they voluntarily want to die, but where did you get back to if you didn't pledge they also got a right to live?
Sexual minorities movement also needs to be kept up where there appear major problems in practice - discrimination by the book.
But, things that would need a turn in the issues, are: Recognizing that women's rights finallly need the adjustments to equal rights where she could potentially be the one not in favor. Recognizing that mass movements from Africa and the Middle East can't just be normal refugee streams, especially if they got thousands of dollars to spend to get themselves smuggled over continents. Recognizing that rallies with colorful balloons, human chains, flash mobs, festivals and theater plays don't change anything in the minds of the powerful people.
And, especially, acepting that they need to also adjust their articles of faith if they don't want to disappear into obscurity or their disciples being corrupted all the time by market-compliant attitudes.

A vacant question is: How do youngsters that grow in time after your experiences started perceive the world? How do they think about things which you're aware of they've taken hold in your lifetime? How do they live with things which had already been there at the time of their birth?
What do they think about things which they get introduced to which are no deal anymore during the time they are already alive?
What crosses their minds if they're clueless about the development of things which another elder person beside them knows about?
What is the position like if you don't know about any of this? If you just happen to drop in in between somewhere at the timeline and the progress is unknown to you?
What does this ignorance look like from the inside and how much do actually they care?
Can they really imagine the world functioning without certain things they got to know, if they know about it they didn't exist in former times?
And - is it actually a bother to them to think this through?

...und ich bleibe fremd.
Ein Bekenntnis zur Andersartigkeit wie man sie in vielen Profilen, in Essays von 15-jährigen oder eben solchen in ihrem Kleidungsstil erkennbar sein soll, wird dies nicht, denn entweder ist man mit Bekenntnissen beschäftigt oder man ist bereits.
Wenn man genau hinsieht, entdeckt man sogar, dass so einige Leute aus diesem Hormon-überquellenden Alter erst sehr spät hinauswachsen. Manche schaffen es auch gar nicht oder haben einen beschwerlichen Weg vor sich.

Fremd zu sein heißt - sich vieler dieser Beweispflichten zu entledigen, oder sie sich gar nicht erst zu eigen zu machen.
Gepaart ist dies oftmals damit, nicht in einer Gruppe von Gleichaltrigen integriert zu sein. Es ist ein notwendiges Übel, denn in jeglichen Fällen führt erst das Buhlen mit Gleichaltrigen dazu, sich auf die Adoption von fremden Maßstäben einzulassen.
Die früheste offensichtliche Übernahme solcher Leitbilder dürfte sein, wenn für Pubertierende plötzlich Alkohol zu etwas interessantem wird und jeder in diesem Alter, eventuell mit Überschwang, nach Erfahrungen damit lechzt.
Nicht zu unterschätzen allerdings sind in diesem Kontext auch Subkulturen - denn genügend flüchten in sie, in der Illusion, so besonders freiheitlich und individuell zu sein. Aber KMFDM zu hören oder sich schwarze Kleidung anzuziehen bedeutet nicht automatisch, dass man individuell ist.
Auch sognannte "Gegenkulturen" haben ihre Regeln und Maßstäbe, mit welcher Einhaltung man sich in einem besseren oder einem schlechteren Licht darstellen kann bzw. mit deren Einlassen darauf man wahlweise in einer größeren oder einer kleineren Untergruppe der jeweiligen Szene landen kann.

Sobald man diesen Zwang, sich krampfhaft einer Gruppe zugehörig empfinden zu wollen, aufgibt, beginnt die Fremdheit. Allerdings beginnt mit ihr auch die viel besagte Individualität.
In der Regel nimmt dieses Verhalten ab, sobald ein menschlicher Körper die Wachstumsphase beendet.
Durch die moderne Impulsflut wird dieses Verhalten jedoch über Strecken teilweise noch über Jahrzehnte aufrecht erhalten, wenn auch in vergleichbar geringeren Dosen.
Manch einer verlernt dieses Verhalten sogar nie - in Form derjenigen, die mit 50 oder im klassischen Rentenalter meinen, sie müssten in der Kleingartenkolonie die beste Laube, den bestausehendsten Rasen und die regelkonformste Idylle in ihrer Nachbarschaft haben.
Dem entsprechend ist auch die Qualität der geistigen Arbeit, die die Menschen hinterlassen - von wertloser Erziehung bis hin zu oberflächlicher Kultur.
Es ist als würden halbe Teenager die Kontrolle über wichtige Positionen, Vorbildrollen oder den Nachlass dieser Generation für die nächste übernehmen. - Und Teenager sind nicht von Konstanz oder besonderer Konsequenz geprägt. Ebenso wenig von Identifikation ohne bestimmte Materialien als Erkennungszeichen.

---

Dieser Text wurde verfasst im Rahmen einer Blogparade auf landlebenblog.org unter dem Motto "Ich war fremd".
Kleine Inspirationshilfe dazu lieferte der Zeitgeist-Blog.

Does constantly being surrounded by talk about sex shape the mind towards thinking about it all the time?
The question arises at least since the decade since when it moved in into the daily boulevard and pure entertainment shows.
Everywhere you're surrounded at least by a pair of breasts - uncovering they're not supposed to do as it should be content appropriate for a child-friendly time, but for a proper dressing it would be said too much - or they unpack the joker of allround naked skin with the nessecary private parts covered so that nobody can call it "pornography".
And if not that, these parts of the media depicture all kinds of beauty contests that stupidity, crudity and normality have to offer.
Another thing if they don't do that, but they just downright talk about it.
The serious job takes advertising: Is there ever a perfume commercial without appealing to the most primitive instincts of humans?
Cosmetics destined for men also barely get along without the attract-a-lady card.

Before the sexual revolution came, people were ashamed to talk about this topic, even if they were troubled, it wasn't integrated into society as it is today - but what kind of development took it after it was?
Is there, frankly, a necessity to watch pornography to be sexualized? To think in these terms?
Taking a look at how much mass media surround you with that topic, how advertising keeps appealing to you on billboards with asses, chests and bodies, and how entertainment is diluted with messages on that level - look at how much music already is about undressing oneself and showing oneself in ridiculously revealing dresses, rather than the songs themselves -, it is more a miracle passing this topic without understanding or noticing.
In the 90s, as the hardest decade in all this, it was lived quite obvious, even in the pornographical character, sometimes it even appeared quite obviously in music. Compared to that, things have already gone square again.
But what made it out in difference was if you stayed away from pop music, if you ignored the rise of Techno and you put your distance between media contents that propagated sex, you could still find some corners that didn't deal with it where you could settle yourself down.
These days this isn't possible anymore.
Enterprises want to sell so that urge floods every movie and lets them become an unobvious advertsing for various brands. Each thing that reaches mass media is like a fashion show, obsessed with how people look like, how they should pack themselves to cause attraction, or at least how to encase themselves to feel well on their own.
Coming to the movies - do actually still a few be made suited for adults which don't contain a sex scene in some way?
Many conventional love stories do exist as well.
Especially those which come from overseas - which try to rattle at the door of the conventions of those peoples' culture superficially, but remain ineffective and that's what they wanted from the start.

One can form his own opinion if being surrounded by such media and cultural contents while people tend to spend a lot of time with it instead of maybe going out alters their thinking by the time passing.
What already lies beyond is the path that mankind has previously traveled - and one can regard it as a proof of what it effects.

Some time one should realize that things can also run without the established institutions. There is a world that existed before the IMF and there's going to be a world after the IMF.
One shouldn't plague himself by refusing to perceive that this is so.

You know about the disadvantages when being famous?
You can't go anywhere without someone molesting you, you can't behave stupid like all the other people without anybody reminding you about it the next day, you can't make a move without someone judging you and deciding a verdict, you always meet someone which giggles about you, about your past mistakes, you can never do a thing undisturbed unless behind closed doors, you don't get a rid of your past self if you want to change yourself, you never get left alone, you never live in safety, you never walk on anything else than a minefield. Your whole life circles around being stalked, serving as a personal entertainment and fearing not to be taken seriously. If not, at will, you also serve as an individual object for personal harm.

Civilization trains off your instincts - or is that a result of an education of fear?

Something that spreads remarkably among youngsters: The disease to mess with Godzilla even though you're only a dwarf.
It doesn't seem to come into their minds that someone is bigger and more powerful than them.
Literally, one is not even able to speak of "they refuse to take notice" because he can't tell for sure if that is the problem.
Sometimes it is like because someone is bigger than them, they start to mess with him. Like they're begging for somebody to show them their limits.
You can't tell for sure, if they do realize the difference in size and voluntarily decide to ignore it, or if they realize at all that there is an incline.

What kind of role models do young males have these days?
Okay, you can go with your father, you can go with your brother, you can go with any other male relative you're close to or that exists in your regular surroundings.
But what if none of that exists?
What, if none of that is good for anything, do you have to offer as a replacement?
For the youngsters, you may have a little yellow sponge, but be that TV show as stupid as it is. Aside from that, you barely have some catchy figures that reflect a character which gets stuck in your head.
For the elders, media offers a few superheroes, depending on where you live, and some wannabe figures and epilepsy causing action figures whose profile as a person is very flat or not acurately reflected due to them being actually suited for a more adult audience.
The almost matured do already have the musicians left, and some more or less flatened video game figures which do nothing more than shooting abstract figures and some humans.
The musicians partly can be used as a role model- strongly depending on who it is.
The wider the age turns up, the lesser you find some.
The last instance are some old-aged action heroes from the last century.
Apart from the numeral appearance, does that carry some variety?
If you look what had been done on the side for females, it is downright a shame.
Females can be the clever one, females can be the heroines, they can kick somebody's ass, they can kill people, they can be sensitive, they can be a mother, they can be a boss, they can earn money at all, or they can just be the princess in the pink fairy tale land.
In some rare occasions they're even allowed to be the antagonist.
What media offers as a role model for males simply can be reduced to the sharp shooter on his never-ending quest to destroy everything, being downright stupid all the time or playing the kong trying to impress the ladies and defending his territory.
Aside from that, the only thing you get offered otherwise is the softie that nobody likes. - Or, to be exact, that the females like, but his own members of the same sex detest because his touchy-feely kind gets him more female companion.
The media also continues to enhance those types.
Compared to the change that had been done to role models for females and the change still being done, it is an evidence of incapacity.
Especially because female role models become a topic over and over again, but male ones get completely locked out.
Like "males know how males behave from the moment they're born".
In regard to the fact that lesser and lesser boys grow up without their fathers (Gayropa ≠ gay: "If you ask why there are no men in the West or wannabe strongs, then ask why their dads were so proud of them that they needed to disappear"), more surrounded by female educational personnel and women in care positions, and lack of reasonable male figures in their close environment this issue becomes a serious problem.
Males become torn between trying to fulfill what society demands of them and their imagination of themselves.
They're missing a guideline how to please everyone else's needs while still maintaining their identity and their identity as a male.
Instead they get filled with clichés.
And the female educational and care personnel can't make up for that because women don't behave, women don't think and, above all, women don't feel like males.