Okay this is more of a question than an actual mind fuck, I'm just interested in the opinion of some other people on this. If you describe yourself as a 'true rebel' aren't you going against the principles that you're bragging about by conforming to a common definition of behavior? Isn't refusing to define yourself as such more rebellious in the true sense of the word? How far does it go? For example, if you were a 'complete rebel' wouldn't it be frowned upon to use normal sentences wouldn't be things mixed up sentences with words ironic insert subject matter here rebel ftw? When do you have to cross over for just a second to let the confused people in on what your doing? I'm confused. I've heard both 'true rebel' and 'complete rebel' used in casual conversation before in situations where one person is describing another. I just want to know if its worth my brain power or if I'm just making it more difficult than it is. Cookies!
Thank you; now I'm a true rebel, but I am for the system in the realm of ultimate people having ultimate good faith. I am a rebel against the people. But I have comfort that the tea party is disposed happily against the people. They think I believe that there must be a System for the People. Sure...
Semantics. Try to understand what people mean when they use those terms, which I'm sure you do already, rather than trying to define your own meaning. Obviously, a rebel can't rebel against everything. They can't eat through their nose and arse just for rebellion's sake. Are conformists rebelling against being rebellious? If they were, they would also be rebels, so the same ilk as the rebel that rebels against the rebels that rebel against rebellion. Really, there are no true rebels, just people who choose to behave in a different manner to the majority.
Rebellion is nonconformity on steroids. I can be a rebellious person but I'd stop short of labeling myself a rebel as it isn't my total identity. If there is something... a set of rules that I understand and agree with then I'm not going to rebel against it. To me, a complete rebel is that way for the sake of rebellion- even when clearly in the wrong.
I appreciate the input. You understand how a guy like me could get stoned and get himself into paradoxes like this. Half the time they aren't even a legitimate paradox, Its pure brain munch. I knew semantics came into play somewhere, but semantics is a fickle bitch as well. Thanks so much!
Once you're being rebelious for the sake of being rebelious, I just think it's just stupid. Labeling yourself as a rebel probably puts you in that catagory.
that all depends on your definition of the word rebel dose'nt it?real rebels are never rebelious just for the sake of it.they are only rebelious for a good cause. an people dont put themselves in a catagory themselves,it's society that does that.
In general, people that go around telling everyone how rebellious they are (I know a girl that does that) come off as trying way too hard to fit a stereotype.. Trying to fit a stereotype isn't very rebellious. Then again, "rebellious" is a pretty abstract idea, and this discussion is pretty stupid.
