"whaddya got?"

devafall stated in this post: when you're a teenager in the '80s in Greenville, South Carolina, having pierced ears was dangerous, and it was one of the few rebellions I really allowed myself.

This sparked a thought on the nature of rebellion. I think that for something to be truly rebellious (as opposed to merely strange), engaging in it must involve an element of danger to oneself. But then, what levels of danger qualify? Is social ostracism enough? How about just getting a few people mad at you? Or must it involve a level of physical danger?

"whaddya got?"

devafall stated in this post: when you're a teenager in the '80s in Greenville, South Carolina, having pierced ears was dangerous, and it was one of the few rebellions I really allowed myself.

This sparked a thought on the nature of rebellion. I think that for something to be truly rebellious (as opposed to merely strange), engaging in it must involve an element of danger to oneself. But then, what levels of danger qualify? Is social ostracism enough? How about just getting a few people mad at you? Or must it involve a level of physical danger?