Younger but more arrogant crowd this year?

[frostypaw]

I am reminded of Adam Kay singing:

"and baby you're all that i want, when you're lying here in my arms, i'm finding it hard to believe you're eleven"

Probably the biggest laugh-oooh-*almost*boo i've heard since seeing jimmy carr last..

[progue]

I'm not sure a wolf whistle comes with an inherent threat although I recognise that it is something that it is now something that is viewed more negatively, which previously wasn't. Of course that doesn't make either view correct it simply means that we have been conditioned (for whatever reason) to view something in a particular way.

When it comes to the idea of the Native American Head Dresses and the wider idea of cultural appropriation is that invented concepts like this simply serve to create reasons for people to seek to be offended for no other reason that they feel left out because other people have got something to be offended about and they don't. This then creates further unnecessary divisions, because people end up takin 'unnecessary' offence at people who are ignorant of the offence they have committed, because it is a newly invented offence that nobody really knows exists in the first place (well it didn't exist in the first place)

I actually can imagine entire groups of committees who sit together and decide on what the latest and most fashionable offendy things are before sneakily implementing them without telling anybody and then waiting for us all to start offending each other.

Divide and Rule eh?

Edited July 2, 2014 by progue

[Craigston]

Washing wellies at a tap though is a different matter - what the fuck is the point?

I politely asked a girl why she was washing her wellies one year and her explanation was that mud ruined her 'look' and if she wanted to sit down cross legged (I assume on a bin bag or something) it would get her jeans muddy. I advised her it was a ridiculous waste of water and left her a standing there, while she was telling me to 'chill the f*ck out, it's Glasto'.

[KryziF]

I'm not sure a wolf whistle comes with an inherent threat although I recognise that it is something that it is now something that is viewed more negatively, which previously wasn't.

Being on the receiving end of a wolf whistle has always felt threatening and not complimentary.

The change in attitude is that more men now thankfully realise this even if you don't think it is a negative thing.

Edited July 2, 2014 by KryziF

[Stone_Love]

I completely agree with the original post and said the same all weekend. Was most apparent to me is when The Black Keys were on. A band is was really disappointed with for only playing their mainstream songs.

[giantkatestacks]

I think the problem with the headdresses as opposed to something else is that you are denying their culture totally if you say that symbols dont matter and they should just get over it.

Symbols dont matter in a western culture but objects, places, items, animals etc have significance and power to them so by saying that they shouldnt be offended is totally denying them their culture.

And when we were on a Navajo reservation earlier this year they were calling themselves Indians, they didnt actually like native americans because how can they be native to somewhere that has only existed recently.

I think its unfair to say they are bandwagon jumping with their offence, they are incredibly marginalised in what should be their own lands. Its very depressing.

[progue]

Being on the receiving end of a wolf whistle has always felt threatening and not complimentary.

The change in attitude is that more men now thankfully realise this even if you don't think it is a negative thing.

I suppose that is a whole other debate. I'm not really sure if we should be thankful that more men have now realised and stopped or disappointed that we have found ourselves in a position where a whistle from a man to a woman could ever be considered threatening in the first place.

I do wonder who makes up these rules.

I have to say it is not something I have ever done apart from messing around in the playground as a small child. I certainly don't recall the young girls feeling at all threatened by that behaviour, but then I suppose that was because it actually had bore no threat in that context at that time.

[scaddoo]

This year I was older and less arrogant

[russycarps]

I think the problem with the headdresses as opposed to something else is that you are denying their culture totally if you say that symbols dont matter and they should just get over it.

Symbols dont matter in a western culture but objects, places, items, animals etc have significance and power to them so by saying that they shouldnt be offended is totally denying them their culture.

And when we were on a Navajo reservation earlier this year they were calling themselves Indians, they didnt actually like native americans because how can they be native to somewhere that has only existed recently.

I think its unfair to say they are bandwagon jumping with their offence, they are incredibly marginalised in what should be their own lands. Its very depressing.

Good to hear from someone who actually knows something about it.

Unfortunately it seems the themes involved are too complex for most people in this thread to get their head around. The last few posts have been laughable and show an utter failure to understand the issue.

[progue]

Good to hear from someone who actually knows something about it.

Unfortunately it seems the themes involved are too complex for most people in this thread to get their head around. The last few posts have been laughable and show an utter failure to understand the issue.

I'm not sure that it is so much a case of not understanding the issue, but rather objecting to the fact that there can be an issue in the first place.

I would imagine that during the battles that were won and subsequent head-dresses bestowed on those who were victorious that these had at least some territorial context? (smaller scale I suppose, but no less devastating to the victims)

I wonder quite how the families that suffered as a result felt about the scalps of their relatives being used as trophies and the head-dresses that were worn as a result of their personal grief.

It would be hard not to have sympathy for anyone who has been displaced from their home against their will, but it is also hard to imagine a world with the ever increasing population where this were not a part of evolution, particularly given the fact that we still live in a world where people still think it is reasonable to kill someone in order to impose their will on others and that we are led to believe we developed from savages, with fairly limited intellect.

Of course symbols also matter to many people in Western culture too, however in many respects we have relinquished most of our attachments and in many ways our own cultural identity in the interests of creating a more tolerant society as a whole....I don't think that is a bad thing personally and perhaps a personal sacrifice that we all have to make.

Of course I wouldn't necessarily go out of my way to cause offence to anyone, but if that happened to be an unintended or unavoidable consequence of me living my life or simply a natural development of cultural integration, then what can we do?

The fact that someone themselves chooses to wear an article of decoration or clothing and is subsequently seen by someone else who then decides they would like to assimilate that article of decoration or clothing is kind of an inevitable consequence of sharing a planet with each other. The problem in this case is that they have decided that they do not wish to share the decorations that they themselves considered it acceptable to wear for whatever ritualistic purpose they deemed suitable.

If we accept that the feather belongs to the bird, the bodily parts of the wolf belong to the wolf and the bears to the bear, then in truth nobody should have any particular claim to these forms of decoration at all.

So I suppose it is easy enough to empathise, but I think we have to be realistic that on a planet of 6 Billion people, the genie is kind of already out of the bottle and it is probably a bit pointless pissing in the wind when it comes to the idea of individuals claiming the right to be offended by clothes, hairstyles decoration etc.

[Ed209]

I think the problem with the headdresses as opposed to something else is that you are denying their culture totally if you say that symbols dont matter and they should just get over it.

Symbols dont matter in a western culture but objects, places, items, animals etc have significance and power to them so by saying that they shouldnt be offended is totally denying them their culture.

And when we were on a Navajo reservation earlier this year they were calling themselves Indians, they didnt actually like native americans because how can they be native to somewhere that has only existed recently.

I think its unfair to say they are bandwagon jumping with their offence, they are incredibly marginalised in what should be their own lands. Its very depressing.

Good post. Having visited Navajo reservations and a number of Navajo towns in New Mexico and Arizona its frankly disgusting how oppressed by western culture these people still are. They sit at the very peripheries of American society, many of their communities absolutely devastated by alcohol, drug and (thanks to US governments casino policy) gambling addictions. The thought of affluent western people running around a music festival abusing their cultural symbols in the name of looking alternative and "earthy" would probably make them weep.

[russycarps]

I'm not sure that it is so much a case of not understanding the issue, but rather objecting to the fact that there can be an issue in the first place.

I would imagine that during the battles that were won and subsequent head-dresses bestowed on those who were victorious that these had at least some territorial context? (smaller scale I suppose, but no less devastating to the victims)

I wonder quite how the families that suffered as a result felt about the scalps of their relatives being used as trophies and the head-dresses that were worn as a result of their personal grief.

It would be hard not to have sympathy for anyone who has been displaced from their home against their will, but it is also hard to imagine a world with the ever increasing population where this were not a part of evolution, particularly given the fact that we still live in a world where people still think it is reasonable to kill someone in order to impose their will on others and that we are led to believe we developed from savages, with fairly limited intellect.

Of course symbols also matter to many people in Western culture too, however in many respects we have relinquished most of our attachments and in many ways our own cultural identity in the interests of creating a more tolerant society as a whole....I don't think that is a bad thing personally and perhaps a personal sacrifice that we all have to make.

Of course I wouldn't necessarily go out of my way to cause offence to anyone, but if that happened to be an unintended or unavoidable consequence of me living my life or simply a natural development of cultural integration, then what can we do?

The fact that someone themselves chooses to wear an article of decoration or clothing and is subsequently seen by someone else who then decides they would like to assimilate that article of decoration or clothing is kind of an inevitable consequence of sharing a planet with each other. The problem in this case is that they have decided that they do not wish to share the decorations that they themselves considered it acceptable to wear for whatever ritualistic purpose they deemed suitable.

If we accept that the feather belongs to the bird, the bodily parts of the wolf belong to the wolf and the bears to the bear, then in truth nobody should have any particular claim to these forms of decoration at all.

So I suppose it is easy enough to empathise, but I think we have to be realistic that on a planet of 6 Billion people, the genie is kind of already out of the bottle and it is probably a bit pointless pissing in the wind when it comes to the idea of individuals claiming the right to be offended by clothes, hairstyles decoration etc.

Missing the point again. Read ed209s post above and try again.

Edited July 2, 2014 by russycarps

[progue]

Missing the point again. Read ed209s post above and try again.

Thanks for pointing that out, I'm afraid it doesn't alter my opinion on the matter at all. I do accept that they (the oppressed or descendants of others that have been oppressed) have an issue with it and other means that they have chosen to identify with, I do accept they have been oppressed, I do not agree with the oppression, but I don't accept the use of an adornment as a means of defining an individual or culture and I don't accept anyone's right to claim such an article of adornment as their own.

Sorry about that It's just the way I see things I suppose.

It's been an interesting discussion though nonetheless and I've learned a few things that I didn't know before.

[Andy0808 v3.0]

Can we leave Essex alone? We're not all that bad.

I'm 21, but yeah I saw a lot of tossers wandering around. Hopefully the brief spell of rain and mud puts them off next year

[DeanoL]

I think the problem with the headdresses as opposed to something else is that you are denying their culture totally if you say that symbols dont matter and they should just get over it.

It's not denying them their culture. That would be stopping them wearing the headresses (see: debates around the hijab). No-one is proposing that. But other people are free to use it how they like too. It's just as silly as the 'only Christians should get to celebrate Christmas' bollocks.

I suppose that is a whole other debate. I'm not really sure if we should be thankful that more men have now realised and stopped or disappointed that we have found ourselves in a position where a whistle from a man to a woman could ever be considered threatening in the first place.

I do wonder who makes up these rules.

No one makes up the rules, like you say, it's conditioning. In this case, the prevalence of rape has conditioned women to perceive it as a threat. You want the chance to wolf whistle women in public as much as you want? Then tell men to stop raping them.

Good post. Having visited Navajo reservations and a number of Navajo towns in New Mexico and Arizona its frankly disgusting how oppressed by western culture these people still are. They sit at the very peripheries of American society, many of their communities absolutely devastated by alcohol, drug and (thanks to US governments casino policy) gambling addictions. The thought of affluent western people running around a music festival abusing their cultural symbols in the name of looking alternative and "earthy" would probably make them weep.

Would it? Would it really? Because I kinda think if my community and family were devastated by alcohol, drug and gambling addictions I really wouldn't give a fuck about what some kids were doing at a music festival on the other side of the world.

[Craig_G]

Well this went off topic quickly.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Deano - You're overlooking that the abuse of language, symbols and iconography is part of a wider structure of oppression and discrimination - given their totemic quality, symbols can come to be even more powerful than actual things as they can come to embody everything that a struggle stands for - hope being a key one. To tell people which things they should or shouldn't care about is, I'm afraid to say, part of the same type of structural oppression and control.

[seanjw]

My friend said this to me toward the end of the festival and I couldn't help but agree.

We ended up camping next to a group of late teens/early 20s lads who seemed to do nothing but sit around their site all day/night drinking, shouting and blowing on a vuvuzela. They made a few comments toward our group but we ignored them because we didn't want any trouble.

The worst experience was the final night. We had stayed up so we could get packing early to leave. As expected, when we came back the knobheads were up and sitting around their tents. Their latest game saw them singling out one of their own and picking up his tent (while he was sleeping) and turning it over before grabbing trash bags full of waste and piling them on top.

The final straw came when they started throwing actual human shit around. We just tried to finish packing up as quickly as possible and got the hell out of there.

I wouldn't tar the whole festival crowd because of this experience (as awful as it was, and probably my worst Glastonbury experience ever) - but overall, as a general thing - I would agree. There seemed to be a larger proportion of tossers this year. And generally they seemed younger.

[progue]

No one makes up the rules, like you say, it's conditioning. In this case, the prevalence of rape has conditioned women to perceive it as a threat. You want the chance to wolf whistle women in public as much as you want? Then tell men to stop raping them.

I kinda suspect it has ultimately become more about women defending themselves about something that they have decided is demeaning or maybe something that just feels a little bit embarrassing for those who are slightly more insecure, which is fair enough I suppose.

I mean a chap stood 50ft up in the air on a scaffolding is likely to present less of a threat of rape than someone you might choose to take home or wander home with after a comfortable chat in a town centre bar in truth.

Deano - You're overlooking that the abuse of language, symbols and iconography is part of a wider structure of oppression and discrimination - given their totemic quality, symbols can come to be even more powerful than actual things as they can come to embody everything that a struggle stands for - hope being a key one. To tell people which things they should or shouldn't care about is, I'm afraid to say, part of the same type of structural oppression and control.

I don't want to go any further with this, but it really isn't that simple, otherwise it would be something that would be far easier for us all to agree upon.

[CaledonianGonzo]

I don't want to go any further with this, but it really isn't that simple, otherwise it would be something that would be far easier for us all to agree upon.

I agree it's not simple, but to argue that it shouldn't be the case is different from saying that it's not the case. You'd hate to see the BP logo on the top of the Pyramid, right?

[Madmensking]

In a vain attempt to try and pull this thread back to topic, I find this a really difficult thread to comment on as I suppose I could be put into the category that is being referred to - I'm only 22, and first attended the festival at 18 (on recommendation from a family member who attended in 2009 NOT because I was then the legal drinking age in case anyone tried to make that connection) and yeah I guess to a degree in 2010, my first year, there was less younger people there compared to this year when I definitely did see more, however I think that Glastonbury is welcoming this change as they have put a lot of time into the expansion of the Silver Hayes area as well as Arcadia and the south-east corner. Regardless of music the younger generation (myself not included) are going to be drawn to nightclub style areas and music as for many this is how they spend their weekends normally! So the 5-day camping ticket and everything now starting to open on Wednesday it just becomes a bigger party for them rather than a festival experience.

As quoted before Glastonbury is an all inclusive festival, quite rightly, however with that mantra does come risks of immature, carefree uni types who are there to party and certainly don't love the farm.

[Klyde]

I was in campervan west and we were surprised at how quiet and tidy everything was.

Apart from the whoosing noise from that baloon bollocks from our neighbours (they seriously loved that shit) it was like a graveyard.

What I did notice during the long walks throughout the various campsites was the lack of security and lights.

All seemed a bit dark and lawless, considering the vast amount of tents. Just breeds groups of dicks to carry on being dicks.

[gorfield]

urrrgggghhh those groups of youngsters that clearly have no respect for others.. barging through crowds and shouting their gobs off. you can spot them a mile off..

how do they even afford to go?

I heard one group at the pyramid - lots of flowers in hair, make up, tiny shorts etc etc who had made up a nice song that they kept chanting..

it went -

e's e's ketamine, coke

e's e's ketamine, coke

e's e's ketamine, coke

e's e's ketamine, coke

Jesus.

I think they just go to get off their faces - not to see any bands.

[zero000]

If people want to get fucked up why does that matter to you?

[CaledonianGonzo]

The late eighties and nineties ravers certainly never did.