There’s an interesting thing that happens to offbeat trends. Take baby clothes. Skulls on onesie at one point horrified grandmothers all over the country — why on earth would dress a baby in jolly rogers? But more parents began to reject the norms of baby clothing, and now I can get skulls on pretty much anything. Sears. WalMart. 

Offbeat becomes mainstream. I don’t think this is a bad thing. I think it’s probably an important step to reaching a society where people stop focusing so hard on appearances. But then it happens that to remain offbeat — an identifier many people take pride in, myself included — there are people who have to take it farther, and must turn their nose up on the “mainstream.” I understand the anarchy in the concept — that we should never just accept the mainstream without examining if it’s what we want — but at some point it just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. 

Last week there was a guest post on Offbeat Mama, titled Are We Protecting Our Kids from the Right Things? I think the author raises some brilliant points about our fears as parents and the things we reject out of ignorance or misunderstanding. Like a lot of people my age, my musical and fashion tastes as a teenager made my parents raise some eyebrows. In most cases they were accepting, if wary; in some cases (see right) it made them uncomfortable. I remember my stepdad being worried that I was making myself vulnerable by standing out and looking like a whore (not his words, but it was the tone). A decade later I get it — I used to walk around unattended with a group of girls, on and off a military base where GIs are occasionally known to make bad decisions. I was oblivious to this danger — my poor father never was. 

So I think it’s a great discussion to have, and excepting one line, I’ve got no complaints about the piece. But I wonder if it leads to this attitude where offbeat is more valuable than mainstream or conformity. I’m not disagreeing that teaching a person to suppress their individuality is bad, but there seems to be this idea that no one would ever conform to the mainstream if not encouraged by their parents. In one comment, a person bemoans their old roommates for being so bland; they decry that the roommates favorite color was blue, favorite music was pop, et cetera. Why is that less valid a choice?

Andy and I want Miles to be whoever he is going to be — and we have no way of knowing what that’s going to be. He might end up nerdy like his parents; he might end up artistic like his grandmothers; he might end up an athletic like his grandfathers. 

Clearly I’d be more comfortable with a bookish artistic child; I’ve been there. At the same time, allowing Miles to be a unique individual in whatever way he chooses is my ultimate goal . If that means he plays football, loves the color blue, and listens to whatever the generic rock of his generation is — so be it. 

The assumption seems to be that if you’re listening to a certain kind of music, dressing a certain way, and even living a certain way means that you didn’t think about it — and I think that’s giving people way too little credit. Being mainstream doesn’t mean that a person isn’t unique. A person shouldn’t be made to feel that because they are into whatever the mainstream happens to be, that they are a mindless sheep. 

Am I totally off the mark here?