What Do You Really Want?

Frankly, I think society still has much in common with the way it was in the 1950's. Sure, some of the things men and women "want" may have changed, but the majority of people still sadly base their lives upon what others will think and expect of them. Conformity still rules their lives, and role playing determines decisions. Be it appeasement of relatives' wishes, keeping up with the neighbors, seeking approval of peers in organizations and groups (being party line driven for example in politics) to the material possessions they select, the mentality to merge into the herd for security and approval still pervades this society.

Both men and women succumb to relinquishment of their own desires in order to get the approval of others. Be it nationalistic pride or simply making sure your clothing style and model of car is up "to par" with your neighbors and peers, many conform to others rather than pleasing themselves. From beliefs to possessions, they try to fit in with everyone else, lest someone consider them "different." And they make sure they never become ostracized, so independent thought and expression thereof is kept hidden.

This absurd election is a prime example of such conformity. The political conventions, as always, were nothing more than parties. People who couldn't be there joined in by rooting for their political candidate by watching at home, and attending rallies (like the large one held here in Colorado for Obama). Take a look at the eyes of some of his supporters; you see utter adoration. Of course, that's what campaigns encourage: Jump on the bandwagon! Get on the winning team! Issues are meaningless. It is a mere beauty contest where substance matters not and image matters most. And people, for the most part, fall for it all. They "feel" good being part of the team with their bumperstickers, signs and t-shirts.

It appears rooting for a political candidate is about the same as rooting for their favorite sports team. Voting, for many, appears less an expression of freedom, and more an action of conformity to whatever group had the most influence on them growing up or the peers they find themselves around now.

Those who are weak seek to fit in with crowds. They need to feel as if they are a part of something greater than themselves. They also wish to avoid anyone accusing them of being different or not normal. They find it easiest to find a group to join and not makes waves. "Worth" is given to their lives when they look around them and hear a crowd chanting the same words. Independent thought is cast aside.

Politics is just one example, but a good one. A place where we see some people so afraid of not being considered "racist" that they support a candidate not for what he stands for but for the fact he is of color. Sounds like "reverse racism," so to speak. I've recently heard several Obama supporters, for example, express great admiration and support for the man- but when simply asked why they are supporting their candidate, they fumbled for words. Ask them to state a few policies they particularly like, and they are speechless. Or, I've seen those who support a candidate, McCain for example, out of party loyalty - never mind that they will admit that they think said candidate is a poor reflection of what their political party used to stand for. To vote for someone based on their race, sex, or political party is to succumb to herd mentality.

Many people will support their political party's ticket regardless of the candidate. For years, I've heard that voting party-line trumps voting the individual, perhaps for group thinkers, but never for me. As for the current election, since I believe either man, Obama or McCain, will do considerable evil as president, and I found no third party candidate worthy of my support (write-ins are not accepted on the Colorado ballot for the office of president), I did not cast a vote for president.

Few challenge the "rules" of conformity among groups. Not many want to be the one to say the emperor has no clothes. After all "You just don't do that!" is an expression I've heard throughout my life. But then, I've never been a conformist and couldn't care less of what others think, so when I've been told that, it only amuses. Challenging other's sacred cows [their herd mentality - no pun intended :) ] by speaking the truth, exposing irrationality or lies, or simply not participating in an activity others put on a pedestal, is second nature to one not playing a role.

But conformity is a something many men and women often succumb to. I am thinking about women in particular because last night I again viewed the film Mona Lisa Smile.

Set in 1953, and on Wellesley College Campus, stories of several young and highly intelligent women illustrate the incredible pressures placed upon them to follow in their mother's footsteps - putting aside any aspiration to use the education they've achieved toward development of a career. It is the arrival of a more free-spirited female art professor which causes the women to question the blind acceptance of the roles they've been programmed to play in life.

Interestingly, the professor herself is also caught in a reverse role playing, for rather than follow her heart, she decides (at the expense of a beautiful relationship with her man friend from California) to reject his proposal of marriage - not because she is uninterested - but because it doesn't fit within the role she's accepted as being a "free" woman. She destroys the good relationship she had in a stubborn determination not be like the young women around her. Instead of allowing herself to ask what would make her happy, she is most disturbed by the whole idea of marriage, thinking that it would somehow take something away from her. But what?