Yes but the thug word has been used time after time based off someone's look and not the actual lifestyle they live.
Probably based off of the stereotype of many who lived the lifestyle appearing that way. Anyone can be a thug. Thug has become a stereotype based on a percentage(probably a vocal minority?) of criminals acting/dressing a certain way.
I've had to experience both the thug lifestyle and look. It's irritating and shouldn't be something to be looked up to. Death to infidels.
everybody acting so tough all the time is just sickening and laughable. I ME MINE. No one's frightened of saying it, everyone's playing it, coming on strong all the time. Oh no, son, that's not how it is. You kids today are nothin' but punks, sissified, so quick to pick up a gun. You're scared to take an ass-whippin'.
All that came to mind when reading the thread title was Slim Thug's song, "Thug". Now I have the chorus stuck in my head! Carry on...
My Grand Ole Opera browser opening back up some old threads lol I dont think there's anything wrong with decidedly being anything. Being decidedly thug, decidely hipster, guido, nerdy, gay, straight. Get in where you fit in. Just like in anything, its the extreme examples of the group can be intolerant of each other Or make the group look bad. Or they're wanting to think they're "better" than the other. Do your thing and leave me alone is how it should be. But then its rockers dont like rappers, rappers dont like rockers, guidos dont like country, country doesnt like anybody, hipsters like techno, gays like techno, no one likes gays therefore no one likes techno or hipsters...and a lot of stereotyping like that goes into it. And thats before you even get to Heartland America. More a matter of mutual respect to me, than it is if the demographic is negative or not.
But guessed what. These are the wanna be thugs are the one that's going to suffered and the companies that commercializing this are cashing in and they don't care.
Califronia Bay started this thing called the reject and it ended up turning to something called "jerkin" (no pun intended) and it includes wearing skinny jeans.
I disagree. It's not solely for black people, that's all just anecdotal evidence.. but I'll still add my own: Most of my friends and their parents (~ mostly white, upper middle class) refer to anyone dress like the description below as "thug" and "gangster" interchangeably - some people also say "wigger" when the person appears to be white. The clothes these kids wear are what labels them as 'thugs' at first. Then their mannerisms further confirm it. For example, at the Galleria yesterday, a bunch of white and latino teens dressed in over-sized jerseys, pants sagging, flat brimmed basbeall hats, white basketball shoes, etc. They were all shouting and hollering at any women nearby and calling guys in skinny jeans as "faggots" - people were very disgusted. In the 80s their loud voices could have been blaring boom boxes: it's the principle of rebelling against what they perceive as the dominant people. For white/Asian people dressed in slacks and sweaters to be discomforted is what the kids seemed to be enjoying. That power is what motivates them to rebel.
Would you say there is a relationship between how a person dresses and their probable education level i.e. a person dressed like a thug vs. a three-piece suit? Be honest. If you needed help in the middle of the night, which of the above might seem less threatening? However, nothing "wrong" with people like Kanye West, Andre 3000, KiD CuDi, etc. who dress differently.
