Talk:Goth subculture

Archived discussions: ARCHIVE 1 ARCHIVE 2

Is the Gothic culture dead?

Today, we have many people which aren't listening to Gothic music. Consequently they're not goths. The same with fashion. Many people in the dark clubs aren't really dressed in Goth clothes. They look like cyber people, metalheads or "normalos". In my opinion, we're living in a post-goth period.

There is no Gothic band in the charts... without the popularity of Gothic music and without the figureheads of Gothic rock, the Goth culture is dying. --Diluvien 20:35, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the Gothic culture is dead, Netcraft confirms it. --Stormie 22:53, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

My question is not a joke. Today, many people who use the term "goth" aren't not really goth. They're not listening to goth music and they don't look like goths. The goth subculture is inseparably connected to Gothic music and fashion. --Diluvien 23:22, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't the place for personal opinion on whether goth is "dead" or not. Mdwh 23:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a logical and scientific place. And logical to me is, that the Goth subculture is dying. THIS IS important to the article. --Diluvien 23:50, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

The goth subculture of the 21st century is certainly not the same as the goth subculture of the early 80's. Two possible points of view on this are: (a) the goth subculture is dying/dead; or (b) the goth subculture is changing/has changed. I have my personal opinions on the topic, I'm sure you have yours - but a Wikipedia article is not the place for them. --Stormie 00:07, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

The goth subculture of the 21st century is no goth subculture. It's a derivative form, that's all. No goth subculture without goth music. And this is absolutely logical to me. How can you define this new culture without typical gothic characteristics? There is no common Gothic ideology. There are hundred of ideologies. The ideology is no typical characteristic. --Diluvien 01:41, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

See the unwieldily-named section "Relationship between goth subculture, gothic architecture, gothic novel, romantic movement, gothic aesthetic, gothic rock, gothic fashion and the sublime" above for my thoughts on this. But basically: the goth subculture is an aesthetic movement. Music is a major but not the only facet of that aesthetic. Music with a gothic aesthetic is not solely limited to gothic rock. And even if it was, definitions even of gothic rock have shifted over time, e.g. the introduction of drum machines into gothic rock in the mid 80's. imho, everyone is perfectly happy to accept that subcultures shift over time to absorb other influences, until they absorb something that you personally don't like - and then "it's not the same subculture any more!!". --Stormie 06:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

p.s. I agree that ideology is not a defining characteristic of the goth subculture, I don't think it ever was. --Stormie 06:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

The gothic culture was a horror movement. The first goths look like corpses with white faces, occult symbols etc. There was no aesthetic or romantic thing. This romantic thing is a phenomenon of the 1990s or an influence of the new romantic movement and has nothing to do with the traditional gothic subculture. The same with Gothic architecture, Gothic novels etc. The name of the Gothic subculture came from the Gothic music, a dark, punky music genre, related to death rock and horrorpunk. There was no relation to the Gothic architecture, but a preference for dead and old buildings in ruins, cemetaries, symbols of decay, etc. It was a "death romanticism". The term "gothic" means "dark, gloomy, spooky". I agree, that there are new developments. But now you have a culture without any relation to the roots. Metaller are listening to metal music, punks are listening to punk music, but goths are listening to futurepop, metal and techno? Bullshit! They're not goths! They're derivatives or parallel movements.

Btw: Do you have any reliable, scientific source that definitions of gothic rock have shifted over the time? A drum machine was in use since the early days of gothic rock. It's not a mid-80s thing.--Diluvien 09:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Like most people making grand pronouncements on what "real" goth is, you don't provide any sources. The use of the word "goth" gained currency slowly; where do you define the beginnings of the gothic culture, and where is your proof that those people dressed as corpses with occult symbols? The pictures I've seen from the Batcave show me plenty of people who weren't wearing corpseface and didn't deck themselves out in ankhs, pentagrams, and what have you. Furthermore, WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A MESSAGE BOARD for you to give us your opinion on the current state of gothic subculture. If you have some factual, supported information to add here, great, but no one cares if you're mad at teenagers listening to My Chemical Romance.--Halloween jack 19:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Must confess I was misremembering how early the Sisters of Mercy were active. But there is a school of thought I've encountered that "true" gothic rock died with the introduction of the drum machine. If it doesn't have a human drummer doing the "tribal" style drum sound, it's not goth. I mention this only as an example of the fact that the line can be drawn in a lot of different places. And as an example of why personal opinions as to what is or is not goth enough to be labelled goth are not particularly useful. --Stormie 03:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

diluvian, this article specifically destiguishes between the Metal subculture and the goth subculture. And no where does it say that futurepop or techno is goth. I'm not exactly sure what the point of this entire discussion is. There are many oldschool goths and there are even young oldschool goths (most being shy to "label themself", yet they are goth nonetheless). So if it is miniscule compared to its size historically it doesn't really amount to being "Dead". Its full of poseurs (as it was always)... This is nothing new. the degree of ignorance amongst non-goths about what goth is, may be at a new high, but this doesn't define the subculture, it only defines what outsiders think is the subculture. The idea that you can define something into or out of existence with mere words is one of the things the gothic romantic movement rejects, so that could never actually influence it. If goths believed that, then I guess the goths believed that the nobility really were more noble!TheDarknessVisible 21:35, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• Goth has not died, it has diversified. Zazaban 20:42, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

"Goth" as it once was has certainly died. I don't think subculture of twenty years ago resembles what is going on now at all. Change isn't always a good thing when something mutates beyond all recognition.Just my opinion.Crescentia 22:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

No, it has simply changed to a point where it may not resemble what it once was. Zazaban 22:34, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of all this, subcultures change and mutate, such is the nature of our society, it has happened to a lot of genres, look at stuff like punk and metal. The original punks were nothing like the 80's punks and then again the 90's punks were nothing like the 80's or 70's punks. We evolve rapidly in terms of fashion, goth is the same. In effect it has become a popular term that many people who wouldn't actually be considered goth are labeling themselves as that, rather than calling themselves something else. It has become a broad term now, and is now more readily associated with metal culture. Should be included in the article? maybe, but it is what Goth is now today, this is an encyclopedia so maybe it should be briefly mentioned in a time line, going through developments and changes in the subculture. However this artcile should be based around modern day term goth, with a mention of its previous roots.

-Some dude with crap opinion —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.106.200.223 (talk) 15:15, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Metal? No not really, at least not from more than a very few people, I've never seen that association, and it's usually refuted by everybody else present. Zazaban 21:42, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Industry kids and Spooky kids. A handful of metal kids, influenced by the music industry, which markets Metal music acts such as Nightwish, Cradle of Filth and other crap as "Gothic music". They're irrelevant for the article. --Breathtaker 23:55, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Criticism Section

It appears the whole criticism section is just a "don't blame me, he listened to heavy metal" when it really should just say that they were not gothic, and their tastes in music have no influence on their actions. ≈ Maurauth ^(nemesis) 08:52, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

The media reported certain individuals as fans of goth music and part of the goth subculture, therefore since there is reliable verifiable criticism of this reporting it is neutral to report the type of music verifiable sources indicate that they listen to and what the authorities actually concluded (say the columbine shooters were not goths and held goth music in contempt). The article does state that "Mercer emphasized that he was not blaming heavy metal music for Gill's actions and added "It doesn’t matter actually what music he liked."" It is not encyclopedic for an editor to simply report their own personal opinion that music was not what caused the tragedies. I'm sure most metal fans and goth fans are 99.999% in agreement that music doesn't cause this behavior. But the media opened this can of worms by their shallow reporting, not wikipedia. the article reports on what the media says and what the authorities and music experts say. Blaim the media for sensationalizing such an irrelevant factor in the acts of these individuals. If there is a reliable study of somekind which can actually make some kind of authoritative conclusion that music can not possibly influence someones actions then that source can also be included. But short of that we can not include a statement such as "their tastes in music have no influence on their actions.". It would be simply someones personal opinion. As it stands I believe the article gets pretty much the best that we can accomplish from a neutrality perspective.TheDarknessVisible 16:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

first paragraph of critisam

While reading this i look at the reference and in the article i read at thougth to myself that it was poorly writen and got its fact wrong.First it was taken from the cbc about the kemmear gill case,which we know form the previous section that he was a fan of nu-metal not goth.Seconded,this story was writen form a person in calgary i bet because it was so conservative and was rearshered poorly.So i am going to take it out.

Mention Strobelight Records?

I made an article for Strobelight Records. Given that they're one of the few (perhaps only) sizable record labels specializing in gothic rock/death rock, would it be appropriate to include a mention in the article? I notice that Cleopatra is mentioned.--Halloween jack 17:41, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Is industrial a goth music genre?

I don't personally think so, but a lot of goths listen to it, and an anon recently changed it to such. Please don't turn this into a debate about what is and isn't a goth, this is about the music and not the people. Zazaban 03:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Well I reckon the two lists in that section, instead of being labelled "The goth subculture developed very closely with certain forms of music" and "Also, the following genres have often been misattributed with goth culture," should rather say "The last person who edited this page is a fan of these genres of music" and "The last person who edited this page thinks that these genres of music suck." :-)

I added those lists and can ssure you I listen to all genres on both lists. :P No, that wasn't the intention, just that the general public often is under the impression that's the music goths generally listen to. Zazaban 05:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

In all seriousness, though - no, I agree with you. The word "goth" does not appear anywhere in the Industrial music article. Therefore imho, if someone considers it to have been closely involved with the development of the goth subculture, they should say so there first, and provide reliable sources. --Stormie 03:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, we'd need sources to say that it is an influence - but we also need sources to say that it isn't an influence, and that people falsely claim it is. Mdwh 17:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

In the 80's/early 90's industrial music was played alongside goth music in clubs. It wasn't until the early 90's that the genre had it's own exclusive scene. However, the two genres are not really related to each other musically.Crescentia 05:14, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Though note the current wording talks in terms of influencing the culture, not styles of music, which would suggest it means things like clubs and the scene, rather than being related musically. Mdwh 17:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I think this section is rather bad - whilst industrial and electronic music are not related to gothic rock, whether genres of music are related to the goth subculture very much depends on your opinion, and definitions. For example, plenty of "goth" clubs play much, or in some cases mainly, industrial and EBM. What does it mean to say "misattributed"? Who attributes them, and why are they wrong?

I'm sure at one time we had a goth music list article which eventually got deleted because it was hopelessly full of original research and POV, with people trying to claim that X were or weren't "goth". This list looks like it's heading in the same direction.

The article already mentions music and bands, whilst this list tells the reader no useful information, and seems just there to push a point of view - I think it's better to remove it altogether. Mdwh 02:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

So are there answers to my questions, or sources, rather than simply reverting? Note, there is a difference between "gothic rock" (which is a specific genre), and "music associated with goth subculture" which is a much broader and harder to define thing (as I say, plenty of "goth" clubs play more than just "goth rock"). Can sources be provided that (a) people claim that these genres have influenced goth subculture, and (b) they are wrong? Can this be expanded into saying something actually useful, rather than what at the moment seems to be just a POV-pushing list which tells us nothing? Mdwh 17:22, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I know this probably shouldn't be here but....

Are they're any goth userboxes that don't assume the user is female? I KNOW I saw one a while ago! Zazaban 05:22, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

BDSM

It seems to be an influence to me. The word bondage is even used. Zazaban 00:08, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

It's not about what it is to us, it's about verifiable sources. What does the reference given actually state?

Bondage pants are just a single item, and I'm not sure it really counts as borrowing from BDSM culture - according to the article, they were popularised in punk subculture.

This certainly doesn't seem strong enough to be in the lead of the article; it suggests that BDSM culture is one of the main influences on goth subculture, which seems dubious to me. Mdwh 02:03, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but it is properly referenced and totally justified. BDSM is an important influence in the goth subculture, just look around and take notice. Trencacloscas 02:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

You've just repeated your assertions - can you answer my question please? What does the reference say? "Look around and take notice" is original research (what am I supposed to be noticing, by the way? Why are bondage pants significant enough to mention in the lead, and not all the other millions of things that people wear in the subculture?) Mdwh 02:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Nobody's repeated any assertions. That's a different person. :) Zazaban 06:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I mean "repeated the assertions". Is anyone going to answer the questions then? Mdwh 10:49, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I'd move that BDSM reference down into the "Styles of dress within the subculture.." sentence in the second paragraph, since that's where the disparate elements that can be found within gothic fashion are listed. As an aside, what exactly is "cultural proclivities" meant to mean in that opening paragraph? --Stormie 03:36, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I think this would be fine. A lot of the problem for me is that it appears in the first paragraph, before the later mention on styles of dress, suggesting BDSM subculture is a major influence on goth subculture. Sure, some goths wear things like bondage trousers, but these are one of many styles of clothing worn. Given that we already have a list of influences for styles of dress, I'm not sure why BDSM gets mentioned up in front.

Whilst I'm at it, I'm not sure about the addition of "horror movies" either? Some have had an influence, but this is a wide genre, much of which has nothing to do with goth subculture. We mention vampires later in the article, but I'm not sure what apart from that is a major influence? Mdwh 10:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I have deleted the reference again because it simply doesn't belong there. Bondage pants were a punk subculture fashion statement and had nothing to do with the goth subculture. Plus basing the inclusion on just bondage pants is ridiculous.Crescentia 15:12, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Plenty of goths wear bondage pants. That was only one example anyway. Zazaban 19:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

If you mean the kids who call themselves goth who wear those baggy bondage pants with all of the chains on them that listen to Korn then you are right. However, it is a fashion statement and does not have to do with the development of the subculture.Crescentia 20:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Funny. I distinctly remember me and my friends wearing similar clothing in 1986, without any "Korn" in sight.Theplanetsaturn 20:43, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

If you want to play the age card, I was around at the same time and I only remeber punks wearing them. There wasn't even a 'goth' subculture back then, because the term didn't come into widespread use until around 90. People who were weirdos in the 80's were usually called alternative or mod. That is until the word 'alternative' got stolen and used by the mainstream recording industry to describe Nirvana and grunge. That is how things were on the West Coast of the US where I lived. By the way I was talking about those ugly wide legged ones that kids wear these days, not the tight ones. They didn't even have the baggy ones back then.Crescentia 22:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Age card? Coming from the person who says "If you mean the kids who call themselves goth..." The age card is already well in play by YOU. And there wasn't a goth subculture then? That's absurd. Maybe where you were it was nonexistent, but it certainly did exist elsewhere. And yeah, the pants were tighter then. But subcultures reflect popular fashions. Popular fashions NOW are these god awful baggy pants. Hence the counter culture equivalents. You keep saying that these fashions were the domain of the punk subculture. But as you should know, the difference between the two subcultures was more loosely defined in that era.Theplanetsaturn 22:34, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I lived in a very large metropolitan area, and I went to the 'alternative' clubs back then, and I tell you that people did not use the word 'goth' like they do now. There was a subculture but it wasn't coined as 'goth'. If you don't believe me that's fine. Yes, the fashions were more combined back then, BUT bondage pants started out in the punk subculture, and did not make an important contribution to the gothic subculture. Do you honestly think that bondage pants are important enough to be used as the single reference for the inclusion of BSDM in the first paragraph? Because that is what this discussion is about.Crescentia 02:56, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

And I tell you they did. By the mid-eighties, there was a subculture and it was referred to as "Goth". In fact, many of the participants were completely put out by the term "Death Rock" that was being used in replacement by the late eighties. I'm sure you believe in what you say. But you are 100% wrong on this count regardless of what you believe. As for the rest, no, I do not believe it is important enough to include in the opening paragraph. But you are supporting the exclusion on erroneous logic and a condescending tone. "If you mean the kids who call themselves goth...". I mean seriously, you expect to throw around crap like that and not get called on it? And then you suggest someone else is throwing around the age card? Regardless, yes, bondage pants were first seen within the punk subculture. This happened to be at a time when the entirety of the goth subculture and fashion was still an offshoot of punk, so the distinction is both irrelevant and misleading The fashion is (and always has been) accepted across both subcultures no matter how you try to pigeon hole it into one exclusively.Theplanetsaturn 03:19, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Crap like that? How was saying that playing the age card? Also, why are you 'calling me out' on it? Is this topic so important to you that you 'call out' anybody who disagrees with you? If it is then I suggest that you reavulate your life, because this is the internet. I'm not going to argue any further with you because, to be quite frank, what you say holds no importance to me and you are going to believe what you are going to believe regaudless of what anybody else tries to explain to you.Crescentia 13:48, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Let's follow your dismissal to the logical conclusion. It's the internet. NONE of this matters. Yet you have edited dozens upon dozens of pages in the last couple of weeks. You can pretend you didn't drop the age card yourself, that you weren't acting in an elitist manner in your justification for the removal of this information. But it's obviously just the world of make believe you're indulging in. Your logic and argument were flawed, regardless of the fact that I agree with your overall intent. You argue for the right thing in the wrong way, you deserve to be called on it. Because frankly, I'm left to wonder how many pages you disrupt with your inaccurate perspective on history. The subculture wasn't called "goth"? That is one of the most absurd rewritings of history I have ever witnessed. Do some research. Educate yourself, and stop using your inaccurate perspective to justify your edits.Theplanetsaturn 18:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I left you a message on your talk page that you obviously haven't read. If you wish to insult me take it there instead of here. Stop the personal attacks.Crescentia 19:40, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

How can I stop what doesn't exist? You keep insisting I'm insulting YOU. I'm not, I'm taking issue with your fallacious argument. There is a difference. As for when and where I respond to you, as long as YOU keep leaving messages for me HERE, I will continue to respond to you HERE. This isn't exactly a chicken or the egg scenario, now is it?Theplanetsaturn 19:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

The problem there is that you are now trying to define goth, which I personally think is an impossible task, one often riddled with elitism and opinion. Zazaban 21:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Isn't that exactly what you are trying to do? It should be under an influence under the fashion catergory, but not under the subculture. The two are different.Crescentia 22:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually I'm trying to not define it, which is an extremly difficult task, one involving a great deal of oddly shaped cookies. But the cookies don't have much to do with Wikipedia, so I'll just leave it at it being difficult. Zazaban 22:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

You reverted it again without answering questions. I removed it again because you have not proved your case. It could possibly go under the fashion influence section, but not as BDSM. Instead it should be called fetish. If BDSM influenced the goth subculture wouldn't a lot of people in the subculture be into pain and domination? Because that is what BDSM is.Crescentia 16:09, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Plenty of goths wear all sorts of things - I think we need something stronger to cite it as a main influence. Otherwise we'll have a neverending list of "things which at least some goths wear". Also it's not clear to me that bondage pants really came from the BDSM subculture, despite the name - they seem to be more a fashion thing.

Better examples might be collars. Also it might be more accurate to state fetish clothing than BDSM - for exereample, PVC and boots. Though it's not immediately obvious how the subcultures influenced each other - it may not be as simple as goths borrowing from existing fetish subculture. Mdwh 21:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry if some people don't care to consider the point here. The point is that the assertion of Fetish culture influencing the Goth subculture is duly referenced and a real source is quoted (I can provide many more). That should be enough to end any discussion for now. Please provide sources and quote them properly or just leave the edit wars for something more productive. Trencacloscas 01:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

What does that reference say? What other references do you have then? You are the one engaging in edit wars rather than responding to the questions on the talk page. It's not up to us to provide sources - you're the one making the claim. And currently the article states BDSM, not fetish. Mdwh 03:42, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Mdwh is correct. You and Zazaban keep putting it back up without any additional information. I am taking it back off. Before you add it again come up with some more references. I also agree with Mdwh in the fact that BDSM is mentioned instead of fetish. BDSM is a behaviour, right? It's being into pain, domination, etc.... I really don't see what that has to do with the development of the the subculture. In a fashion sense I do think that fetish attire has influenced things a little bit, but not to the extent that it gets mentioned up at the top of the article. If you want to add it as an influence put it in the fashion section because that is where it should go. Please stop reverting. Also, I just took a look at you discussion page and I see that you have a real history of doing the same kind of thing on other pages as well.Crescentia 15:54, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree actually, wait until there's some concensus. Zazaban 20:21, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

The problem is you are giving no references at all. I can give plenty of references involving influence of the BDSM culture (in fashion or in ideology) in the Goth subculture (if you want to call it 'fetish', it's ok by me, but 'fetish' is not necessarily a culture or an ideology, just a fashion term, and thus incorrect), but it's useless since you don't offer any elements to support any opposing points of view. The creators of the Goth subculture were involved in BDSM, the attires owe plenty to the BDSM scene, Goths and BDSM people buy clothes in the same shops, Goth parties include oftenly BDSM shows.... That's what I meant with "look around and take notice". Stop edit wars by fundamenting your opinions properly, please. Trencacloscas 22:05, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

No, you give one reference. I'm not going to change it back again because I'm tired of this. Somebody is bound to do it soon anyway.Crescentia 22:40, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I gave the reference of a book totally devoted to the topic of Goth Subculture. Even the pages. Want exact quotations? Cool: "The relation between Goth and BDSM is not recent, but rather something that happened from the beginning" (page 207). "There is not a plain consensus in the gothic community about sexual practices in the same level that there is about disciplines typically artistic: cinema, music, literature, plastic arts in general, and even fashion. But it is undeniable that gothic esthetics are tributaries of the fetish and BDSM scene, and beyond individual preferences of sex and seduction, parties and events, from the beginning and each time more oftenly, include BDSM shows..." (big etcetera follows, page 207). There is a whole chapter about the subject, but I won't transcribe it for you. This should be enough to stop your senseless edit wars without the intervention of an administrator.Trencacloscas 03:00, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

You still only give one reference. The same reference. Here is a link that says fetish fashion has influenced goth fashion...NOT the subculture: http://www.sfgoth.com/primer/parentFAQ.html . Want another? Here: http://www.penddraig.co.uk/pen/g_gloss.htm This one says that MOST BDSM people have nothing to do with the goth subculture. Want yet another? Here: http://gothic-charm-school.com/charm/?p=71 She says that Goth and BSDM are two seperate things. STOP REVERTING. You link still makes no sense. Just because a goth night has a BDSM show then the entire subculture must be influenced by that?The author is calling artistic endevours 'disciplines', so that means that they must be linked to BDSM? That also makes no sense. He gives no proof that the two are linked, he is just stating an opinion, and a wrong one at that. How did the link between the two happen from the beginning? He gives no proof. In that book he also links gothic metal to the gothic subculture, even though the two have nothing to do with one another. That author is just perpetuating myths about the subculture. Mick Mercer, who has participated in the gothic subculture since the beginning, mentions nothing about BDSM being linked to the subculture in any of his books.Crescentia 13:36, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

A crucial part of that quote is "There is not a plain consensus in the gothic community about sexual practices in the same level that there is about disciplines typically artistic: cinema, music, literature, plastic arts in general, and even fashion." I'd be a lot happier if that was conveyed in the text, but it is not, and putting it in the lead, before the mentions of music and fashion, and especially cinema, conveys that there is a consensus. I would suggest either a reword to state this, and/or moving it to later on in the article. Mdwh 13:15, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Edit - though I'll accept that naming the sources explicitly implies that it is not a consensus. So I think I'll accept what we have there now. Mdwh 13:19, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

First of all, are you aware that the first link you provide totally supports the relationship between Goth and BDSM? Your second link does not say anything about the subject(which is the influence of BDSM on Goth subculture). Here it is the exact quote: "Although Gothics tend to appear to be familiar with the practices of bondage by their apparel, most of those people wearing vinyl pants and bondage bracelets don't know the first thing about BDSM and are following a fashion trend. The majority of BDSM practitioners have nothing to do with gothic, and they view bondage gear as a tool, not an accessory". The third one is just a forum-like opinion and it is not even clear; it mentions the crossover between fetish, BDSM and Goth scenes but doesn't say anything about influences. PLEASE GET REAL!!!! I can also provide many internet casual links and references: http://www.nycgoth.com/more/sadomasochism or http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A473924 at a simple query. But I quite prefer books, here's another one: Carol Siegel "Goth's Dark Empire" (pages 8-13 and more too numerous to quote), and also take a look at Corvis Nocturnum "Embracing The Darkness" which points almost the same. By the way, did you ever care to read the expression "to a lesser extent". Since I', tired of attitudes like yours I will rephrase the assertion in a manner that will be incontrovertible. Hope it ends the argument by now. Trencacloscas 21:27, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Your reference is in SPANISH so how can anybody here read it ? This is an English language Wikipedia artricle. I mean seriously, if I wanted to read the book I, and others here, couldn't. I stand by the fact that your source is dubious. Somebody else will just revert it again. You are the ONLY person who thinks that it should be included at this point, and instead of waiting for an agreement you just keep on reverting. Also, I would rather trust the judgement of a source such as Mick Mercer, who actually particpated in the early "scene", than a reporter or professor who has no inner knowledge of it.Crescentia 22:28, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

The problem with using Carol Siegel as a reference is that she's an academic who seems to be really mostly interested in gender and transgression. (That is, she's one of the academics who is way more enamoured of PZB's Lost Souls than most goths I've known have ever been, and she seems to be interested mostly because of the gay themes.) Not the only academic who's slightly overemphasized the importance of that book to the subculture. (Yes, there are plenty of goths who like it, but I don't believe it's had much influence, if any, on the subculture itself. And it didn't accurately depict every local scene, either.) 4.224.228.113 10:49, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not the only person, there's Zazaban over there too, and of course I'm just calling a neutral point of view if there is more nonsense on your side. I just included too more quotes right in English. By the way, if Mick Mercer says something about the subject, why don't you quote him? It is totally imposible that he never touched it. Oh, wait, I read "Hex Files: The Goth Bible" some time ago and guess what?... there was an entire section dedicated to Fetish. A pity I don't have the book with me, do you? Trencacloscas 00:24, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

He also included vampire and pagan sections and yet not all goths are into those things either. He said I quote,'...these are relevent now.' He did not say that the BDSM scene influenced the development of the subculture. He said that some people in the goth subculture partake in it NOW, but that others, including himself, aren't interested in it at all. Yes, I do have the book and it is sitting right in front of me. Oh burn.....Crescentia 04:49, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Certainly, and there are goths that don't dress in black. Mick Mercer is not the only expert or the only one who made researches on the subject, so it doesn't matter in the end. Anyway, I wonder why would he put an entire section about fetish in a Goth book. If he actually wrote that fetish and bdsm never influenced the Goth scene, that would be relevant. But I quite remember it is not the case, and I intend to recover my copy of his book just for the sake of doublechecking. Trencacloscas 13:52, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Fetish fashion as a fashion influence

I have no strong opinion one way or another on the above discussion as to whether BDSM has been an influence on the subculture. But I think the following paragraph, on the fashion styles, should mention fetish fashion.

The most obvious examples would be leather collars (with O-rings, etc) and PVC clothing (well, more usually polyurethane in reality). You'd be hard pressed to walk into any goth club without seeing examples of both of those. Roy Badami 12:11, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Just a recommendation from a non-Goth

The Ideology section goes to relatively great lengths to say that there is no real Goth ideology. So why is there an Ideology section here? I won't remove it, because it's not something I'd bother returning here to keep up with, but the whole article needs serious trimming, and it would be a good start for a "regular" here.

MarkinBoston 03:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

One of the reasons is that a great number of non-goths believe there to be an ideology and quite often their ideas involve satanism and white supremacy. It is needed to explain that that is NOT so. Zazaban 20:00, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I used to know some people who identified themselves as goth, and their ideas did involve satanism, violence and, if not white supremacy, certainly not tolerance. I know they were not representative of all goths, but I think it's best to leave that section out since it has nothing to do with goths, really. It should be enough to just state in one simple sentence that goths are not associated with any one ideology.--80.86.74.135 14:35, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

They sound like metalheads, a lot of them think they're Goth. I have yet to meat a Goth who holds those ideas, but plently of Metalheads who self-identify as Goth and are generally regarded as pillocks. Zazaban 23:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Who are you to say who is goth or not? The only information you had to base your assumption on that they were not true goths on, was their ideology, while at the same time you maintain that there is no ideology associated with goths. They identified themselves as goth and in many ways they matched the description of goths in this article, including fashion and music taste. Does this not make them goths? If it is their ideas that disqualify them from being goths, the ideology section has to be revised, because in that case there clearly is ideology associated with goths.--80.86.74.135 23:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Calm down, I never said they weren't Goth, I only said what they sounded like to me. I of course, was wrong. Zazaban 23:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Jhonen Vasquez

I think he's given way too much prominence in the criticism section. Either add a few sources and other critics to balance things out, or he should go. Zazaban 21:52, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Bzzt! Wrong! A former version of the article had too much info about that boring internet humor dude Maddox, and posited that a page he'd written making fun of goths was criticism. He wasn't a scene member, so the "criticism" wasn't very astute. Vasquez has been a scene member, and his criticism (mostly in the Anne Gwish strips) has been spot-on. It should stay. Most other "criticism" of the subculture is based on misapprehensions by conservative parents, etc. 4.224.228.113 10:34, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Noctívagus

This Portuguese band keeps getting re-added with no explaination. Is it notable enough? Zazaban 19:28, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

No. It should be deleted.Crescentia 22:36, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

This band is not notable enough, and the person who keeps adding them is doing nothing more than spamming them. If they are reading this I would encourage them to stop doing so.Crescentia 13:39, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Fashion WikiProject.

Does this article really qualify or should it just be gothic fashion? Zazaban 02:40, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

'See Also' links that do not belong...

I removed 'underclass' and 'intercultural competence' because neither have anything to do with the goth subculture. The term underclass denotes a socio-economic level that some people live in, not a subculture in which people CHOOSE to join. Intercultural competence, according to the Wiki article, has to do with people of different national cultures getting along,etc... The goth subculture is not a national culture based upon a specific country's long history. Rather, it is a recent subculture based upon music.Crescentia 04:56, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Comparisons and analogies, never heard of those? And do not reply to me, 'cos Im likely leaving this site. Doktor Who 05:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow.Crescentia 05:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I removed them. They were far to general, we would have to split internal links into a seperate article if we added stuff like that. Zazaban 05:37, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed.Crescentia 05:51, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh what a coincidence, today everybody is against me, it seems that after 2000 edits, (700 in the main spoace), I deserve retirements, in 1 year i've never seen something like this, everybody against me just in a few hours. Doktor Who 05:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

You are taking things way too personally.Crescentia 14:39, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I don't even know you, it's not personal.

Zazaban 07:10, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Gothic metal has nothing to do with the gothic subculture so it shouldn't be included. It is a metal subgenre, not gothic. Even the article says that they are not the same.Crescentia 14:18, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

It MAY be debatable since it is a metalised version of Gothic Rock, but it isn't really an influence. Zazaban 20:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Gothic metal is metal, not gothic rock. Back in the 80's, when I was in high school, the metal crowd hated the goth/punk crowd, so it's really ironic that people try to lump gothic metal into the gothic rock camp. Metal has never really been an influence at all in the gothic subculture. The whole gothic subculture came from punk.Crescentia 01:21, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, to be fair, gothic metal is not an 80's flavour of metal. You'll certainly find a lot more crossover between the metal crowd and the goth crowd now than you would have then. --Stormie 04:12, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I never said it was gothic rock, I said it was a metalised version. Like a fusion genre? Zazaban 05:56, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

No, like gothic metal is related to death metal which is in no way related to deathrock or gothic rock except for the NAMES. Crescentia's comment from 23:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

below is correct... stop trying to shoehorn "Gothic Metal", which has appropriated the NAME goth, into the subculture. The "goths" who listen to gothic metal are gothic metal fans, not related to the long-term-existing goth subculture. 4.224.228.113 10:38, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't get it. Gothic Metal is a rock style that combines elements from Metal and Gothic, most Goths today listen to Gothic Metal and any Gothic club these days plays Gothic Metal for the people. It doesn't matter if it is an influence or not, it is a fact. Trencacloscas 21:44, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Give some proof that most goths listen to gothic metal. Facts please. None of the goth clubs I went to recently played gothic metal so your statement is not universally true.Until you provide facts that mose goths these days listen to gothic metal the link is gone.You are stating your opinion and nothing else. PLUS the GOTHIC SUBCULTURE WIKI page states: QUOTE: Mick Mercer, author, noted music journalist, and world's leading historian of Goth music[17][18][19] stated, of Kimveer Gill, that he was "not a Goth. Never a Goth. The bands he listed as his chosen form of ear-bashing were relentlessly Metal and standard Grunge, Rock and Goth Metal, with some Industrial presence.", "Kimveer Gill listened to metal", "He had nothing whatsoever to do with Goth" and further commented "I realise that like many Neos this idiot may even have believed he somehow was a Goth, because they're only really noted for spectacularly missing the point." Mercer emphasized that he was not blaming heavy metal music for Gill's actions and added "It doesn’t matter actually what music he liked.". What Mercer said is that just because you listen to gothic metal doesn't mean that you are a goth. In fact he is stating that gothic metal isn't goth at all. That means that listing gothic metal as an 'also' link is going against the Wiki page itself.[20].Crescentia 23:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Also, if gothic metal is so important in the subculture than why isn't that mentioned in the page itself?Crescentia 17:14, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

It is mentioned, in the bit that states why it is not important in the subculture. Zazaban 17:30, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Yep, here is the quote: "This is a common misconception(RE:metal being associated with gothic subculture). Individual goths will listen to any music they like, but as a subculture, heavy metal music is not an associated musical style.[7]" That just proves the point that the gothic metal link shouldn't be included.Crescentia 18:20, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

( this however, is incorrect as goth is a pacifist subculture).

The gothic fascination with the macabre has raised public concerns regarding the well-being of goths. The mass media has made reports that have influenced the public view that goths or people associated with the subculture, are malicious ( this however, is incorrect as goth is a pacifist subculture). Some individuals who have either identified themselves or been identified by others as goth, whether correctly or incorrectly, have committed high profile violent crimes, including several school shootings. These incidents and their attribution to the goth scene have helped to propagate a wary perception of Goth in the public eye.[10][11]

How can one say it is a pacifist subculture? It is apolitical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.176.14.100 (talk) 02:49, August 25, 2007 (UTC) Pacifist doesn't necessarily imply politics. It's simply is a fancy word for non-violent. Zazaban 02:59, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

It's more like apathetic. Unlike the punk subculture, which has always had a politically mided contingent of people, the gothic subculture has never really been involved with causes. I think it is due to the fact that many focus on their status within the subculture, rather than on what is going on outside the subculture. Sad but true. During the whole time I was involved in it I maybe met only a handfull of people who went to protests, etc... Every time I hear the word 'pacifist' in connection with the gothic subculture it makes me think of the passive agressive behaviour that is prevelent in the subculture. It's not that people are non-violent, it's more like they would rather gossip like hell about people and then pretend to be friends with them the next moment.Crescentia 03:09, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Yep. I agree with this. And I think that "Non-violent" would be a more accurate word than "pacifist." But articles about the subculture written for a mass audience never touch on the emotional violence factor, all that passive-aggressive behavior. Most goths, at least those who go out a lot, seem to concentrate on various aesthetic pursuits: what status in the subculture is conferred through fashion, musical knowledge, hanging out at clubs and dating all the other "hot" scene people, art projects, home decor, etc. I think the cause goths are most likely to be involved with is animal welfare, but usually more in an "I'm vegan" way than an "I foster homeless animals" way. 4.224.228.113 10:44, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Every single time that I have mentioned the passive agressive thing in forums people get all pissy and say,"The 'scene' isn't like that!". People are in a whole lot of denial about it. There is a huge amount of emotional warfare that goes on in the "scene". I have lived in four different areas of the US and it happens everywhere.Crescentia 14:47, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I've reinstated this claim in (hopefully) more NPOV language, with a reference. Rightly or wrongly (I would say rightly, but then I'm a goth so you might regard me biased :) the goth scene is regularly described as peaceful, non-violent, etc, and that tallies with my experience. I just added the most authoratative reference I could quickly find, but it wouldn't hurt to have maybe one more. Roy Badami 21:42, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and to comment on the emotional thing (sorry, made the edit before noticing there was a talk secion on it - my bad): By all means write a section on the emotional 'drama' that seems to be a frequent occurence in some parts of the scene. But in the context of a section talking about accusations of mass murder, I think it's reasonable to comment that physical assualt is rare in the Goth subculture, and I think it's clear from context that that's what 'non-violent' means here Roy Badami 21:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Associated music

Alright, this section is getting really ugly. I think that our definition of what can be called Goth is highly conservative, and is trying to exactly conform to what it was in 1982. Can't we update a bit? Even other language Wikipedias are way more liberal than us. Zazaban 22:53, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree. This has all the same problems as Gothic music (previous version) which was redirected after an AfD and List of non-goth musical artists popular within goth subculture (which was deleted after a prod). The sources only cover punk rock being an influence, and metal not being an influence (and I don't think either of those are controversial - the issue is things like industrial or electronic music). I'd rather get rid of it - we already cover the music in the article text, and in Gothic rock; no need for a list that's just going to attract random people's opinions of whether X is goth or not. Mdwh 09:29, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

The reason why you say this is because you want things like gothic metal and BDSM added, when neither of those things are practiced/liked by a lot of people in the subculture in the US or even in England. Maybe this one is more conservative because the things you want added aren't as popular in the countries where the subculture started, which happen to be english speaking countries. If you want those things added then put them in your country's Wiki article on the subject.Crescentia 23:57, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I removed it, we can put it back if we can ever agree on a version that is not a snapshot of Goth music a quarter of a century ago. Zazaban —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zazaban (talk • contribs) 07:07, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the statement of the person who added it back again, without gothic rock based music there wouldn't be a gothic subculture to begin with.Crescentia 23:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Gothic rock is mentioned in the article, multiple times. We also have it in the "See also" (if people think other genres should be listed, feel free to put them in the "See also" too, and/or work it into the article text). It is unnecessary to repeat it in list form. At least there seems to be consensus on removing the "misidentified" section. Mdwh 00:08, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. This topic is very well covered in the main article.Theplanetsaturn 00:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Where is the problem? It's a simple music section. Music, which is strongly associated with the Goth subculture. --Breathtaker 00:19, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

If nothing else, it's redundant. In the case of regional variations, it appears to be trivial.Theplanetsaturn 00:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Which is already covered in the article. Prose is generally preferred to simple lists (see Wikipedia:Embedded list) anyway, and I see no point in repeating it. Furthermore, we already have a place for such lists - the "See also" section, which already lists gothic rock. I have no objection if we make a music subheading and put those other genres such as Punk rock and Dark wave. Do you object to removing Regional variations, by the way, or has that just got caught up in the reverting? Mdwh 00:27, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

The music section is an important part of the article. Since the end of the 90s, the term "goth" has been misused by the music industry for every kind of metal, rock or techno music. new subcultures developed on the foundation of this term abuse. A seperate music section (in addition with references) helps to define the original goth subculture and their music. --Breathtaker 00:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, friend, that's it. My 3 cents: I am not usually much involved in such discussions, becuase I really don't have enough time (I enjoy a BIG amount of styles/genres of music), however with regard to gothic rock/dark-new-wave, I wrote the article Danse Society, so, please do not remove that section. Thank you.Doktor Who 00:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Can I ask your reasons for wanting to repeat the information already in the article? Mdwh 02:53, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

There is a link to the gothic rock article in the first sentence of the gothic subculture article. Yes, music is an important aspect of the subculture. So much so that it has it's own page. Clearly, that's where the bulk of this specific information belongs. Also, you've been re-adding the "regional variations" section as well. How is this section justified by your argument?Theplanetsaturn 00:49, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

1.) The first part of the article is an introduction, nothing more. There should be a short music section within the main section of the article.

2.) If you delete the link to the Toronto goth scene, no one can find the article of the Toronto goth scene. That's logical, hmm? --Breathtaker 01:13, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

1.)You're ignoring the point. There is a direct link within the first sentence to an article that is completely dedicated to the topic of gothic music. That is the appropriate section for this information

2.)And again, you're ignoring the point. What reason is there for a "regional variation" section if the only example is Toronto? It seems trivial. Incorporate it into the main body if it's relevant.Theplanetsaturn 01:19, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

An article introduction is a synopsis of the article contents, nothing more. And that is the point. --Breathtaker 01:32, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Ignoring the point again. The point is not the introduction. the point is to the link. There is an entire page dedicated to gothic music. that is the appropriate section for details on the information you wish to include. I suspect you understand this. And you still ignore the topic of the regional variations". Please address this.Theplanetsaturn 01:35, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

This is beside the point anyway - it's not only mentioned in the introduction, it's also mentioned multiple times in the article, and it's listed in See also. The issue isn't whether it should be mentioned, because clearly we all agree that music should be. The issue is whether to repeat the information in list form, that is likely just to attract an increasing number of genres (as it has in the past). Lastly, please read WP:3RR. Mdwh 02:55, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to start handing out 24-hour blocks for Wikipedia:Three-revert rule violations if people don't stop edit warring over inserting and removing that section. --Stormie 02:50, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

And now, to throw in my two cents. I entirely agree with User:Mdwh that a prose section is much more desirable than a "list" section. I simply do not think you can cover the shades of meaning sufficiently without prose. It needs to describe the fact that there is music that was associated with the birth of the subculture, music that sprang up within the subculture, music that did not develop within the subculture but has become associated with it via the club scene, and music that is reckoned to be wrongly associated with the subculture by outsiders.

Furthermore, as we've all seen, a list of styles has led to the most common edit to this article being someone either adding their favourite subgenre of music to the list, or removing genres that they personally dislike. I'd like to think that people would do that less often if they had to write a sentence of coherent prose around it.

I would actually say that the section "The goth scene" is a pretty solid starting point for a replacement for the list section. It's almost entirely about music anyway. --Stormie 03:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

"I'm going to start handing out 24-hour blocks for Wikipedia:Three-revert rule violations if people don't stop edit warring over inserting and removing that section."

There's only ONE person here who has been in violation of this rule, and that's Breathtaker. Address those culpable and leave the rest out of it.Theplanetsaturn 04:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

The Three-revert Rule rule is an admonition against edit-warring. It's not a license to edit-war as long as everybody on your side only reverts once or twice each. But relax, since blocking people will prevent them from contributing to this talk page too, I'll just protect the main article if edit-warring continues. --Stormie 04:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and if you investigate, you'll see that when it became apparent that Breathtaker would not relent in his reversions, everyone else (long before your general admonishment) ceased and continued with polite discussion on either this talk page or elsewhere. So please, address those responsible only.Theplanetsaturn 04:54, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Zazaban has been doing the exact same thing so it isn't just one person.Crescentia 16:17, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

It's absurd to comapre Zazabans after the fact edit (you'll notice that his reversion was time stamped well after my comments anyway) with Breathtakers half a dozen.Theplanetsaturn 19:05, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Some thoughts on reordering the article

Currently, after our introductory section, we have "Origins and development," then our disputed "Associated music" section and "The goth scene" (primarily about music). Then we head off into "Historical and cultural influences", then back to "Ideology" and "Fashion".

I would propose that Music, Fashion and Ideology should be together, since they're what the subculture is "about", and that origins, development, history, cultural influence and the like should all be together, since they're "about the subculture". Perhaps like this:

1. Music
2. Fashion
3. Ideology
4. Origins and development
5. Historical and cultural influences
6. Controversy
7. Criticism

(followed by references/see also/links)

What does anyone else think? --Stormie 12:37, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I think, it looks like the German goth article. *rofl* But it's a good article structure. A main characteristic is, that the Goth subculture originally existed within the post-punk and dark wave movement. In many European countries, such as Germany, France, Italy etc., all the original Gothic bands, e.g. bauhaus, cure, siouxsie, sisters etc., were called "Dark Wave". There was no Goth with metal music and there was no Goth with Manson music. Metal, Manson and their fans are definitely no part of the goth subculture. The Goth subculture is associated with Gothic rock, Gothic rock is the life elixir of this culture. It's like the Metal culture. Without Metal music there would not be a Metal subculture. A Goth is listen to Gothic rock and a handful of other genres of the dark wave movement, such as ethereal music from the Projekt records label. Sure, besides this music he can listen to other genres, but Gothic rock and Dark Wave are the most important music movements in connection to a Goth. And on the foundations of this music, the Goth subculture developed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.32.134 (talk) 20:06, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

A proposal for the revised music section.

Have both the original muisic (As we've always had,) Newer music, and music often mistaken for Goth, Including both Genres like Metal and Emo, and a few bands like Marilyn Manson and maybe The Misfits. Mention that some newer genres status as Goth is disputed by some. Also, perhaps a history section for the evolution of 'Goth' music. Zazaban 15:23, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

You stated in an edit change that the music section doesn't represent what music goths listen to. It shouldn't be about that because people who identify themselves as 'goth' can listen to anything. I listen to classical, hardcore punk, etc... but I wouldn't call that music 'goth' because it isn't. Rather, the music section should be about what music has ALWAYS been considered 'goth'. The recent 'evolution' of goth music is more about how the genre is being misrepresented by the mainstream press, and people believing them, than anything else.Crescentia 16:15, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I think this is covered well by "By the mid-1990s, styles of music that were heard in venues that goths attended ranged from gothic rock, death rock, industrial music, EBM, ambient, experimental, synthpop, shoegazing, punk rock, 1970s glam rock, indie rock, to 1980s dance music.", as well as the surrounding paragraphs. This gives a list of genres, and gives something more well-defined (i.e., what is played in venues) than simply "music that goths listen to".

Either way, that list we are edit-warring over needs to be integrated into the main text - and it's not clear what in that list isn't already covered by the main text already? (Apart from possibly the references.) Or is it that Breathtaker prefers it in list form?

I haven't seen anyone address the criticisms we've raised in talk - as far as I can tell, I've only seen people argue that we need to cover goth music, but that's not in dispute - we already do cover goth music in the article. Mdwh 22:19, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

The ..styles of music that were heard in venues that goths attended.. sentence is key, imho, since this article is about the goth subculture, not about gothic music. I would argue that "music associated with the goth subculture" is: styles of music played in clubs and gigs organized by and targetted towards people within the subculture.

I'm not sure how one goes about finding reliable sources for what music has been played in goth clubs over the years, sadly. My personal experience (which of course is not good enough for a Wikipedia article reference) is that most of those styles indeed have been played in goth clubs, and frequently (not sure about "1970s glam rock" though!). Marilyn Manson, much as I'm not a fan, is certainly an artist who I've often heard getting played at goth clubs. --Stormie 04:00, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

What it's about is what influences Goth, Mainly Post-punk and Gothic Rock at the beggining, then Industrial and EBM more recently. Zazaban 05:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

EBM is a totally different thing and more related to the rave movement than to gothic rock.Crescentia 18:49, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Whatever, could you please stop that stupid edit war? --Buxbaum666 08:08, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

This is a fallacy. Gothic clubs aren't really existent. The most events are Independent music events. Different genres are played and different subcultures are a part of the club scene. Beside the Goth subculture there is a Rivethead culture and a Cyber culture. In the 1980s and early 1990s different subcultures, such as Punks (Pistols, Ramones), EBM-heads (Nitzer 242), Crossover-heads (Ministry, NIN), and New Wavers (Depeche Mode, Anne Clark), were a part of the club culture. Pure gothic events are rare. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.50.138 (talk) 12:08, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I find it debatable whether they're all different subcultures, they all intermingle and are called and often self-referred to as 'Goth.' I personally find that most changes on this page seems to be based on nostalgia and not current information. Zazaban 15:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Try telling a rivethead that they are part of the gothic subculture. I don't think they would like that very much.Crescentia 15:32, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... Met some that think that. Zazaban 19:24, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Try telling a goth that they're not a goth, but a rivethead, because they listen to NIN ;)

Try telling a goth that they are a goth, and there's a fair chance that they'll say, no, they're not, they're dark alternative, or whatever :-) The scene is diverse and not well defined. Roy Badami 22:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, a lot of the problem is that few clubs that play these different genres actually advertise themselves as a "goth club". E.g., Slimelight advertises itself as "alternative club dealing in industrial, power-noise, cyber-synth, ebm, cyber-goth, darkwave, trad + modern goth, plus crossover and related alternative sounds." They still seem to be full of goths, and are often known as "goth clubs", but the problem is that we really need to go by verifiable references.

Even so, I'd say this situation supports the point being made - the subculture includes clubs which play a range of different styles, and not just clubs that play purely goth rock. It's not clear to me how we can view goth, rivethead and EBM as entirely separate, when there are many clubs that play the full range of these genres (although yes, I agree we shouldn't go labelling these other genres as "goth" or "goth music" - which is one of the reasons I oppose a "goth music" section). Mdwh 21:53, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

If the term "goth" has another meaning today and the Goth subculture article includes this new pseudo-goth meaning, i'll create a new big fat Dark Wave article including a section for the old Goth subculture. That's a promise! This new "pseudo-goth subculture" has nothing to do with the original Goth and Dark Wave movement! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.50.138 (talk) 17:12, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Goths still listen to Dark Wave, but also Industrial. Wikipedia isn't going to submit to POV, and thus we should potray Goth as it is now, not as it was 25 years ago. Zazaban 23:10, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Gothic is a subculture within the post-punk and dark-wave movement, nothing more. And this also includes parts of the post-industrial movement (a handful of goths listen to dark ambient or neofolk music). Metalheads, Technoheads and Rivetheads are not a part of the Goth subculture. They are foreign subcultures. A Goth is mainly listen to Gothic rock and Darkwave music. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.43.163 (talk) 11:14, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Btw: Mick Mercer also thinks the same, the goth movement is connected with gothic music: Mick Mercer, author, noted music journalist, and world's leading historian of Goth music[14][15][16] stated, of Kimveer Gill, that he was "not a Goth. Never a Goth. The bands he listed as his chosen form of ear-bashing were relentlessly Metal and standard Grunge, Rock and Goth Metal, with some Industrial presence.", "Kimveer Gill listened to metal", "He had nothing whatsoever to do with Goth" and further commented "I realise that like many Neos this idiot may even have believed he somehow was a Goth, because they're only really noted for spectacularly missing the point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.43.163 (talk) 11:36, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I never brought up Metal. Zazaban 23:22, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Lots of the goths I hang out with listen to EBM. I'd make the distinction between trad goth (traditional goth music and dress) and bleep (synth-based music such as EBM or futurepop) and the associated cybergoth attire, but I would regard both as part of the goth scene. But YMMV depending on which part of the world you're in. (I'm in the UK.) Goth has been around long enough you can't expect it to be homogenous. Roy Badami 22:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, sorry, should have said explicitly: surely the very existence of the term trad goth (which is widely used at least here in the UK) admits the existence of other, non-traditional forms of goth? Roy Badami 22:16, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

There are no Cybergoths. The term is totally absurd.

• These people don't listen to Gothic music
• These people don't look like Goths
• These people don't represent any Goth ideology
• These people don't show any interest in old buildings, cemeteries, gothic novels etc.

In Germany, these people came from the Techno and Rave subculture. They're absolutely untypical for Goth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.56.75 (talk) 23:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

That is quite the generalization there. Somewhat POV as well. Not that I don't agree with you somewhat, it is POV. Actually there are Cybergoths, they seem to listen to both Goth music and Techno music, and dress in a fusion style. Zazaban 23:40, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Here is my theory about that. When the rave culture took off here in the states a lot of people who thought that the gothic subculture was dying buggered off to go to raves. When THAT scene died off they returned to the gothic subculture and brought rave type music with them. I agree that those type of people really don't have anything to do with the gothic subculture. From the way they dress to the music they listen to, to their very interests, they really don't have anything in common with trad goths.Crescentia 23:43, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Sounds about right. But it would be POV to not include them. Zazaban 23:44, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

And yet, while cybergoths might (in your opinion) not be regarded as part of the goth scene in Germany, looking at last year's band listings for the Wave-Gotik-Treffen goth festival in Leipzig I immediately see that Front 242 (industrial) and Rotersand (aggrotech? I'm not very good at genres) were playing there. Roy Badami 09:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Forget the Wave-Gothic-Treffen. Nowadays, this meeting has nothing to do with Wave or Goth. The Original WGT has died at the end of the 1990s. I'm from Germany and the Cyber people are definitely no part of the Goth subculture. People of other countries think that Germany has the biggest Goth meeting. But that was a long time ago. The WGT is dead. Only the name stayed the same. In the last years, we used other events, such as Under Cover of Darkness Festival, Batcafe Festival or Gothic Pogo Festival. In the United States there are similar events (Drop Dead Festival etc.) --87.122.55.68 12:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, I certainly know British goths who go to WGT but I'll accept for the purposes of the present argument that German goths may not regard it as representative of the German goth scene. But I have a question for you: do german "cyber people" refer to themselves as goths or regard themselves as part of the goth scene?

In any case, we all have to be careful not to be too regionally specific, here. It is perfectly possible that in some countries or regions cyber tends to be regarded as part of goth and in other areas its regarded as separate Roy Badami 13:26, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

They don't really think about the structure of the Goth subculture. They're party people, they're no "thinkers". On a German Gothic board you can read that Goths dislike Cybers and Cybers dislike Goths ([1]). Cybers hate Goth. They think that Goth is boring, outdated and ultra-weepy. Cyber people are looking for fun, nothing more. It's an outgrowth of the Rave culture, inspired through techno- and trance-inspired genres such as Futurepop, Hellektro etc.. They're more Rave- and Rivetheads than Goths. Only a few Cybers do refer to themselves as "Cybergoths". But the large part doesn't use any term. They don't care about this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.55.68 (talk) 16:31, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Cyber people listen to Aggrotech, Futurepop, Power Noise and other crap... they don't listen to Gothic rock... they're no Goths and they're absolutely irrelevant for the Goth subculture article.

I'm sure the organisers of Infest would wish they had been informed that these entire genres of music are 'crap' - it would have saved them the trouble of having to book any bands :-) Roy Badami 09:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Eurocentricity

Regarding the accusations of eurocentricity, have a look at the Japanese-inspired goth fashions, inspired in turn by Japanese horror.... which is in turn itself inspired by the West... dammit. Corpman 12:34, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Question

Can we possibly refine the paragraph that says that violence done to goths is uncommon? Personally, all of the goths I know (myself included) have to avoid violence more in one month than most people do in a year.. - 99.250.73.234 (talk) 04:40, 19 November 2007 (UTC)