|
I
learned early on that
most people would prefer
to be told what to do,
what to like, most of
all what to think. As
harsh as that sounds it
is for the most part
true. You yourself
probably, statistically,
fall into that category.
Don't take this as an
insult. We are talking
millions of years of
evolution at work here.
Stick with me and I may
be able to wipe a little
of the offence off.
In our, humans, earliest
days of development we
found ourselves woefully
under prepared for the
trials that lay in wait
for each mistake we
made. We had no armor of
any kind to protect
against cuts. Totally
inadequate fur to
protect from the
elements, we're talking
the days before fire
here. Long but sadly
unremarkable legs were
good for freeing the
hands but not well
adapted to speed and
rapidly loosing the
ability to adequately
climb. Our hands were
small and worse our
claws/fingernails were
no match against the
predators that saw us
simply as "food". Even
our brains were not yet
developed enough to
defend against all that
was seeking our demise.
Or at least an easy
meal.
Contrary to our desired
belief we were certainly
not "hunter gatherers".
Rather more likely we
were scavengers waiting
in the shadows for the
more powerful and better
adapted big cats and
wolves to have their
fill. Then to wait again
for the hyenas and
vultures, which we were
still no match for, to
finish. Only when the
choicest and then the
seconds were picked
through did we emerge
from the shadows to see
what was left to survive
on.
I wont argue the point.
Others have spent
lifetimes studding and
can come to no decided
answer on any of this. I
fall to my own sense of
logic. Believe me or
don't. I don't really
care. But for the moment
just accept. If you do
accept my premise then
the logical question
would have to be this.
"How the hell did we get
this far then?" Good
question.
The answer in short.
Groups. We stayed in
them Congregating in
groups allows safety in
numbers. Many eyes have
a better chance of
spotting the stalker and
alerting the others. The
larger group can defend
the weaker young from
predators and so on.
Many animals use this
tactic for survival
still today but then we
began to do something no
other animal ever had
before. Although many
insects do and they are
way better at it than
us. We specialized. Some
within the group began
searching out food
sources. Others stayed
and watched over the
young. Still others
would likely begin to
develop skills in simple
tool making. If you
proved to be good at
making clothing to
protect from the cold,
chipping stones for
tools making ropes
stripping every last bit
of food from the carcass
this would become your
"job".
This lifestyle has a
circular effect on our
development. First it
creates the need for
better cognitive skills.
The smartest become the
most necessary to the
group, thus the most
desirable mate, thus the
most likely to mate with
other smart ones and
produce even smarter
offspring. The offspring
becomes even better at
the job and even
smarter. The second is
"dependence". As a
specialist you are very
good at one thing but
not so good at others.
You may be a great rope
maker for snares, lines
and baskets. But lousy
at setting the trap or
finding the carcass to
drag home or collecting
only the editable
vegetation. You rely on
others to use what you
produce to get the food,
shelter clothing you
need to survive. And
they all rely on you for
the very same thing.
This reliance reinforces
the need for better and
better specialists and
vise versa.
Specialization combined
with intelligence then
creates a new dynamic.
The need to pass on our
skills to the next
generation. But how to
do that? By example is
ok if there is time and
the skill is not to
difficult. But language,
often in the forms of
ritual and song, is a
remarkable way to pass
on the skill and
knowledge quickly and
efficiently. So now your
group must develop and
share the same language.
There is one other
aspect to the "Group".
It's closed. At least to
some extent. Outsiders
are not to be trusted.
Anyone you don't know
could be trying to get
your food shelter,
weapons or worst of all
your specialists. Trade
was useful but only when
tempered with huge
amounts of caution.
History lesson over.
What does all this tell
us about ourselves today
and how does this
attempt to wash away the
stigma of being a
follower?
One, people are pack
animals. We tend towards
groups of like
individuals. We seek out
others like ourselves
who can each add an
important element to our
group dynamic.
Two, in that group we
must look to the others
already established in
the group to lead us in
the proper edict and
behaviors that define
that group.
Three, there are always
leaders within the
group. This is not to
say they are not
followers of the leaders
that came before only
that now they lead the
next generation.
Four, interaction
outside of the group is
necessary but only with
caution and only with
the established "safe"
groups.
Lets put this theory to
work on the high school
level.
All the cheerleaders
like to dance and dress
the same way. They are
good at the athletic
skills they have and use
them in a similar
manner. Some are better
at high jumps others the
splits. There will
likely be a leader head
cheerleader. She will
lead the others but
mostly by reinforcing
the rules, actions and
interactions that she
was taught by the former
leader. They will
interact with other
groups. The "jocks" are
ok because they are a
close relation.
"Preppies" can be
passable as friends but
not likely mates/dates
(though they will work
in a pinch on prom
night). "Geeks" are
taboo but can be
utilized if low grades
threaten to take you off
the squad. "Freaks" are
out of the question, at
least when others can
see. Occasionally a
cheerleader will venture
into the "Freak" world
but will never let the
rest of the pack know of
her indiscretions.
This is of course an
over generalization but
the theory is sound. If
you accept the
historical premise. This
dynamic can be stated
for all the groups
mentioned and many more
that have not been. So
to be called a follower
is to be called a
successful human. You
are one of the winners
of the genetic race.
Passing on your genes to
the next generation who
will in turn, likely,
fall into a group.
Feel better now? Good
lets move on.
As this is called "My
Life" what does all this
have to do with me?
As a teen I had quite a
few friends. Many in
different and often
conflicting circles. It
was/is my ability to
adjust and assimilate to
each social structure
that has been both a
blessing and a curse.
Most people I knew had a
group of friends they
would "Hang" with pretty
much most of the time.
This group often defined
and stereotyped them
into a certain social
role. You were a
"Preppy", or a "Rebel",
or a "Geek", or a
"Stoner" or a "Punk".
Universally you were
either "cool" or not. I
mention these categories
simply because I was all
of them. I could
assimilate into any of
these groups with little
or no effort. And best
of all I was neither
"Cool" or "Not".
I was as much a person
that was looked up to as
I was shunned. I lead
groups into one mess or
another then when I
tired of them or the
games we were playing I
moved on to the next
group. Oddly I never
seemed to make any
enemies. Or at least
very few. One would
think I would have but
in fact I remained good
friends with most of my
"X" girlfriends. The few
guy friends I had I kept
by never becoming a
threat to their group
dynamic. Much more on
the male threat level
later but for now lets
stick with the women.
I will admit there were
many. Too many really.
I'm not bragging it's
the truth and it was not
always a good thing. I
dated a lot of women and
even more often I had
sex with women I was not
dating. I had/have the
ability to be what the
person wants me to be.
This gives me an
advantage when dating by
putting the other person
at ease almost
immediately. I could
talk just about anyone I
wanted to into bed and
at the time I wanted to
with a lot.
I hurt many surly but
not as many as you might
think. By becoming what
the woman wanted I often
became a very nice
person and treated them
quite well. I often hear
from "X's" who say I was
the nicest boyfriend
they ever had. Sadly I
have been dumped too
many times for the exact
same reason.
I have never been able
to figure out the need
for abuse that so many
people display.
Especially women. Don't
go jumping down my
throat this is such a
true statement that
whole government
agencies and non-profit
organizations exist just
to address this problem.
"House of Ruth" is there
to help the women who
continuously get into
these destructive
relations over and over
again.
The "bad boy" being
attractive is as old as
time. The bad boy is
bad. He loves them and
leaves them. Hardly
giving them the time of
day. He treats them
rough and casts them
aside body bruised and
spirit broken. I don't
think I ever left anyone
that way. Though someone
out there may beg to
differ. I treated each
woman I have been with
like a Goddess even if
just for one night as
was often the case.
So many of them sought
me out in school even
when they had an
established "Boyfriend".
I was not of any group
so the rules never
applied to me. I wore
the leather of the "bad
boy" riding in on the
urban stead. I had the
brains of the "Geek" to
impress with knowledge.
The heart of the "Poet"
to blind the senses. As
a side note I still
write today but with
slightly more caution.
In my teens I would
crank out perfect
"Hallmark" poems by the
dozens and sell them the
poetically challenged to
give to their loved
ones. Once a loved one
figured out who really
wrote the words that
wooed her virginity from
her. She had her friends
critique my work on my
face.
This is another problem
of not having a group to
truly call your own. No
safety in "One". When
you're down you're down
alone. That's why the
few friends I could
truly count on I kept so
close.
But there in lays the
real problem. So many
friends but so little
connection to their
social group. Not being
a real part of their
group left me with a
feeling of being a
constant outsider.
Accepted but not
assimilated. And when
the chips were down for
me. They felt no
obligation to come to my
aid. Nor did I for the
most part.
There were a few groups
of people one could
argue I "lead". These
groups would often
follow with little or no
question into whatever
my whim dictated. But
when things began to
unravel or I tired of
the games I was always
free to disappear
leaving the leadership
to the next in line.
Even these groups had no
concern for me when the
chips were down but not
down in their personal
realm.
That is to say. If I was
not with them, leading
them, when the chips
fell then they would not
think to come to my aid.
Did I resent or blame
them? No. And well I
should not have for I
would not have come to
their aid either.
One could argue, given
my original premise,
that I am not a
successful human.
Unworthy of procreation.
This in fact may well be
true. There are those
who might say that
inventors, great
writers, artists and the
likes were like me,
thinkers outside of the
social group. I would
argue that they, for the
most part, followed in
the paths of those who
came before them.
Building and expanding
on the works of others
in their given group.
Besides. I have created
nothing great. At least
nothing I view as great.
Given this thought I
must say this. I have
chosen not to breed. To
the best of my knowledge
I have no children and
to the best of my
abilities to control I
will not have any. Maybe
I recognize my
inadequacies as a human
and choose not to pass
my genes on. Maybe I
just don't like kids.
Final thoughts. My group
is not nonexistent but
it is fairly limited and
very personal. I hold no
influence on their
future nor they on mine.
I neither lead them nor
follow. Through careful
selection or random
happenstance I have
managed over the years
to find a select group
of non-group people to
call my friends. They
are all very different
people that share a
desire not to answer to
anyone's group. Not even
our own.
Thank you,
From just another
American
~Kid Kaos
|
