Today, non-conformity is acceptable in our society. Or is it really? Because it seems to me like some ways of expressing non-conformity are acceptable, while others aren’t. I like to call the former “acceptable rebellion”. Don’t get me wrong, I like rebellion. I like it when you choose your own way over conforming to what everyone wants you to be. I just don’t like it someone makes it look like they’re rebelling, but are actually just telling the masses what they want to hear. Non-conformity and rebellion are not non-conformity and rebellion when you’re just dishing out something that society wants to hear, or what society is telling the people what they want to hear. Perhaps it’s related to the tragic phenonemon of what was previously vehemently against the status quo then becoming the norm. Take Christianity for example. Before it became the religion of the Roman Empire, they were rebelling against it, guided by the teachings of their spiritual leader, Jesus. Then they became the religion of the Roman empire to become pretty much everything they, and Jesus for that matter, ever hated, and what it is today. Or the hippie movement of the 1960’s. Back then, they were the rabblerousers and social non-conformists of their era who fought against the establishment, primarly against the Vietnam war among other things. Now, many of their ideas and spirit of idealistic rebellion are accepted both as the norm and as the typecast one of the non-conformist stereotypes. Hell, the musical icons of that decade, such as the Beatles, are among the most popular musicians in the world. That example is reflected in contemporary artists engaged in moral social commentary, such as Banksy (a sell-out among the graffiti art world), who are accepted because their “rebellion” is the rebellion that people want to hear. And ultimately, that’s all that happens in modern times. Most cultural rebellion seems to not be true rebellion, but rather just more stuff the people want to hear, and people telling them just that.