who call them selfs hippies

Not really. Heywood had raised the question of 'credentials' in an earlier post to me. It seemed that he was basing his opinion of my credibility on whether or not I was a noteworthy individual during the 60's. In responding to Heywood, under those circumstances, it seems perfectly reasonable to present credentials for the purpose of establishing credibility.

I don't see any reason to assign a negative motive to it.

 

Facts are not showing off. I wanted to let Haywood know I have knowledge of music history. I don't need to brag. Ya wanna come to my house and see my diplomas? I do take pride in my education and accomplishments.

Pissing match? Seems you're the only one interested in that. Good grief.

As far as your disagreeing with my take on rock. I stand my ground. Jerry Lee Lewis, like Elvis, were Rockabilly based not pure rock. Little Richard and his ilk were more blues and R&B based. Again, not pure rock. Holly (and the Crickets...Senor purist) was pure rock. Bill Haley based his music more on Swing with a rock backbeat.

Just because a song is titled "Rock Around the Clock" doesn't necessarily make it rock.

Quite correct, my friend. I think Mr. Duck needs to notice that, too. LOL!

I would most definitely say I'm a purist when it comes to rock. My bad, perhaps.

And a bit off topic....Did you know the Beatles helped this nation when we needed it most. Any of you youngsters know why? (All those who were alive when it happened should disqualify themselves...you probably know what I'm getting at)

Think children...

Zen

 

Who are the "wannabe" hippies, the ones younger than 55?
Does being born 40 years late make them ineligible to have the same values?
The Free Masons have been around for centuries and we still have them today. Why can't there be new hippies, too?

I don't hate anyone here. I dislike what some people have to say, but I can't really claim to hate anyone. I don't really know anyone here well enough to hate them.

And how do you know that these "wannabe" hippies don't shower?

And how do you know that no one considers them hippies?

What you mean is, you hate them and you don't think they shower and you don't consider them hippies, but you're a far cry from everyone.

I can't really speak to the hippie hatred of the '90s and punk scene, because I didn't hang with that crowd, nor was I subject to any specific hatred, having shed my hippie ID long ago. I see, here on the forums, a significant percentage of people who were not alive when the hippies were common, who have some very negative things to say about them.

Perhaps they've always been there, but my outward appearance has spared me any of the exposure. Here in the ether, we all look the same.

 

By arguing?
I think we have different definitions of pissing match.

What exactly is rock to you then?

The ones that dread their hair and wear hemp and don't shower, yet hang outside of Starbucks and Crazy Mocha all the time, even though there is a family run coffee shop right in between those two shops. Carry around acoustic guitars even though they don't play, get into fights with people, etc. etc. etc.

I never said shit about their age.
If you ask me, most all hippies are wannabes.

Because I smell them...

Because I live here and no one does..

Well, I'm glad you finally found it, because you are really fucking narrow minded. Expand your mind

 

Everyone who follows a trend is a poser. You think it just naturally occurs to huge numbers of people at the same time to dress the same, act the same and listen to the same music? Of course not. It's a crowd like any other crowd. Maybe it's a crowd you like, but don't try to deny it. Wearing tie-dye and smoking pot are what defines a hippie in the mainstream. Yes, you can argue that it's a certain mindset, but if we're talking about the hippies in the 60s we're talking mostly about a bunch of stoners who all dressed the same and acted the same, who thought it was cool to say 'fuck the establishment' without ever doing anything constructive. That's a trend, and a pretty lame one at that.

 

All you're really saying is that they don't fit your definition of what a hippie should be. Who are you, who get's to decide what a hippie should be or how they should act or where they should hang out?

What you smelled was a few individuals. What you did with the information is extrapolate to include all individuals. Your perception does not equate to reality.

What you know is that some people don't. What you did with the information is extrapolate it to include all people. Your perception does not equate to reality.

Really? Are you kidding?
You're the one putting all the limitations and restrictions on who can and can't be a real hippie, and I'm the one who is narrow minded?

You've got yourself into this restrictive and confining little box of beliefs and now you're stuck with 'em.
It's almost like boiling a frog - you aren't even aware of it.

 

There's not much point in the word 'hippie' existing if you refuse to allow it to be defined. There is a common idea of what a hippie is; if you're defining the term differently, state your definition. But don't try to hamstring the discussion by insisting that the terms in use can't be defined. That's just stupid. You can't even discuss a word if it doesn't mean anything.

 

Oh for god's sake, is there no end of the haters?

Yeah, you know a lot about it. You've completely changed my mind, Zorba.

I don't deny that the word hippie has a definition, I just reject *your* definition.

From Answer dot com:
"A person who opposes and rejects many of the conventional standards and customs of society, especially one who advocates extreme liberalism in sociopolitical attitudes and lifestyles."

From thefreedictionary dot com:
"A person who opposes and rejects many of the conventional standards and customs of society, especially one who advocates extreme liberalism in sociopolitical attitudes and lifestyles."

from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hippie
"a person, esp. of the late 1960s, who rejected established institutions and values and sought spontaneity, direct personal relations expressing love, and expanded consciousness, often expressed externally in the wearing of casual, folksy clothing and of beads, headbands, used garments, etc."

From http://www.yourdictionary.com/hippie
"1. any of the young people of the 1960s and 1970s who, in their alienation from conventional society, turned variously to mysticism, psychedelic drugs, communal living, etc.
2. any person having a similar lifestyle"

According to you, anyone who joins up with anyone else to express a solidarity of ideas, values, and expression is a poser. That makes EVERYONE a poser. If everyone is a poser, what difference does it make?

Learn some basic logic, please.

 

Could be. Why don't we drop it then? Apologies if I offended.

Funny you should ask that. I had to write a dissertation on that very question.
My answer to you is the same one i gave my professor. (without all the wordy bs) One band sums it up to a tee...The Who
I got a very good grade on that one.

Don't tell me you're one of those "cleanliness is next to godliness" folks.
Have you ever been outside the American/Canadian Empire?
Why does the smell of human bother you? I much prefer (excepting serious stink) human scent to perfumes, deodorants and such. My wife and I shower (Navy showers-5 minutes...save our precious resources) but use no add-ons. I especially love the scent of natural women. The pheromones drive me crazy!

That makes no sense.

Zen

 

who call them selfs hippies?? hmmmmmmm.....ME!!

 

WOW - you must have a lot of properly shaved pubes to assume that I know little or nothing about what I'm talking about.

Try to mellow out and to learn how to spell "their" the right way.

 

If you lived in the "establishment" before that time as we did you would know that just saying fuck it was constructive.

 

You may be confusing a trend with a movement. Disco was a trend. Hippiedom was a movement.
As I recall I've never heard of the "Hippie Trend" but "Hippie Movement" I have.

Having been there I can tell you you're quite incorrect. Some wore tie-dye, some leathers, others wore Army surplus and others anything that would fit from thrift stores or free boxes. Act the same? that's pure silliness. Listen to the same music? Nope! wrong again. My friends back then were into rock mostly but also Folk, Jazz, Classical...whatever made them groove.
While I liked rock I was also on the Board of The Phila. Folk Song Society and the Phila. Orchestra Society.
Pigeon holing an entire movement defies logic.

C'mon, man. How can you make a statement like that when you weren't there?
It WAS cool to say "fuck the Establishment" and you're so wrong thinking we did nothing. Protesting the war (and getting tear gassed and beaten in the process) was nothing? The first Earth Day was nothing? Changing the face of music was nothing? Furthur and the Pranksters were nothing? Helping end segregation was nothing? Helping start equal rights for women and homosexuals was nothing.

Young man, surely you jest!

Zen

 

Well said zencoyote,and perfectly put across!....You tell um!

 

I want to address just one of the PREJUDICES that ppl seem to have against Hippies. The myth that they never bathe. Now granted, I haven't lived with all the free thinkers of the counter-culture, but the ones I did live with bathed regularly - it wasn't one of the majority culture habits that we rebelled against.

However, what many of us did rebel against was trying to abolish our natural scent as a species, a scent that nature had intended as a sexual attractant. In other words, many of us did forego the use of underarm deodorant and smelled like much of the world outside of North America. This odor is associated with poor hygiene in our mainstream culture but occured on quite clean bodies. It goes with sexual maturity, just as hair in womens pits, which you also encountered in the counter-culture.

Zen says exactly my point:

My wife even into the '90s knew to forego deodorant if she wanted a sniffing, licking, nipping out-of-control fuck. It is also a common practice with many gay men and here is an article to that effect:

http://www.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=135122


This prejudiced assumption of unbathed Hippies was around in 1970 when I was arrested in San Francisco on "suspicion." During booking I stripped down and when told to lift my feet the pig saw that they were black with the grime of wearing sandals on dirty city streets. He took it on himself to tell me to take a bath. I had bathed just the night before but that pig did not consider that I would be clean except for my grimy soles and went away confirmed in his mind that he had encountered another dirty Hippie.

This has nothing to do with the Hippie discussion but has to do with someone not researching the subject they comment on.

Bathing regularly is a fairly modern North American phenomenon from around the mid 20th Century. Up to that time the Saturday Night Bath was the norm, if done that often. People really smelled like people back then as deodorants didn't come into use until the 1890's. The French were notorious, even in the 20th Century for foregoing bathing, changing underwear every day and using deodorant. My kinda ppl.

 

No, people who all act the same as an end in itself are posers. That's what modern 'hippies' are, and I suspect there were a lot of people like that in the original movement as well. All you guys were a part of it, so of course you think it was great. There are people from that time who would disagree, as I do. The fact that I wasn't there doesn't mean as much as you make it out to. I'd like to think I have enough knowledge of the human condition to transcend forty years or so.

I think that perhaps you are.

You're right. Of course everyone didn't dress/act exactly the same. But you have to admit there was a lot of commonality.

Protesting the war and fighting for black/gay/women's rights was certainly worthwhile. I don't really consider the civil and women's rights movements as part and parcel of the 'hippie' period. The major battles in those areas were fought in the early sixties and before. So the hippies protested the war, sure. Lots of people did, and didn't make the movement look quite so retarded. You think anyone gives a shit what a bunch of stoned kids running around with no shirts on think? No: they just look crazy. There's a happy medium somewhere between being 'square' and going insane. If anything came close to meeting it, I'd say the beat movement was it; in my opinion the hippie movement ruined the beat movement. Smoking a little pot is different than going crazy on acid and acting like a retard.

In future I'd appreciate a little less condescension too.

 

Anyone who uses disparaging insults in describing ppl with developmental disabilities deserves all the condescension and admonishment that more sensitive ppl can give them.

You see nothing harmful in using "retard" as a derogation? Maybe you should drop a little acid and see how our mentally retarded brothers and sisters have their place in our world and deserve respect like everyone else.

Oh, sorry for being so condescending, brash boy.

 

I see nothing harmful in using 'retard' as a derogation, as modern society already considers it one. I think you're just deflecting attention from the immediate discussion here. You know I'm not insulting people with developmental disabilities, so fuck off.

 

Just for fun,,,, does anyone know what a revlon hippie is?????
Noone I know was, but I have met a few over the yr's! Giggle,
Lovins folks,,, you tell em Zen!!!

 

So, you believe that the modern hippies are just paying lip service to the hippie values? You think they're trying to fool everyone, because it's just so gosh darned fun and popular to be a hippie that, even though they're not, they want to appear as though they are?

You know, at least they have the ability to come together under a common banner. Radically and proudly unique people like yourself would not be able to hook up with someone else for fear of losing your fiercely guarded individuality. I wonder how you'll ever make a movement out of that...
Oh yeah, movements are for posers. I forgot.

Arrogance begets condescension. BE the kind of person you want others to be.

You seem like a pretty intelligent kid, for 18 years old. It's a shame that you let the arrogance and cynicism drag you down.