Gettin’ it on.
I am reaching for some understanding regarding human behavior in these times we are living in. For the moment I am finding little.
It has to do with accepting oneself and others, and in that acceptance understanding there is nothing to fix or change, for there is nothing that is changeable. It is like altering one’s body physically—our looks as opposed to our feelings, behavior or thinking. Why might we want to do this?
All very complicated, but if we start from the physical, where there are only a few things one can do to alter what has been given to us, we can change what we eat in relationship to want and desire or health and need. We can keep the body in good physical condition, immunized or trained for a particular skill.
Then there is the universe of ‘how’ we dress, decorate, and present our image to the outside world, protecting our bodies from climate and weather.
This dressing is a presentation to ourselves and others, representing self as we wish to be interpreted—showing our place and purpose. The dressing expresses the values of the images and labels. This outer presence speaks to the importance of appearance—to ourselves as well as to others.
What does this costume mean when there is no audience?
What is the role that the dressing seeks to play? Is it acting or real?
Is it how we wish to be seen, hiding something we wish not to be identified?
Most of this is generally not given much reflection or critical thought, but is it not all “dress up” to go somewhere? Routine ‘dressing’ is more of a subconscious habit, and yet it is quite revealing to examine the physical appearances of humans when viewed as an act toward influencing the perceptions of others. This is also true in the animal kingdom as well.
Looks also drive behavior, as well as response, in simple and common ways—deeper, neural driven, and psychological. The baseball or football player in uniform represents a physical pattern of performing and movement. Another characteristic is that it is a polarized or competitive dialogue of group behavior and activity. Essentially any sport is “dressed” to define what the game is.
Then there are police, soldier, nurse, and doctor uniforms, as well as those representing men and women—all of which represent the identity and role of a social position and function. The individual’s identity is exchanged for the role the uniform represents. Along with this the individual identifies with the role in a personal gratification of both its social regard and the characteristics of respect and function. This is a group identification.
The job qualifications, responsibility and performance of function all interact to give the observer, and the recipient, the task of evaluation—judgment of the level performance of the one who wears the label. This is not always a friendly conflict between the ’opposing team’ vs the ‘home team’, but it has some deeper meaning in social interaction. It is a domesticated exercise of semi- friendly “Us” and “Them”.
Clothing has a different purpose of symbolic structure for soldiers, police, authorities, kings, priests, rulers, etc.; the clothing is the symbol of power and the interactions are not ‘playful’.
These elaborations are difficult to see, especially if you are wearing the clothing of the role you are to carry out and sitting on the bench ready to play. Or, if you are a soldier standing in line or sitting behind a wall or in a ditch waiting to attack or be attacked. You may also be a policeman having been called to ”police” a gathering or investigate a shooting. The difference between the clothing you wear and the role to be played is the deeper consequences of its collective behavior. Either one can be seen on the one hand from the perspective of an individual, and on the other as a group member. Both can be seen from the objective distance of a non participant.
This takes us to thinking as an individual, as a member of a collective group desiring or rejecting the consequences of engaging in the actions expressed in the ‘name’ of the ‘label’ and what it implies.
“I don’t want to play baseball.”, “I don’t care who wins.”, “I feel bad for the losers.” “I only like to watch.”
“I don’t want to shoot someone I don’t even know.”
“I don’t want strangers to shoot me.”
These twists and turns become more and more conflicted in what is a development of awareness, understanding and knowledge of what I will call “the emotional distortions of the crowd”. Especially when the ‘game’ of war-ing has forever been the expression of an abstracted domination of hate, exclusion and neglect of conscious managing of tribal reactions in the failure to dominate those who disagree, rather than include the ‘others’ in a world of equity in regards to crowded and expanding community populations.
Revelations of this kind are part of the biographic development of individual consciousness, which in part is the capacity to distinguish the reality behind the social images i.e. its content and purpose. This is especially true of political images and labels. In the complexities of social power, anger and frustration grow even more.
When we can better understand and examine the character of the individual behind the labels they wear to present themselves to others and the world, we are beginning to find our way to a better understanding of what is true and what is used to manipulate us. We know more about what is given to us in our neural brain matrix to control the complexities of human body, characteristics of feeling and thinking. Hopefully to find a more productive and realistic understanding of the difference in personal and social interaction, and for a better use of the meaning of symbols and labels.