Talk:Emo (slang)/Archive4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Protection Banner 2 better picture 3 Citicism 4 A new approach? 5 Response to first comment 6 Two separate sections? 7 Emo song. 8 Why is this page protected? 9 Merge this page with main Emo article 10 References 11 Comment 12 "Emo" = Undefinable 13 The Typical Emo College Student? 14 Article completely rewritten. 15 slight edit to fashion section? 16 Emo is a steriotype 17 emo is emo 18 RCB 19 Emos and Self-Harming 20 Emo poetry 21 YouTube video 22 Self-harm and emo 23 Emo Female? 24 Merge from Emo poetry 25 Subject change 26 Protected? 27 Splitting the personality section

[edit] Protection Banner

This page is protected, but has no protection banner. That's confusing and not OK. Clearly protection is necessary to avoid unending revert wars from an unending parade of oppinionated teenagers, but c'mon, let's put the banner back.

There is a lock image in the top-right corner. ~ Switch (✉✍☺) 01:42, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] better picture

yooh put ur right leg in yooh put ur right leg out yooh put ur right leg in && yooh shake it all about yooh do the hokie pokie && yooh turn ur self about && thats wat its all about!!!!! i lurve cathy!!!!!

Go ahead and upload it. If it is agreed to be accurate, and it is of good quality, nobody will delete it. Don't delete the other photo, because I disagree with you about it being inaccurate, and nobody has expressed that they believe it is inaccurate before. Just add yours as photo #4, or photo #2 if you prefer it to be next to the other. Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contribs) (Gallery)} 01:13, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, if possible, could we get a long shot of you, clothes and all? We need pictures of emo fashion in general, not just the hair. That would be great. ~Switch ^t 08:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citicism

We need a citicism section —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.45.195.190 (talk) 17:01, 21 January 2007 (UTC). emo boy&girl with a bit too much make up but still ok i guess... [img]http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/7227/img2865ci8.jpg[/img] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.155.199.130 (talk • contribs)

[edit] A new approach?

I think it's been clearly established that emo is one of the most ambiguous labels we've come up with in the world. Our current attempts to get a good definition of it aren't going real well. I suggest we take what we have done in the article, and merge relevant information into other articles (such as editing the Goth article to include any relevant emo information). I believe this label is currently beyond the scope of an encyclopedia in its current state, and we should wait unil our culture can create a more unifying idea of what emo truly us. Thoughts? Nodnarb232001 19:49, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't really care about what happens to the article at the moment (when I get the chance, I'll go through it and post my thoughts afterwards). What I really want to talk about is the talk page. Before I archived it, it was almost 80 kilobytes long and the only reason it was that big is because people keep posting all of this useless crap that doesn't do anything for the article or Wikipedia itself. If it weren't for that, the talk page would probably be half as long and we wouldn't have to archived it (although when editing the page, it would have said something about how long it is and tell you to archive it). So unless you have something to say that could benefit the article, like what Nodnarb232001 wrote, please don't post anything at all. // Sasuke-kun27 20:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

As a "user", I was after info to help understand what my teenage son was on about. Currently the article does not quite match what I've been hearing here (in New Zealand). Could that be because, as a youth culture label, the term 'emo' is constantly changing or evolving? I'm not suggesting the current article is wrong, just not complete or up to date, or there are regional differences. I've also been told that the evolution of Emo has some connection to MySpace (As a means of sharing the look?). Any thoughts of these ideas? --Alisterb 01:59, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Simply because our world culture has yet to specifically define the term doesn't mean it is invalid and should be merged. For example, the United States population is having a major conflict just defining the "war in Iraq". The term is definitely legitimate slang for a cultural subgroup (at least in my part of the United States). It may be used differently in different areas but in my location I could easily define "emo". It may not be uniformly used across the world but certainly in certain regions it has a clearer definition. In any case, I don't think the term should be removed/merged. 67.21.19.23 16:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, this article sucks. No, emo has nothing to do with goth. Part of the problem is you're trying define "emo" the word, not the "emo" scene/subculture/whatever. Cedars 20:40, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

^Exactly, emo has nothing at all to do with goth, gothic subculture, music or anything. - Deathrocker 00:46, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I always thouygh emo kids cutt them selves "Emo" simply has too many accepted/disputed uses and definitions. (e.g., Where I come from, "emo" is only a noun when talking about a genre--not a person. "Emos vs. goths" would be grammatically incorrect.) I used to be emo about four years ago, and what I was told set me apart as emo was the fact that I didn't acknowledge being emo. It wasn't about self-pity but about being a romantic as well as finding others superior to myself. I was horrified when magazines began telling people "how to be emo" and Dashboard Confessional became the poster children for what was accepted as "emo." Emo was not about popular images or popular music, and that is what it has become--a popular image with connotations of unpopularity. However, for people like me, that view of "emo" is incorrect in our minds. We should recognize how many views of this term exist and accept them all as true in different contexts. AngelProjekt 05:53, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

"emo" is a neologism that isn't set in stone for any part of speech. The word is not academic, nor foreign-derived, so it doesn't make any sense to speak definitively about its correct usage. For all your clear personal experiences, you are just entering into speculation. The article has been for a long time searching vainly for credible sources, while posters mostly have been concerned about what they think, without any uncertainty, is the correct definition. We are not getting anywhere. Rintrah 07:15, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

As I have heard it used "emo" is a noun; a person who is unreasonable depressed and gives no further reason as to why he/she is depressed than "their's so much pain and suffering in the world." The small clique that I have become friendly with views "emo" as a cancer, people who hang-out with other emos eventually become emo themselves'. I have, actually, observed these particular kids, who are labeled as "emo", seeming somewhat gloom and rather sad. Slang words and subculture or rock culture words aren't the easiest to define; they really can only be descriptive definitions. User:Randy6767 05:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Currently, the article seems to say being an Emo means mainly having hair on one eye? on ANY forum when talking about emos, its clear that emo is synonymous to "suicidal youth who believes him/herself to be misunderstood by society", their haircut, dressing and even music is of secondary importance(thats only in public mind, but, considering Emo is only general public term, public image is true image). btw you got some vandalism here - see references.

[edit] Response to first comment

This article is in serious need of a professional's view, objectivity and study. Has anyone thought of turning to the marketing and psychology journals for this? It seems like a pretty basic step, and the information is out there in the internet and at the library. If these emo kids really are living comfortable lives, then it stands to reason they represent a fairly large consumer base. I found one article that actually had a serious attempt at objective research. You can find it at http://wber.monroe.edu/EmoECYC.pdf The sources at the end would probably be worth investigating.

Dont Merge in with Goth, Goth is NOT emo

71.98.16.172 00:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

How so? The similarities between Goth and Emo are numerous and uncanny. Nodnarb232001 09:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Goth and emo have almost nothing to do with each other. The only vague connections I can pull up are that both are derived from punk and both have an image in the mainstream of being depressed, self-harming and/or suicidal. Even then, goths (tend to) play down that aspect, whereas emos will play it up. A brief mention that some trends previously assoicated with "goth" are now associated with "emo" is fine, but nothing more. -Switch ^t 06:41, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

They play it down? I always thought wearing black leather, fishnet stockings, Marilyn Manson T-shirts, piercings, corpse make-up, and excessive mascara made it more obvious. Emos are moderately dressed in comparison. Rintrah 14:51, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't know any goths who own Marilyn Manson shirts. Maybe it was a typo and you meant to type Bauhaus or The Sisters of Mercy? ;) In any case, I shall clarify: Emo kids play to the media image of them as depressed, suicidal, self-harming. They act the part, complain about how hard their white male middle-class suburban life is, even pretend to be depressed when they aren't. Goths don't actually assoicate themselves with that kind of thing, it is a stereotype applied to them by mainstream media; in fact, in my experience, goths tend to resent that stereotype, and they try to distance themselves from it. -15:21, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I admit my knowledge of gothdom is poor, but I am sure I have seen many in Manson T-shirts; however, I have seen very few Bauhaus or The Sisters of Mercy ones. Have you ever been to Flinders Street Station in Melbourne? Goths are conspicuous there, and their dissociation from everyone else is presented starkly. It seems a poor strategy to stand out with a peculiar dress sense indicating alienation and depression, yet resent the negative media attribution. There might be a whole underworld of a gothic subculture unknown to me, but to my knowledge, in my city, Melbourne, the goths at Flinders street typify the subculture. All the goths I have known, which I admit are few, have expressed the desire to make their differences known. But I agree with you, goths seem less like crybabies than emos. Rintrah 15:49, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a terminology thing; I know a few "real" goths and my mother knew quite a few first-generation goths, so and I would consider the the kids you're talking about (I have seen them - I catch the train to Uni at RMIT every day) part of a generic "we're so different and rebellious" subculture that exists all over. You might, for example, notice a lot of baseball caps, hoodies and baggy pants (gangsta culture) or similar parts of heavy metal fashion as well as the goth fashion, and most of them will listen to metal more than gothic rock. I don't think Manson has anything to do with goth, personally.

(I know very little about this either.) Manson's music is in the Industrial genre, which is either not "goth" or on the fringes of it, depending on how one looks at it. His most fervent supporters are goths or people who are called goths by outsiders. Of the Flinders Street crowd, a large part are ostensibly goth — faces painted white, black clothes, and other recognisable parapharnalia — but among them are people who style themselves as punks, hoodies, and metalheads. They are really a heterogenous crowd who only have their loser, psuedo-rebellion status in common. All my contacts have told me goths meet at Flinders Street because of Smoke Dreams, some tradition dating back to some time I have forgotten, and the gothic clubs in proximity to the station. There might be differences to "real" goths—this I have no idea about. As far as I know, because the goth scene is small in Melbourne, there is also a mix of "subcultures" at goth clubs. Although the Flinders Street goths annoy me, emos seem to be the growing vermin, the one I should worry most about. Rintrah 13:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

We're getting off-topic here, but I'll just follow up the question of music - Manson is industrial metal, which, at different times, may be very similar to "classic" industrial music, which was more of a post-punk thing, or very different indeed. For example, Ministry were an industrial band who started, after a while, to incorporate heavy guitars into their music; on the other hand, Fear Factory were a death metal band who after a while incorporated parts of industrial into their style, along with dance and other electronic genres. It's largely a POV thing, yes. Between how industrial Manson is, and how goth industrial is, and what exactly constitutes goth... you can get a lot of confusion. -Switch ^t 15:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

ok, the whole 'Goth v. Emo' thing; When I think of Goth, I think of a subculture that dresses in more lacy, almost medevil inspired dark clothing, they listen to bands like Bauhaus, or Skinny Puppy, even the Damned and the like. Goth was more popular in the '80s and '90s. The attitudes were more of a melancoly, longing sort of emotional, S&M sexual sort of thing. When I think of EMO, I think of a subculture that dresses in a sort of punk-goth hybrid, the hair dye, the little black outfits with splashes of strange colors, the wrist bands, the pins on the jackets and bags. All of these are expressed either in Goth and punk. They listen to bands like My Chemical Romance and Dashboard Confessional, which IMO is a bit of a cry from the punk and goth music of The Damned (goth)or The Minutemen or even the Ramones (punk).People of the EMO culture that I've had dealings with, seem to almost feel 'oh woe is me' martyr, nobody understands me sort of thing. Goth was a bit more 'the world is a terrible place' almost existential sort of thing. Comparing the music of goth and punk is Similar to the comparison of 'new punk' to 'old schoolpunk', which would be like comparing Green Day to Fuguzi. Again, just watered down versions of the original. My point of reference comes from living in NYC but then again, it could be different regionally.

...but emo is the new goth; the new "in" counterculture of today's mid-school to college youth. Despite emo being almost totally different from goth, the mainstream culture's reaction is as it has been to teenage culture through the generations. "Oh no, that Elvis - that John Lennon - that Ozzy - that Kurt Cobain - that Marilyn Manson - will corrupt our youth and shake the very foundations of civilization!" This is the turnover; this is the new era. Soon the advertisers will focus on the emo as they focused on the goth. Before you know it, there'll be a major character in a mainstream television drama that dresses emo, sounds emo, but otherwise is just there to reassure the parental generation that their kids are okay. This is the way of the world. --BlueNight 21:51, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

That is a just a little speculative. You are also generalising; Elvis and John Lennon, and even Kurt Cobain, did not cause the same reactions as Marilyn Manson. Although emos and goths have a lot in common, they are different. Perhaps what you are saying is emo represents many of the things goth used to more prominently, and that those who might have become goths in a different era are more likely to turn emo. In any case, neither goth nor emo was an "in" counterculture. Emo is also less likely to be featured in mainstream media because it is less of a rebellion. Rintrah 13:51, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure Elvis did, though I wasn't around. Regardless, though there have been people like that in every generation (Jim Morrison, Sid Vicious, Eminem for example). However, there are a lot of negative connotations to the term "emo", and no one is exactly sure what it means, so I don't really know where it's going to go. In any case, I agree with Rintrah for the most part. -Switch ^t 10:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Two separate sections?

Maybe the page should be split or re-written as two pages: Emo(slang) and Emo(sterotype)
I'd be willing to do it
(with some help of course) any thoughts? Kirbyrocks 22:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

This Page needs to be deleted, emos do not exist according to themselves, they just want to go die so why should they have a page? it makes no sense.Papageorgio 15:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

That's a good idea, though there will probably still be people posting comments about one on the other's talk page. To Papageogio: you're right that the frequent comments about emos not existing are absurd. It seems to operate on a logic similar to 'There is no way to define "big" precisely; therefore, big things don't exist and there is no point describing them." But I think the second part cannot be entirely true; for the emos who post on this page don't seem dead. If there are any dead emos who contribute to this article, leave a message on my talk page. Ernest Hemingway expressed a fondness for self-inflicted shotgun wounds, yet he has a page of his own. Rintrah 17:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC) While I am still on this talk page, I want to make another comment: can people posting on this page stop treating it like MySpace and msn? This is about an encyclopedia article, not a place for random speculations and dimly thought out opinions. Rintrah 17:30, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

This is odd. If "they" have enough of an identity in Papageorgio's mind for him to communicate a couple of stereotypes as an adduced reason for him to be against the existence of this article, then clearly the concept is well-defined enough to merit a wikipedia article - for example, I imagine there is a wiki article on nihilism despite the fact that it's a philosophy of the ultimate meaninglessness of existence - why should the fact that a philosophy or a concept is about depression, or percieved negativity mean that Wikipedia shouldn't cover it?. me - I came here because it's a word I've heard a couple of times and I didn't know exactly what it means. After reading the article, I'm still not clear about it - it seems like the vagueness of the concept, and it's being applied to a few essentially different things over the course of the last decades makes it difficult to define. The main thing I've got so far is that it's about trying to look a bit like Jarvis Cocker... PaulHammond 13:33, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it should be split. The page is good the way it is. Along with the page Emo (music), which is more factual, the two concepts you propose are already covered. Aidanr444 18:03, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Emo song.

Should it be mentioned? Most people know what I mean you can find it anywhere, but ill post a link later. That song (if not true) is still better than the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 164.116.40.13 (talk) 21:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC).

I have no objection to it but others do. If you post a link to it, it will probably be deleted. Rintrah 02:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Since the "Emo Song" is like a part of the emo phenomena, shouldn't it be mentioned somewhere that there is a connection between emo and myspace as well as it being common for "scene kids" or "emo kids" to wear girl pants? 172.166.35.118 03:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)PhyreChild

I think you mean "phenomenon", but it's not really the right word either. People do keep bringing up the connection of emo to myspace; I am starting to believe there is something substantial to these rumours. Yes, tight jeans are popular — surely, no one is going to deny this? The article does have a problem with the lack of sources, however; so we should be hesistant at adding rumours and unsourced assertions. There should be magazine articles which describe the emo subculture — has no one found any of those? Emos strongly stand out, but so many people whine on this page how it is impossible to pinpoint them — yeah, sure. Rintrah 14:45, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't see why the two should be seperated, Emo's attempt to live UP to their stereotype, they don't try and turn down those views unless they're doing it for more attention or because it's something they can feed off of for emotional pain.

If you mean "The Emo Song", as featured on YTMND, it is a mocking satire of the phenomenon, and as such, posting the lyrics ("Dear diary...") is POV. However, mentioning that the "song" exists is NPOV. As for the Myspace connection, perhaps a mention of melodramatic blogs and other Internet postings in general is in order instead. --BlueNight 09:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps. But can anyone find references? Do they exist?! Re unsigned, anonymous poster: just as the taste of diesel and mould can be separated, so can emos and goths. Rintrah 12:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Also mention Tickle me Emo/Elmo please. =D Berserkerz Crit 21:14, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Can we mention "F*** Emo" by the Nihilists then? Just to give a well balanced argument.. <roll eyes> Waffle247 90.152.12.130 14:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why is this page protected?

And what is up with this global-conspiracy nonsense at the end of the first paragraph:

"Even though it is a group of kids it has leadership that resembles a monarchy. The knowledge of this is very discreet."

Don't make factual assertions, especially far-out ones like this, without some kind of support for your assertions. If you have some evidence of this global emo-conspiracy, post it. If not, take it out.

And unprotect this page while you are at it.

Jjobrien3 18:27, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

The page was semi-protected to prevent edits such as the one you mentioned. It was semi-protected so that most users may still edit the article but apparently that's not really working out. The last thing we want right now is to unprotect the page and unleash a swarm of vandals (especially vandal-only IPs). The edit you mentioned has already been reverted, so you don't need to worry about that. If anymore vandals strike, users who still have the privilige to edit the article, such as myself, will fix it as soon as possible. // Sasuke-kun27 18:35, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Annon 22:13, 16 December 2006

I have a problem with the statement "there is no significant evidence of any correlation between emo and self-harm." Aside from the fact that the author uses no evidence in his claims throughout the article and calls for evidence here, there is a strong correlation between the two. Yet anyone who knows about statistics can tell you that correlation does not equal causation (see Pirates and Global warming proof.) There are lurking variables that can affect the two, as in the case of the Pirates-global warming the lurking variable is time. While it is near-impossible to determine if listening to emo music causes self harm, one can determine there is a correlation. As such I have repeatedly deleted the above said statement. This may have caused the protection of the page, but I stand by it.

The correlation may be that a teenager whose social life revolves around his own melodramatic interpretation of his own social life is also the type of person who is likely to attempt suicide, either as a cry for help or as a final decision. --BlueNight 22:34, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

This page seriously needs to be reverted to a less insulting version. It has been locked on a version of the article that is completely unsuitable for Wikipedia. I request that it be unlocked so that someone can revert it to a better version (for lack of a better term) and then locked again. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.47.41.87 (talk) 00:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Merge this page with main Emo article

This article seems to serve more as a magnet for vandals than a useful information source at the mo, and is lacking in sources and verifiable facts. Any useful material would, IMO, benefit from being included in the main Emo article, which deals with the music scene, and would put the "emo lifestyle" more in context, perhaps. Hyperspacey 13:36, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

In principle, it is a good idea; but doing so would degrade the main article, while unnaturally juxtaposing the content of this article with incongruous content. The two subjects are different: they only share their attachment to the emo theme. An article on Metalheads and one on the Heavy Metal scene, for instance, do not necessarily form the same subject matter, even though they are connected. It is better to keep this article separate in its substandard form. Improving it is the best option, in my very humble opinion. Rintrah 14:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, on closer inspection, the Emo (music) article wouldn't benefit. There's a lot of redundant info from it duplicated in this article; odds are it'd be best to strip this down to a look at "emo style" (clothing, hair) and and reference the teeth out of it. I'd like to comment on what people consider "emo culture", but it'd probably work out as a lengthy description of a stereotype. Suggestions? 194.73.163.108 15:28, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

That is a good idea. If you can write an article based on the "emo style" with abundant sources, you will greatly improve upon the status quo. "Emo culture" is more difficult to define; a very brief description sourced from a few articles would be ideal, say perhaps magazines, if better sources do not exist. If you made it longer, it would be butchered by those who hate it, and other drive by editors would inject their own ideas into it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rintrah (talk • contribs) 15:40, 15 December 2006 (UTC).

I think this article should certainly be enhanced with more content, but I fully disagree with stripping it of content or rewriting it to exclusively focus on "style". Style should definitely be included, but this article should be a collection of all elements of emo that are not directly related to the music. The redundant content between here and the music article is intended to provide the origin of the non-musical element.

The real problem is that there aren't (m)any decent sources. Most articles written about emo style are best guesses written by journos or college folks. There is no specific emo style - while "emo" style includes certain elements, there's a myriad of varying versions thrown under the umbrella. -- ChrisB 21:56, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

The style subject is most easily verifiable, whereas the others are bewilderingly subjective. It should be the foundation of this article because it is most objective; it is also the most prominent aspect of the non-musical element of emo. I agree, the origin is also important.

Best guesses by journalists and published academics are better than best guesses by random wikipedia editors. Rintrah 10:52, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

That statement makes me think you haven't read some of the articles on emo in the popular press. Cedars 21:03, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References

The article does not have one reference.

This is everything I found after half an hour on Google:

• Description of "emo" from a magazine targetted at teenage girls: [1]
• Tabloid rant against "emo": [2]
• Article on emo which confirms the origin of the term, from About.com: [3]
• Article that discusses the perceptions of "emo", from knot magazine: [4]
• Poorly edited opinion piece which muses on the word "emo", from Incendiary magazine: [5]
• A link site I haven't explored: [6]

Now, put some references in! Rintrah 13:32, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

---

I agree with Rintrah - there are no proper references, articles and magazines are not an reliable form of historic record, could we perhaps find some proper sources that are not so clearly biased? For example the article that rants about the dangers of self harm and "emoism" in exactly the same fashion that many similar publications did about goths, punks, metallers etc. It's so clearly not a source of information but an opinion that I see little or no value in including it - unless the authors of this article simply want to have a go at emo bashing like the rest of the net is at the moment. Waffle247 90.152.12.130 14:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comment

This article doesn't seem to reflect what emo actually is, just stereotypes. Emo isn't "self-hating, crossdressing mopers who love post-hardcore." The original emo fad was art meets hardcore. (For example, a punk rock-loving poet may be emo.) And depression certainly doesn't constitute "emo-ness" either; if your only emotion is sadness, you're not very emotional, are you? — Phantasy Phanatik | talk | contribs 10:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Great! Find sources for your ideas, and amend the article accordingly. You might also want to keep in mind, This is not a forum for discussing the article's subject. Rintrah 12:53, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Emo" = Undefinable

"Emo" doesn't exist except in slang, but having that out of the way...The reason no one can find an exact definition of "emo" is because the group of members that are called "emo" differ in many different ways(redundant, I know). Let me explain this...the "emo" group is accepting to whoever wants to join. Anyone that feels they fit in no where else turns to the "emo" group looking for something to be a part of. Poets of many sorts usually do not fit into any other group but are accepted as "emo". Self-harm is highly disrespected in other cultures/subcultures, that is the reason why those that choose self-harm turn to the "emo" group for somewhere to go to. Seeing as how the "emo" group was formed in the early '80's, many of the early members that participated in self-harm or saw it from a person-to-person level grew up accepting self-harm in their lifestyle. Musicians knew who they wanted to get their message across to and knew how those people felt on things and included self-harm and depression in their music. Since this music had gone mainstream, media had linked romance related depression in some "emo" classified music to all punk originating music that contains romance, the struggles of life, or any struggles at all, for that matter. Media had widely spread the looks of the top mainstream "emo" musicians(who may or may not have been linked in any way at all to the original "emo"). This look had been the tight jeans and the hair flipped to one side. This brings me to my next topic, looks. The mainstream "emo" look, though it varies from person to person and region to region, is as follows...hair flipped to the side, somewhat tight shirts and jeans, and Converse Chuck Taylors or skate shoes of different forms. This is only a "scene" version of "emo" but it is widely spread and commonly accepted. Basically, whoever that feels the need or wants to be "emo" can be. It is a very broad term even though "scene emo"(mentioned above) looks are high associated with the "emo" title. So, no matter how hard you try and how long you work tryin to define "emo" beyond the media-filled, mainstream, "scene" image that has been produced, it is impossible. --CWark323 03:27, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Did you read my last comment or the one at the top of the page? Rintrah 03:44, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I will post citation when time permits it, but most of this info is from a first-hand experience and from speaking with many of my friends...I know this is unwanted because it is shown as not reliable, but I have webisites and magazine articles that also agree with me. I promise I will post later.--CWark323 04:13, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Typical Emo College Student?

I don't see what relevance this photograph has. To me it looks like general vandalism. There is no description of it on the page, but it could be just someone putting up a picture of their friend to wind them up. Remove? Coldcroc 22:11, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

   yes! Please remove it. While your at it Explain this SCENE thing please.

Here, I'll explain the SCENE thing. Before I start, allow me to inform you that I am a 17 year old male who attends high school so the only credibility I can offer is the fact that I'm exposed to teenage trends on a weekly basis. Scene kids (or scenesters as they are sometimes called) are kids who dress up in a particular manner that emulates the common fashion trends of a musical subculture so others will think they are "cool". Usually they'll listen to the popular stereotype of the music that claims to be part of the subculture they're trying to fit into examples include Good Charlotte or simple plan for punk scenesters, senses fail and 18 visions for the Emo/hardcore scensters, and bands like korn and disturbed for the metalhead scenesters. (note: while people may dispute whether these bands are emo, punk, or metal between themselves, there's no denying that they've made money by generalizing themselves as such). Now when most people familiar with the term "scene kid", they tend to think of the stereotypical "emo kid" because that is the particular subculture of today that is "different" and "cool to be a part of" so its the most emulated scene kid fashion. As far as I have seen personally, not many people (at least in my town) are aware of the difference between scene kids and emo kids, and I'm assuming its mostly the same elsewhere in the U.S.

Basically, Scene kids are the new "posers", they try to fit in, but only for attention and acceptance, not because of personal beliefs or ideas.

Scene kids do tend to share much in common with the emo stereotype though, regardless of what subculture they're trying to fit into. One of these similarities is the belief that most emo kids are from well off middle class families but they pretend to be poor and act as if they live a harsh life. This is usually the case with scenesters as they are typically well off middle class, or even blatantly rich kids, who are cashing in their allowances for their own emotional security (once again, based on personal experience).

The term scene kid is appropriate because that's what they spend their time doing, trying to find a "scene" or subculture to fit into, yet never really embracing it or becoming a part of it.

If anyone thinks that my info is solid enough I'll write an objective article regarding the subject and send it to whoever would like to review it and possibly post it up.

~Fred Rogers~

[edit] Article completely rewritten.

I just spent about 2 hours COMPLETELY rewriting the article. I did not use a single sentence from the original article. My reason for doing it this way is that the whole previous version of the article was unsourced. My version of the article has no unsourced statements whatsoever. If you wish to add information from the old version, please feel free to do so, but ONLY if you can cite a good source, and ONLY if it is completely non-point-of-view.

Some may argue that some of my sources are unreliable. My response to that is that while they are not absolute sources, they need not be. This article is about a slang term which is VERY ambiguously defined, and is the center of much debate. All sources are mere opinions, which is quite acceptable since this word was "invented" in the last 30 years, and isn't even in dictionaries. We here at Wikipedia are merely reporting that these opinions exist

Please keep this article well-sourced and NPOV. Let's not let it get out of hand again.

Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 17:42, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Regarding edits... adding {{sprotect}} to the top of an article doesn't protect it. You have to ask an admin to do that. And it says in WP:FOOT that "(Foot)Notes and citations" is the preferable title for footnote references, for two reasons: "References", where possible, should simply list resources used for the whole of the article (as in the article on Rage Against the Machine), and footnotes can be used to explain the text in greater detail where necessary (as in the article on Alternative rock), not only for references.

The rewrite is great though. The article has never looked better.~Switch ^t 18:38, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

• • Okay, thanks a lot. I didn't know, but now I do. Can you ask an admin to semiprotect this article for me? It was just yesterday. I don't know how to go about asking for that. Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 18:42, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Actually, the page is semiprotected. log out and try to edit it. I added the tag back. Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 18:48, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for using my sources. Rintrah 15:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

• • Thanks for providing them! Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contribs) (Gallery)} 16:23, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] slight edit to fashion section?

.... um how about something about the origins of the look? I'm 31, which makes me old enough to have had a long set of bangs the first time they were popular in the late 80's skater cut craze... surely someone has traced these origins a little more accurately than me and my memory and intuition...

I think it needs to be noted that there are older fashion stylings that still exist in the emo scene. This stems from the fact that emo fashion has changed over the last 20years and many older references to emo fashion will have nothing to do with tight pants and hair worn over one eye. All of these trends I would like to add can be cited on fourfa.com. Fourfa is already used as a source for this article and is regarded as one of the foremost authorities on the subject of emo and the trends within the scene. An example of one of these oversights I mentioned would be that the original emo hair cut resembled that of the Romulans from Star Trek. Also the worn out sweater has always been a staple of emo kids, and no mention is made of it or the thread bare button down shirts that were often seen on emo kids untill the last 3-4 years. If everyone concurs, I'd like to add a small amount of wording to address this. (by small i mean 3-4 sentences at most) Tell me what you think.Slag 10 04:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

• If you wish to do this, make sure that everything you add is at the fourfa site (or some other site which you cite). I would suggest saying something like "several years ago, emo trends included XYZ."(citation) and then change the current sentence about emo fashion to read "By almost all current definitions, emo clothing is characterized by...." If you do not know how to cite your sources, see WP:CITE, or simply type {{fact}} after your contributions, and someone else will cite the source for you. Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contribs) (Gallery)} 04:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

• I simply added the {{fact}} tag. http://www.fourfa.com/fashion.htm is the source for the revisions though, so I think its citation 6...Slag 10 05:30, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

• • I have reorganized, corrected, and cited it for you. I think it should be allowed to stay now, but we'll let others come to consensus about that. Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contribs) (Gallery)} 05:42, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

• • thanks for all your help. this has been a fairly edcuational experience for me, as far as etiquete for doing edits like this. Slag 10 19:23, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Tight pants is an understatement, most emo guys (well Scene kids more often then not in my town) tend to wear Girl pants, usually the kind that are tight and tend to bring out the attributes of the female body (tight on the legs, low-rise, rounder at the hips, etc.).

I point out that this is the case with scene kids but as for Emo's it could just be tight guy jeans BUT the picture at the top of the article reflects the way the scene kids at my school dress so I figured it was at least worth mentioning.

~Fred Rogers~

Thank you for your contribution, but sadly, anecdotes about your town do not constitute encylopedic fact. Cheeser1 20:59, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

While this undoubtedly an uncredible source since it's a place where people basically apply there own definitions to current slang words, there are a few definitions that basically wraps up what I've said about scene kids and makes it much more clear, plus it's proof that they obviously exist outside of just my town and the descriptions are very similar. So even if a collection of definitions and personal experience aren't enough for an article, at least people can use this link and get a more solid idea of what a Scene Kid is. definitions 2 and 4 are 2 are the better ones, some of the other ones aren't even definitions but oh well.

heres said link http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=scene+kids

And sorry, but I didn't use an anecdote, I didn't give you an account of any particular incident, just a brief overview of scenekids in my town in general. I think there's a slight technical difference ;) ~Fred Rogers~

"A brief overview of scenekids in my town in general" is just a bunch of anecdotes rolled together, and it's still completely anecdotal. Please see [the dictionary] for the definition of anecdotal. Furthermore, the urban dictionary is not a reliable source. Please read about reliable sources for more information. To be clear: neither you nor anyone else should contribute things to this article that aren't properly supported, regardless of how ubiquitous it might seem based on the urban dictionary and/or your anecdotal observation. Cheeser1 18:12, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Emo is a steriotype

Add this to the article when it is no longer locked.

Emo is a Steriotype=== First and foremost, "emo" is a sterotype. "Emo" is often confused with [[punk]]. If one is to dress "emo", that does not nessessaraly mean the one in question brings harm to ones self. Emo often means a certian clothing style, hair style, or music genre. A person that harms ones self is simply someone who has false ways of relieving stress, not an "emo". A small word of caution to readers, don't call someone "emo" because of they have "unexplainable scars". It's a harmfull steriotype, and it hurts feelings. Do you not thing these people suffer enough? Not all "emo" people harm themselves, and not all people who harm themself are "emo".

• Thanks for the suggestion, but sorry. This is entirely unencyclopedic, unsourced, and it gives orders to the reader. Not to mention the spelling and grammatical errors. Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contribs) (Gallery)} 22:05, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] emo is emo

Emo used to be a type of music, "emotional" music if you will, like dashboard confessionals, and newer music like MCR and AFI. However, emo is so much more than that now. It is a way of dress and a certain image one portrays. Usually this attire includes tight pencil jeans, makeup, standard band t-shirts (that most of these kids have never actually heard of) as well as old school converse, and the standards of black white and pink.Now these fashion trends are for both men and women. It is essentially the less hardcore version of goth. However, it is not a STEREOTYPE. Kids who dress like that are just as conforming as those people who wear gap or old navy or american eagle. It is almost cliche now to have these "tortured" high school souls who feel like their lives are a drowning black abyss. They are not a stereotype. Most of the kids that can actually afford to dress emo, come from upper middle class suburban areas and their lives are not bad at all, but teen angst is as teen angst does. It is unlikely that these kids cut themselves, and there is a slim chance that anyone actually thinks they do. If you would like to know what an emo kid is really like i suggest this short educational video :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHTAT_UPm18 It will definitely answer any questions one has about the emo culture. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 137.207.120.33 (talk) 15:35, 8 February 2007 (UTC).

Perhaps. And perhaps this will clarify the proper scope of a talk page: This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Emo (slang) article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject. It is quite clear. If you want to help improve the article, find sources for your assertions and then inject this sourced information into the article. Rintrah 15:41, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually before that emo was an off-shoot of hardcore punk (emocore) , before the term was applied to pop-punk bands with melodramtic lyrics. A song with emotional is not neccessarily emo. The term today is more of a creation by the media and is misused by so many people that it's meaning changes depending who is saying it anyway.

[edit] RCB

If anybody has any discussion on the flipside of emo as in the acronym RCB I´d like to hear about it.

What do u think of RCB? Do u think that its creation will cause people to rethink stereotypes, opposites, name calling and labelling? Read it and see!

Otherwise there gonna bin my article which is actually turning into a positive backfire on emoism!

I want people to feel inspired to Use The Write Words!

[edit] Emos and Self-Harming

I believe you have got the wrong idea about emos, yeah, some emos self-harm, but theres a reason behind it, they don't follow along with other trends (the whole point is to stand out and be different) and so they get bullied for it. They then become depressed and start self-harming. If you believe that all emos self-harm, you are stereotypring all of them. Most of my friends are emo, and I'm goth, and I believe that you have got it all wrong. This 'definition' of emo is unfair and maybe if you spoke to a few emos yourself, you would realise they're not people who sit in corners in darkened rooms listening to depressing music while slitting their wrists, thats just sick. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cherri.om (talk • contribs) 18:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC).

• "Some definitions of emo hold that a typical "emo person" is likely to inflict self-injury..."
  This is what the article reads, and it is a matter of fact that some definitions do hold that as "emo." Go get 10 randomly selected people and ask them if they think that an emo person is likely to self-injure. Many will say yes (see sources cited). Wikipedia is not here to create an ideal definition, merely to report the definitions which already exist. Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contribs) (Gallery)} 21:08, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

• Let's get this straight here....Emo's are wannabe punks who can't be like us. And you spelled stereotype wrong. Emo's brought it on themselves. All emo's are are goths and punks combined. Besides everyone hates them and preppies.....

No one will believe anything you say unless you give a source. 64.121.36.5 23:12, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Historically I don't recall the emo fad being mentioned, I'm sure the Greeks would have jotted something like that down somewhere, so how do you get a source that says emos aren't into self harm? I don't think it's likely to make the news headlines e.g. "No suicides reported in nice emo teen sub-culture dominated town" or "Emo does not kill himself over breakup" - it's not exactly riveting, edge of the seat action is it. Waffle247 90.152.12.130 15:07, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

God, I hate you stereotypical viewers. Not all emos slit their wrists. They're not losers. I was a self harmer I admit. I've stopped. You shouldn't think that every emo is a loser who hides cutting themselves all the time. Please be a little more open minded. -1lostinlife 19:20, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Emo poetry

I just discovered, and linked to from this article, the emo poetry article. I'm not sure it should exist, but real work has gone into it - unlike emofication, which I nominated for speedy deletion for being an attack page - and it uses sources. Some of those sources could even be used for this article, while others already are. Anyway, it contains some public domain text and images this article could also use, although the picture of a "typical emo girl" doesn't look very "emo" according to our sources or my opinion. Anyway, just letting you guys know. ~Switch ^{t c g} 09:35, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] YouTube video

I missed when this video was readded in the "reorganise a bit" edit a few days ago. Can someone please explain how this is appropriate here? If the video was an article, it'd be tagged db-attack within minutes. It only exists to disparage the subject. Is it funny? sure. Is it necessary for this article? I don't think so. --Onorem 02:36, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Sources and links don't have to be NPOV, only articles. Why exactly do you think it should be removed? ~Switch ^{t c g} 04:59, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I think it should be removed because it's a 3 minute attack on Emos. I don't see what encyclopedic value it holds beyond what's already stated in the article. Should every YouTube video that makes fun of Emos get a link in this article? Why exactly do you think it should be in the article? --Onorem 13:34, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

It's a good example of how "emo" is perceived in a popular context. That's why I think it deserves to stay. Maybe that What Is Emo? video, too, could be added. Emo has barely had anything said about it apart from criticism. I'm not vehement about it though, so if you feel strongly remove it. ~Switch ^{t c g} 13:45, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with SwitChar. I think that the "Emo Song" video a well as the "How To Be: Emo" video should be included in this article. This is because both are very well-known, and both present information about the subject of this article, and insight into a subculture. While the "Emo Song" is 100% criticism, satire can provide insight into a subject, even though it is biased. Are you also saying that we shouldn't have the "EMO cult warning for parents" article as a citation because it is biased? On the other hand the "How to be: Emo" video is quite informative, and while it pokes fun at the subject, it is actually very insightful. Additionally, the "How To Be: Emo" video even has its own Wikipedia article. If another person agrees with me, please add both videos to the article. Here are the links: [7][8] Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contribs) (Gallery)} 15:05, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

External links to YouTube are usually (but not always) frowned upon by WP:EL. // PoeticDecay 15:12, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I believe that this instance constitutes an exception for the reasons I mentioned above. Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contribs) (Gallery)} 15:15, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I believe that the video cannot be traced to its original source; if it can, we shall link to there. The How to Be: Emo video can definitely be linked to its original source, and probably should be. ~Switch ^{t c g} 16:15, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Self-harm and emo

Is the need for such a slandering of emo needed under this title? If it's sourced somewhere, shouldn't it be quoted? Seems a bit harsh, that's all. Thanks! 68.110.182.47 04:32, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

just because you are emo doesnt mean that you are going to cut yourself!!! its peoplw who are jelaous and just want to make fun of people that make the emo seem like something bad. i think emo is a style, not that you are going to hurt yourself.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.115.220.77 (talk • contribs)

Like most metal scenes the more contorversial themes such as self harm and depression are picked up on by the general public even if those who empathise with the scene don't see these themes as the most predominent, defining part of the subculture. Waffle247 15:18, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

The self harm and emo section is utterly ridiculous, and will only serve to scare parents who know nothing about the subculture. Emo as a culture sprang up around relatively innocuous pop music. The farther away from its hardcore origins it gets, the more similar it is to ordinary pop: an obsession with romantic love, overwrought, heartfelt belting, etc etc. Certainly, a subcategory of emo kids cut themselves. But a subcategory of ALL kids cut themselves. Linking a symptom of mental illness to a pop subgenre is patently absurd. The idea that emo causes cutting, or is even directly linked to cutting, is like saying Marilyn Manson caused Columbine. It's alarmist, unverifiable, and smacks of mainstream suspicion of all types of difference. Mhickcoxhoward 22:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Emo Female?

Is there such a thing? I think there is.... but no reference is made as to what that might look like. I don't feel I am an authority, I was just called emo and I wanted to know why, since I don't think I fit my definition of emo. 71.236.252.185 03:45, 22 February 2007 (UTC)Dracling 21. February 2007

Google image search or myspace might help. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 16:56, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Emo female = emo male with genitalia on the inside. Waffle247 90.152.12.130 13:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge from Emo poetry

Please merge any relevant content from Emo poetry per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emo poetry. (If there is nothing to merge, just leave it as a redirect.) Thanks. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-23 07:58Z

[edit] Subject change

You need to change the title of this, because people need to learn that 'emo' is not a trend, or a fashion, but an emotional state, scene on the other hand is EXACTLY what ya'll are saying is EMO!!Rawr I'm Scene. 05:40, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The same was said about goths.... but many post-goth people don't claim the same thing. If 'emo' is nothing to do with fashion why does it have it's own sub-genre of clothing? Waffle247 15:19, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Protected?

Hey if this article is semi protected, how come anon. IP addresses keep editing this article? J-stan 01:36, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I think it just had the protection banner - even though it wasn't protected. I'm not sure who we appeal to to get that fixed. --Cheeser1 16:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

See here. --Cheeser1 16:48, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Should we request page protection? J-stan ^Talk 16:49, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Splitting the personality section

I would like to know how the editors feel about creating a subsection in the Personality section about poetry. J-stan 21:23, 24 June 2007 (UTC)