Hey guys,
Just watched the MTV special with Lady Gaga and she said that her show is a religion and her fans are a cult. I really wish she could see this blog page. Maybe one day???
p.s
The blogs had over 15,000 views :)
AMAZING
PAWS UP
Tuesday, 21 June 2011
My show is a RELIGION. My fans are a CULT.
Hey guys,
Just watched the MTV special with Lady Gaga and she said that her show is a religion and her fans are a cult. I really wish she could see this blog page. Maybe one day???
p.s
The blogs had over 15,000 views :)
AMAZING
PAWS UP
Saturday, 26 March 2011
Little Monsters: A Modern Day Cult?
Disclaimer
Disclaimer: This is an article with the sole aim to explore cults and Little Monsters. I am not claiming to be an authority on either subject. Please note, that even though I have two degrees in Psychology, this article is formulated by my own psychological opinion. I am not a professional psychiatrist and any similarities between you and the mention psychological issues should not be taken in a negative way. Any spelling or grammar mistakes I do apologise.
Over the past two years the phenomenon that is ‘Little Monsters’ has become prominent in today’s popular culture. Lady Gaga’s fan base has taken on a life of its own and in turn has become a force to be reckoned with. However, there have been concerns expressed that Little Monsters are becoming increasingly like a cult. The basic question is ‘Are Little Monsters a modern day cult?’ If the answer is yes, the bigger question is ‘Should we be concerned or could this be a good thing?’
This article explores whether Little Monsters can be classed as a modern day cult by examining what a cult is, and then exploring similarities and differences between Little Monsters and cults. The article will also draw upon Psychological theory in order to assess whether being part of this phenomenon is a cause for concern or a cause for action.
So, let’s start at the very beginning as I’m told it’s a very good place to start.....
The most simple definition of a cult is:
A cult is a minority group who’s practices, ideas or beliefs are considered to be strange by the majority.
During the latter half of the 20th century the term has been used in a more derogatory manner, often associating cults with religion, mental health, brain washing and mass suicide. This is because the most widely known cults are religious in nature (Heavens Gate, Mormons, The Family etc).
Cults that are of a non religious nature are often overlooked due to the negative stigma the term cult has attracted. There are political cults, mystical cults, music cults and Satanism cults. Using the most simplest definition,
‘A minority group who’s practices, ideas or beliefs are considered to be strange by the majority’
almost any group that fits the basic criteria can be classed as a cult. The group of teenagers at school who are in love with Edward Cullen, the group of guys who play poker for huge amounts of cash on a Friday night, or even the group of old ladies down the street who meet and bake scones every Wednesday. However, due to the cults that are most often heard about in the news, these types of groups are not typically classed as cults.
In 1988 Robbins's identified three types of cults. The first type are cults that are dangerous and authoritarian. The second type, are cults that are culturally innovative, and the third type are cults that are protoreligous.
Little Monsters are not dangerous and do not operate under an authoritarian regime (discussed later). Little Monsters are however, culturally innovative as they are part of a something that strives for change in the mainstream. Little Monsters can be said to be following a movement but this is a non religious movement. It is more a cultural/ sociological movement where they are seeking a society where there is no prejudice or ill judgement.
Little Monsters cannot be classed as religious in nature as religious cults tend to operate within a mainstream structure, they require 100% commitment, typically have a hierarchy of leaders and are of course religious. Non religious cults tend to operate outside mainstream society, require varying levels of commitment and typically have one single leader.
Little Monsters, does not operate within the mainstream, they do not require 100% commitment (you can like other artists) and has one leader (Lady Gaga). When you strip it down to this level, ‘Little Monsters’ do fit into the category of a Non religious cult.
When compared to Roberts (1988) classifications of cults Little Monsters would be classed as the second type of cult, a cult that is culturally innovative. However let’s not stop there and say already that Little Monsters can definitely be classed as a cult. Let’s take a look at cults main characteristics so we get some idea of how cults and Little Monsters compare.
One of the main characteristics of a cult is that they have a charismatic leader. Every cult has a leader that the rest follow, without a leader the cult would not exist. A cult leader is powerful, inspires the admiration of others, is full of charm, and is full of self belief. This description can be taken in one of two ways. This description runs extremely closely to the description of a sociopath, as well as running closely to the description of someone who is altruistic in nature (someone who has selfless concern for others). I think this is where cults are split into those that are destructive in nature (lead by an individual who is charismatic and has sociopathic tendencies), and cults that are not destructive in nature (lead by an individual who is charismatic and has altruistic tendencies).
So is Lady Gaga a charismatic leader? YES! Lady Gaga is powerful in many ways. She is musically powerful, creatively powerful, and culturally powerful. Lady Gaga not only inspires the admiration of others she admires the inspiration of others. Lady Gaga is full of charm and Lady Gaga is full of self belief.
Lady Gaga also meets some of the more negative aspects of being a Charismatic leader. Charismatic leaders are often said to have the ability to manipulate others. I think if we look at things objectively and fairly Lady Gaga is the queen of manipulation, but not in the typical sense of the word. She is not manipulating her followers, she is manipulating her self-image. Lady Gaga has full control over every single part of her image. She only lets us see what she wants us to see. Just like how cult leaders such as Jim Jones (Peoples Temple) and Charles Manson (Manson Family) only let their followers see their better sides. However Lady Gaga’s manipulation isn’t causing anyone direct harm or pain, the manipulation is not for self gratification, the manipulation is for the benefit of the cause.
On the whole Lady Gaga meets the criteria of a charismatic leader. It is the fact that she is highly altruistic, and cares deeply for others that make her the type of charismatic leader that leads a non destructive cult.
Could this be the first sign that Little Monsters are a modern day cult?
Another characteristic of a cult is that the cult and its members are both physical and psychological isolated from the outside world. Cults often live separate lives to the mainstream and do not take part in activities outside the cult. Physical isolation can also include living in remote areas, no contact with non cult members and the cult’s children attend cult run schools. Psychological isolation can occur by the cult not allowing any free will or free thinking. It is needless to say that prolonged exposure to this type of setting is damaging in many ways.
Little Monsters are neither isolated physically or psychologically. Little Monsters are spread all around the world and populate many cultures. Little Monsters live in the mainstream and have access to non group members and non group related ideas. Lady Gaga encourages free thinking and she promotes individuality.
For this cult characteristic Little Monsters do not meet the criteria.
It has been widely noted that cults have their own inside language in order to maintain privacy and secrets. Little Monsters do not necessarily have their own language but they do have their own terminology. Words such as monster love, paws up, free bitch, and tea cup whore are frequently used when Little Monsters are communicating. However, these terms are not used to maintain privacy or secrets of any kind. They are more like words by which affection is shown, and words by which others can recognize each other.
Although Little Monsters do not have their own language, they do have their own terminology that sometimes only they understand, so for this cult characteristic we will rest on a maybe.
Another one of the main characteristics is that cult members are often under strict control, especially over their daily routines. Cult member’s daily routines are often solely based on working for the cult, and more often than not the cult leader. Little Monsters are not restricted in their daily routine, unless they themselves have placed the restrictions. For example, if a Little Monsters wishes to follow Lady Gaga around, or sit all day tweeting about her, they have actively chosen to do so.
Nevertheless, Little Monsters are restricted on some things. They are restricted in terms of what they say to each other. For example, one monster would not say ‘I hate you because you’re not white’ or they wouldn’t say ‘I hate you for being gay’, just as a member of the Peoples Temple wouldn’t say ‘I don’t believe in god’ as they would not be welcome within the group. What is important to note is that once again for Little Monsters these restrictions have not come from the leader, they are universal restrictions set by the group as a whole.
For this cult characteristic we can say Little Monsters are not a match.
Cults can also be characterised by that nearly all cults have elements of motivational teaching. Both religious and non religious, destructive and non destructive cults, all are ‘spreading a message’ so to speak. This is usually done during large group gatherings such as rally’s or in group meetings. The motivational teaching is usually conducted by the cult’s leader and is a key part in gaining and maintaining cult members.
I think it is an understatement to say that Lady Gaga is excellent at motivational teaching. The message she tells and the motivation she gives is mind blowing, and no other artist does this on this level. Lady Gaga can not only be classed as a pop star she is a phenomenon. Her motivational teachings cover a wide spectrum of topics and issues, from campaigning for gay rights, standing up against bullying, promoting HIV awareness, and most recently encouraging charity donations to the Japan relief fund. These motivation teachings are not self promoting and they do not benefit the group. Who says that cults have to only use motivational teaching as a tool to endorse in-group behaviours? Why can’t cults endorse out-group behaviours? Who made this rule up? One does wonder....
Many cults are also characterised by their beliefs in an ‘end time revelation’. Cults often centre on an idea that is often to do with the world coming to an end or the second coming of Christ, for example the Y2K computer virus that was predicted to end the world in 2000. The cults often use these ‘end time revelations’ in order to attract and keep cult members.
Let’s examine something that Lady Gaga has recently shared with her Little Monsters. Part of Lady Gaga’s promotion for her Born This Way single she both tweeted and talked about G.O.A.T. This stands for Government Owned Alien Territory, a place where a new race of people are born. Lady Gaga speaks about the end of the world as we know it (metaphorically speaking), and the beginning of a new race that has no prejudice or judgement. I am by no means saying that Little Monsters believe that the world is coming to a end, I'm saying that they believe that Lady Gaga can help to bring about a end to the worlds prejudices.
Although this is not exactly the same as a cults belief in the end of the world, it is a belief in the end of something.
Once again the movement of Little Monsters meet the criteria for yet another cult characteristic.
May cults thrive on group pride and group trust. Cults depend upon group trust in order to survive. If they cannot trust one another to maintain the privacy and secrets of the cult, the cult would collapse. Trust plays apart on almost every level of a cult’s structure. The members trust the leader, the leader trusts the members, and the members trust other members. Cults would not survive either without the pride its members have and cult members are often over protective of the beliefs and practises of their cult.
The exact same can be said about Little Monsters. Little Monsters trust Lady Gaga, Lady Gaga trusts her Little Monsters, and Little Monsters trust other Little Monsters. Little Monsters would not function on the level they do if they did not have an intense level of trust. They divulge secrets, fears and hopes to one another without question as the trust they share in unquestionable. They trust one another not to judge them and they trust in Lady Gaga not to let them down.
Little Monsters also have an extreme level of group pride. They will defend their ‘cause’, each other and leader at all costs. They pride themselves on equality, loyalty and passion, just like cults do.
Once again Little Monsters match up to another cult characteristic.
Let’s have a look at all this information once it is put into a chart:
Out of the eight key characteristics of cults, Little Monsters have five (and a half) of the same characteristics. The ones they do not have are probably the characteristics that are most destructive in nature, isolation and strict control.
I think when comparing group characteristics to Little Monsters it can be said they are well on their way to being a cult.
Let’s now take a look at some of the psychological traits that cult members have, and how Little Monsters compare.
A leading Psychologist, Michael Langone PhD identifies several traits that can make a person more likely to be recruited and join a cult. The main three traits her identified are the three D’s, dependency, disillusionment and desire.
Langone states that individuals who have an intense desire to belong are more likely to be recruited and join cults. A lack of self confidence decreased their ability to live independently and ultimately leads them to be dependent on others.
I think we can agree that many of the Little Monsters are dependent and suffer from a lack of self confidence and this is one of the reasons they can identify with Lady Gaga. She is a strong woman and she inspires Little Monsters to abandon their insecurities and hold onto the person who they truly are. Many Little Monsters depend on Lady Gaga in order to stay strong and look to her for advice and strength. They feed their dependency cravings on her message. Although this dependency can sometimes for some be extreme I think that most Little Monsters identify the limit of positive dependency and are not at any risk of psychological harm.
Another trait that Langone identifies is disillusionment. He suggests that individuals who feel detached from one’s own culture and do not agree with the status quo, desire change, and more often than not cults meet this desire.
Little Monsters also have the psychological trait of disillusionment. Many Little Monsters are detached from mainstream influences and often feel they are ridiculed for this. This is another reason why Little Monsters gravitate to one another, they are like minded. Lady Gaga is providing a movement towards changing the status quo. Little Monsters want the same things Lady Gaga want, they want peace, and they want change.
The third D is desire. Individuals who need to believe that there is a higher purpose and believe that there is something ‘more’ are also more likely to be recruited by cults.
Little Monsters are seeking something extra; they are seeking something more than what the status quo provides us. They believe that Lady Gaga can provide them with a higher purpose. The desire Little Monsters demonstrate is not measureable. It cannot be counted, it cannot be placed in tick boxes, it can only be felt.
It seems that those who class themselves as one of Lady Gaga’s Little Monsters also present the three psychological traits that Langone identifies.
Taking into account all of the above discussion I think the following conclusions can be made; Little Monsters are a modern day cult. They are modern in the sense that they fit into many of the characteristics and traits of a cult, but they also have their differences. It’s these differences that make them a modern cult.
Society needs to change its views on what a cult is. Not all cults are evil, dangerous and oppressive. What is wrong with joining a cult that is none of these things? What is wrong with joining a cult that promotes freedom, equality and change? What is wrong in wanting to meet and converse with like minded people? What is wrong with moving away from old fashioned views and embracing new ones?
Are Little Monsters at any psychological or physical risk of being part of this modern day cult? I think the conclusion we can come to is no. The group dynamics are almost perfect. As long as Little Monsters remain on this positive path Little Monsters are not threatened with any significant risk of psychological or physical harm.
The modern day cult of Little Monsters is nothing to frown upon. Their message and spirit should be something that is embraced and encouraged. The movement they are part of is the future.
Who wouldn’t want to be a part of this?
If there was a form to fill in to join the modern day cult of Little Monsters I would be the first to sign it. Would you?
Paws up Little Monsters!
L. Smith
Please feel free to tweet me (@HausOfSmith) with your comments as I would LOVE to hear your opinions (good or bad). Or you can alternatively leave a comment underneath this post by pressing the ‘comment’ button.
Special mentions are for @HausOfJim @LORD__GAGA_ @gvernmenthooker as they all of proof read this article before I unleashed it on you all!
Special mentions also for @gagamonsterplan and @Lilian19 who are wonderful in every way.
I used the following books and articles during the creation of this article:
Robbins, T. (1988). Cults, converts, and charisma. London: Sage
Disclaimer: This is an article with the sole aim to explore cults and Little Monsters. I am not claiming to be an authority on either subject. Please note, that even though I have two degrees in Psychology, this article is formulated by my own psychological opinion. I am not a professional psychiatrist and any similarities between you and the mention psychological issues should not be taken in a negative way. Any spelling or grammar mistakes I do apologise.
Over the past two years the phenomenon that is ‘Little Monsters’ has become prominent in today’s popular culture. Lady Gaga’s fan base has taken on a life of its own and in turn has become a force to be reckoned with. However, there have been concerns expressed that Little Monsters are becoming increasingly like a cult. The basic question is ‘Are Little Monsters a modern day cult?’ If the answer is yes, the bigger question is ‘Should we be concerned or could this be a good thing?’
This article explores whether Little Monsters can be classed as a modern day cult by examining what a cult is, and then exploring similarities and differences between Little Monsters and cults. The article will also draw upon Psychological theory in order to assess whether being part of this phenomenon is a cause for concern or a cause for action.
So, let’s start at the very beginning as I’m told it’s a very good place to start.....
The most simple definition of a cult is:
A cult is a minority group who’s practices, ideas or beliefs are considered to be strange by the majority.
During the latter half of the 20th century the term has been used in a more derogatory manner, often associating cults with religion, mental health, brain washing and mass suicide. This is because the most widely known cults are religious in nature (Heavens Gate, Mormons, The Family etc).
Cults that are of a non religious nature are often overlooked due to the negative stigma the term cult has attracted. There are political cults, mystical cults, music cults and Satanism cults. Using the most simplest definition,
‘A minority group who’s practices, ideas or beliefs are considered to be strange by the majority’
almost any group that fits the basic criteria can be classed as a cult. The group of teenagers at school who are in love with Edward Cullen, the group of guys who play poker for huge amounts of cash on a Friday night, or even the group of old ladies down the street who meet and bake scones every Wednesday. However, due to the cults that are most often heard about in the news, these types of groups are not typically classed as cults.
In 1988 Robbins's identified three types of cults. The first type are cults that are dangerous and authoritarian. The second type, are cults that are culturally innovative, and the third type are cults that are protoreligous.
Little Monsters are not dangerous and do not operate under an authoritarian regime (discussed later). Little Monsters are however, culturally innovative as they are part of a something that strives for change in the mainstream. Little Monsters can be said to be following a movement but this is a non religious movement. It is more a cultural/ sociological movement where they are seeking a society where there is no prejudice or ill judgement.
Little Monsters cannot be classed as religious in nature as religious cults tend to operate within a mainstream structure, they require 100% commitment, typically have a hierarchy of leaders and are of course religious. Non religious cults tend to operate outside mainstream society, require varying levels of commitment and typically have one single leader.
Little Monsters, does not operate within the mainstream, they do not require 100% commitment (you can like other artists) and has one leader (Lady Gaga). When you strip it down to this level, ‘Little Monsters’ do fit into the category of a Non religious cult.
When compared to Roberts (1988) classifications of cults Little Monsters would be classed as the second type of cult, a cult that is culturally innovative. However let’s not stop there and say already that Little Monsters can definitely be classed as a cult. Let’s take a look at cults main characteristics so we get some idea of how cults and Little Monsters compare.
One of the main characteristics of a cult is that they have a charismatic leader. Every cult has a leader that the rest follow, without a leader the cult would not exist. A cult leader is powerful, inspires the admiration of others, is full of charm, and is full of self belief. This description can be taken in one of two ways. This description runs extremely closely to the description of a sociopath, as well as running closely to the description of someone who is altruistic in nature (someone who has selfless concern for others). I think this is where cults are split into those that are destructive in nature (lead by an individual who is charismatic and has sociopathic tendencies), and cults that are not destructive in nature (lead by an individual who is charismatic and has altruistic tendencies).
So is Lady Gaga a charismatic leader? YES! Lady Gaga is powerful in many ways. She is musically powerful, creatively powerful, and culturally powerful. Lady Gaga not only inspires the admiration of others she admires the inspiration of others. Lady Gaga is full of charm and Lady Gaga is full of self belief.
Lady Gaga also meets some of the more negative aspects of being a Charismatic leader. Charismatic leaders are often said to have the ability to manipulate others. I think if we look at things objectively and fairly Lady Gaga is the queen of manipulation, but not in the typical sense of the word. She is not manipulating her followers, she is manipulating her self-image. Lady Gaga has full control over every single part of her image. She only lets us see what she wants us to see. Just like how cult leaders such as Jim Jones (Peoples Temple) and Charles Manson (Manson Family) only let their followers see their better sides. However Lady Gaga’s manipulation isn’t causing anyone direct harm or pain, the manipulation is not for self gratification, the manipulation is for the benefit of the cause.
On the whole Lady Gaga meets the criteria of a charismatic leader. It is the fact that she is highly altruistic, and cares deeply for others that make her the type of charismatic leader that leads a non destructive cult.
Could this be the first sign that Little Monsters are a modern day cult?
Another characteristic of a cult is that the cult and its members are both physical and psychological isolated from the outside world. Cults often live separate lives to the mainstream and do not take part in activities outside the cult. Physical isolation can also include living in remote areas, no contact with non cult members and the cult’s children attend cult run schools. Psychological isolation can occur by the cult not allowing any free will or free thinking. It is needless to say that prolonged exposure to this type of setting is damaging in many ways.
Little Monsters are neither isolated physically or psychologically. Little Monsters are spread all around the world and populate many cultures. Little Monsters live in the mainstream and have access to non group members and non group related ideas. Lady Gaga encourages free thinking and she promotes individuality.
For this cult characteristic Little Monsters do not meet the criteria.
It has been widely noted that cults have their own inside language in order to maintain privacy and secrets. Little Monsters do not necessarily have their own language but they do have their own terminology. Words such as monster love, paws up, free bitch, and tea cup whore are frequently used when Little Monsters are communicating. However, these terms are not used to maintain privacy or secrets of any kind. They are more like words by which affection is shown, and words by which others can recognize each other.
Although Little Monsters do not have their own language, they do have their own terminology that sometimes only they understand, so for this cult characteristic we will rest on a maybe.
Another one of the main characteristics is that cult members are often under strict control, especially over their daily routines. Cult member’s daily routines are often solely based on working for the cult, and more often than not the cult leader. Little Monsters are not restricted in their daily routine, unless they themselves have placed the restrictions. For example, if a Little Monsters wishes to follow Lady Gaga around, or sit all day tweeting about her, they have actively chosen to do so.
Nevertheless, Little Monsters are restricted on some things. They are restricted in terms of what they say to each other. For example, one monster would not say ‘I hate you because you’re not white’ or they wouldn’t say ‘I hate you for being gay’, just as a member of the Peoples Temple wouldn’t say ‘I don’t believe in god’ as they would not be welcome within the group. What is important to note is that once again for Little Monsters these restrictions have not come from the leader, they are universal restrictions set by the group as a whole.
For this cult characteristic we can say Little Monsters are not a match.
Cults can also be characterised by that nearly all cults have elements of motivational teaching. Both religious and non religious, destructive and non destructive cults, all are ‘spreading a message’ so to speak. This is usually done during large group gatherings such as rally’s or in group meetings. The motivational teaching is usually conducted by the cult’s leader and is a key part in gaining and maintaining cult members.
I think it is an understatement to say that Lady Gaga is excellent at motivational teaching. The message she tells and the motivation she gives is mind blowing, and no other artist does this on this level. Lady Gaga can not only be classed as a pop star she is a phenomenon. Her motivational teachings cover a wide spectrum of topics and issues, from campaigning for gay rights, standing up against bullying, promoting HIV awareness, and most recently encouraging charity donations to the Japan relief fund. These motivation teachings are not self promoting and they do not benefit the group. Who says that cults have to only use motivational teaching as a tool to endorse in-group behaviours? Why can’t cults endorse out-group behaviours? Who made this rule up? One does wonder....
Many cults are also characterised by their beliefs in an ‘end time revelation’. Cults often centre on an idea that is often to do with the world coming to an end or the second coming of Christ, for example the Y2K computer virus that was predicted to end the world in 2000. The cults often use these ‘end time revelations’ in order to attract and keep cult members.
Let’s examine something that Lady Gaga has recently shared with her Little Monsters. Part of Lady Gaga’s promotion for her Born This Way single she both tweeted and talked about G.O.A.T. This stands for Government Owned Alien Territory, a place where a new race of people are born. Lady Gaga speaks about the end of the world as we know it (metaphorically speaking), and the beginning of a new race that has no prejudice or judgement. I am by no means saying that Little Monsters believe that the world is coming to a end, I'm saying that they believe that Lady Gaga can help to bring about a end to the worlds prejudices.
Although this is not exactly the same as a cults belief in the end of the world, it is a belief in the end of something.
Once again the movement of Little Monsters meet the criteria for yet another cult characteristic.
May cults thrive on group pride and group trust. Cults depend upon group trust in order to survive. If they cannot trust one another to maintain the privacy and secrets of the cult, the cult would collapse. Trust plays apart on almost every level of a cult’s structure. The members trust the leader, the leader trusts the members, and the members trust other members. Cults would not survive either without the pride its members have and cult members are often over protective of the beliefs and practises of their cult.
The exact same can be said about Little Monsters. Little Monsters trust Lady Gaga, Lady Gaga trusts her Little Monsters, and Little Monsters trust other Little Monsters. Little Monsters would not function on the level they do if they did not have an intense level of trust. They divulge secrets, fears and hopes to one another without question as the trust they share in unquestionable. They trust one another not to judge them and they trust in Lady Gaga not to let them down.
Little Monsters also have an extreme level of group pride. They will defend their ‘cause’, each other and leader at all costs. They pride themselves on equality, loyalty and passion, just like cults do.
Once again Little Monsters match up to another cult characteristic.
Let’s have a look at all this information once it is put into a chart:
Out of the eight key characteristics of cults, Little Monsters have five (and a half) of the same characteristics. The ones they do not have are probably the characteristics that are most destructive in nature, isolation and strict control.
I think when comparing group characteristics to Little Monsters it can be said they are well on their way to being a cult.
Let’s now take a look at some of the psychological traits that cult members have, and how Little Monsters compare.
A leading Psychologist, Michael Langone PhD identifies several traits that can make a person more likely to be recruited and join a cult. The main three traits her identified are the three D’s, dependency, disillusionment and desire.
Langone states that individuals who have an intense desire to belong are more likely to be recruited and join cults. A lack of self confidence decreased their ability to live independently and ultimately leads them to be dependent on others.
I think we can agree that many of the Little Monsters are dependent and suffer from a lack of self confidence and this is one of the reasons they can identify with Lady Gaga. She is a strong woman and she inspires Little Monsters to abandon their insecurities and hold onto the person who they truly are. Many Little Monsters depend on Lady Gaga in order to stay strong and look to her for advice and strength. They feed their dependency cravings on her message. Although this dependency can sometimes for some be extreme I think that most Little Monsters identify the limit of positive dependency and are not at any risk of psychological harm.
Another trait that Langone identifies is disillusionment. He suggests that individuals who feel detached from one’s own culture and do not agree with the status quo, desire change, and more often than not cults meet this desire.
Little Monsters also have the psychological trait of disillusionment. Many Little Monsters are detached from mainstream influences and often feel they are ridiculed for this. This is another reason why Little Monsters gravitate to one another, they are like minded. Lady Gaga is providing a movement towards changing the status quo. Little Monsters want the same things Lady Gaga want, they want peace, and they want change.
The third D is desire. Individuals who need to believe that there is a higher purpose and believe that there is something ‘more’ are also more likely to be recruited by cults.
Little Monsters are seeking something extra; they are seeking something more than what the status quo provides us. They believe that Lady Gaga can provide them with a higher purpose. The desire Little Monsters demonstrate is not measureable. It cannot be counted, it cannot be placed in tick boxes, it can only be felt.
It seems that those who class themselves as one of Lady Gaga’s Little Monsters also present the three psychological traits that Langone identifies.
Taking into account all of the above discussion I think the following conclusions can be made; Little Monsters are a modern day cult. They are modern in the sense that they fit into many of the characteristics and traits of a cult, but they also have their differences. It’s these differences that make them a modern cult.
Society needs to change its views on what a cult is. Not all cults are evil, dangerous and oppressive. What is wrong with joining a cult that is none of these things? What is wrong with joining a cult that promotes freedom, equality and change? What is wrong in wanting to meet and converse with like minded people? What is wrong with moving away from old fashioned views and embracing new ones?
Are Little Monsters at any psychological or physical risk of being part of this modern day cult? I think the conclusion we can come to is no. The group dynamics are almost perfect. As long as Little Monsters remain on this positive path Little Monsters are not threatened with any significant risk of psychological or physical harm.
The modern day cult of Little Monsters is nothing to frown upon. Their message and spirit should be something that is embraced and encouraged. The movement they are part of is the future.
Who wouldn’t want to be a part of this?
If there was a form to fill in to join the modern day cult of Little Monsters I would be the first to sign it. Would you?
Paws up Little Monsters!
L. Smith
Please feel free to tweet me (@HausOfSmith) with your comments as I would LOVE to hear your opinions (good or bad). Or you can alternatively leave a comment underneath this post by pressing the ‘comment’ button.
Special mentions are for @HausOfJim @LORD__GAGA_ @gvernmenthooker as they all of proof read this article before I unleashed it on you all!
Special mentions also for @gagamonsterplan and @Lilian19 who are wonderful in every way.
I used the following books and articles during the creation of this article:
Robbins, T. (1988). Cults, converts, and charisma. London: Sage
Tuesday, 15 March 2011
New article coming soon!!
Seems as 'The Psychology of Little Monsters' has been so successful i have decided to write another installment. The second article will be titled 'Little Monsters: A Modern Day Cult?' and will explore how Little Monsters have taken on a life of there own.
Keep checking back for updates or follow me on twitter @HausOfSmith so you'll be one of the first to know when the article is available.
Paws up!!!
Keep checking back for updates or follow me on twitter @HausOfSmith so you'll be one of the first to know when the article is available.
Paws up!!!
Thursday, 30 December 2010
THANK YOU LITTLE MONSTERS!
As of the 31st of December 2010, 'The Psychology of Little Monsters' has been viewed over 10,000 times. Maybe one of these has been by Gaga herself? Thanks to all the Little Monsters who have read this, and keep blogging, tweeting etc about it so more Little Monsters can see :)
L.K.Smith
L.K.Smith
Wednesday, 22 September 2010
'The Psychology of Monsters'
Disclaimer: I’m writing this for those who don’t quite understand our Monster mentality. I hope by explaining the Psychology of Monsters we will be better understood by others and ourselves. Please note, that even though I have two degrees in Psychology, and even though approved psychological theories will be used during this piece of writing, this article is formulated by my own psychological opinion. In other words don’t go diagnosing yourselves with mental issues and disorders... that would be NO.GOOD. OK? Please note I am Dyslexic so any spelling or grammar mistakes I do apologise.
This article is © 2010 to L. Smith
For those who live on another planet Psychology is the study of human mental functions and behaviour. And for those of us who live in another universe Lady Gaga uses the term ‘Little Monsters’ to describe her millions of fans worldwide. People choose to become Monsters as they connect with the messages Lady Gaga sends and promotes, such as acceptance and love, which will be discussed in this article.
Over the past few months Monster’s have been widely critized and said to be obsessed with Lady Gaga (which is probably true). But could it be that Monster’s are actually obsessed with the psychological advantages of being a Monster?
The Monster community makes you feel welcome, accepted, wanted, and loved no matter what you look like, act like, where you live or what you believe in. A psychological theory proposed by Abraham Maslow (1943) appears to run alongside with how the ‘Monster’ community works. Maslow proposed in his 1943 paper ‘’A Theory of Human Motivation’ that we have a hierarchy of needs. The hierarchy consists of five levels, each of which is a basic human need. Being a Monster correlates heavily with the two of these levels, level three, ‘Love & Belonging’ and level four, ‘Esteem’. Maslow states that humans need to feel a sense of belonging and acceptance (Monsters can issue a HUGE tick next to this level). Maslow goes on to suggest that this need can come social groups such as, clubs, sports team, religious affiliations, gangs etc.
Some may argue that Monster’s cannot be classed as a ‘true’ social group and therefore any mental well being that stems from this cannot be psychologically beneficial, as Monster’s on the whole do not interact face to face. However, times are changing, the world is changing, and these cynics need to accept that the social networking phenomenon is vastly becoming a prominent source of socialization for millions worldwide. Does it really matter whether we gain the emotional support and friendship online rather than face to face? It seems that Monsters are leading the way in demonstrating that the answer is NO it doesn’t matter. Monsters thrive on accepting one another. This shows that a large part of the Psychology of Monsters is care giving and kindness.
Maslow’s fourth level ‘Esteem’ is that humans need to feel respected and valued by others. As Monsters isn’t this our primary claim? Don’t we accept each other no matter what? Don’t we accept EVERYONE into our Monster family? Don’t we value each other’s opinion and value each other? YES WE DO. This again shows that the psychology of Monsters is founded on kindness and acceptance.
Another key area of Psychology that can help to explain the Monster mentality is Attachment Theory (Bowlby 1969). Attachment Theory is basically connections between humans. Attachment theory mostly focuses on young children’s relationship with their primary care giver (mother in most cases) where infants in time of distress, need to be immediate proximity with their care giver. There are two distinct attachment styles; we either have secure or insecure attachments. Those with secure attachments are comfortable in both intimate and dependant relationships, and those with insecure attachments struggle with any type of relationship and often blame this on themselves.
It seems that many Monsters have formed this type of infantile attachments with their ‘Mother Monster’. It is common to see Monsters tweet Lady Gaga when they are feeling depressed, anxious, stressed etc, saying that they need to be near her. Monsters fall into both types attachment styles. There are those monsters that have a secure attachment with Lady Gaga and those with insecure attachments with Lady Gaga. Those Monsters with insecure attachments display such behaviours as discussed before, constant need for attention from Gaga, when in reality Lady Gaga cannot provide one on one care giving. It seems that these Monsters need to find an alternative figure whom can provide support to them on a day to day basis, face to face.
Another psychological theory that helps to explain the Psychology of Monsters is Social Identity Theory (Tajfel, 1979). Social Identity Theory is a collection of both Sociological and Psychological theories that look at why individuals identify with, and behave as part of groups, as well as sharing and adopting attitudes. The theory suggests that people’s behaviour is largely influenced by having a group identity and having a sense of belonging in a group that is distinct from other groups. This is termed positive group distinctiveness. Being able to distinguish the ‘in group’ (the persons group, in our case Monsters) from the ‘out group’ (non Monsters) allows us to cherish the values of the group. These values can provide a boost in self esteem and sense of belonging.
Monsters positively benefit from being part of the ‘in group’. On a day to day basis I see Monsters telling each other about their achievements, and often crediting being a Monster as the reason for their success. It seems that those of us, who embrace being a Monster the most, seem to be the ones who get most out of it. For example, I know Monsters who seriously take on the fundamental aspects of being a Monster, BE YOUR SELF! Those who embrace the fact they are different, and can share their difference with others seem to be mostly happy and confident. Monster’s who struggle to be accepted in every day social situations, such as school or work, find comfort in being accepted by such a group. And what’s wrong with wanting to belong? Seriously, what?
Another thing that’s worth noting is the effect of ‘in group’ bias. This stems from Social Identity Theory and is defined as being the preferential treatment is given to those who are part of the same group. Psychological studies have shown that group members will show special treatment to co group members, even if the group they belong to is trivial, such as having the same last name or birthday (Brewer, 1979). Think about how Monster’s behave to others. Monster’s do show special treatment to each other, and are biased towards others. But in my psychological opinion I don’t think that this bias is in a negative way. I think this bias stems from the fact that many Monster’s are not shown kindness in their every day social surrounding (for being different) so when Monster’s come together on mass they go out of their way to show others kindness and affection.
Let’s move on to another area of Psychology that can help to explain the Psychology of Monsters.
It’s widely known that some fall in love with celebrities and create fantasies in their minds by attaching positive emotions (happiness, security, belonging) to the celebrity and then taking these emotions out of context. In some cases this 'love' can result in obsessional behaviour such as stalking. Erotomania is a delusional disorder where a person falls in love with someone of a higher status than them, for example, a boss, a doctor, a teacher, a celebrity (Munro, 1999).
Many Monsters express that they 'love' Lady Gaga, but this is more of a friendship love that you feel for your best friend, or your parents. By definition it could be said that Monsters are in some way displaying stalking behaviour by sending Gaga love notes, drawing pictures of her, begging her to notice them, checking the news, checking her tweets etc and in turn displaying obsessional behaviour. Some may crititze this by saying Gaga wants this attention and she is our adoptive mother so therefore wants us to do these things, and I’m not disputing that. What I’m trying to get at is the difference between being a fan, and being obsessed.
The type of 'celebrity love' Monsters display is more on a par with ‘Borderline Erotomania’ which is defined as a form of extreme attachment (Meloy, 1989), where the person feels that they are in love with a celebrity but is still in touch with reality and understands that the celebrity doesn't love them back.
The main concern here is that some Monsters may take things one step further. It has been noted that some Monsters use twitter in order to make threats against themselves (self harm etc) if Gaga doesn't follow them. This is either obsessional behaviour at its best or its plain old attention seeking, I’m unsure at this moment in time. As long as Monsters don't start loosing touch with reality and start aggressively freaking Gaga out, it think were OK here.
I think the main point of this article is to stress the fact that being a Monster has so many psychological advantages. Human beings have the impulsive urge to form connections and relationships with others. Being a Monster enables us to do that. I hope that after reading this, the non Monsters can is some way say that they understand ‘the Monster mentality’ a little better. I hope that after reading this fellow Monster’s can recognise parts of themselves in the content and realise how being a Monster effects them.
Feel free to tweet me @LadySmithGaga if you want any more information on any part of this article, and feel free to send me your thoughts. Or if you want to ask questions in private you can email me using Ladysmithgaga@live.co.uk
Paws up free bitches!!!!!
Special thanks to these monsters who read this before I let it loose @gagamonsterplan @LilMonster19 @TheWalkinIrony @jakkmonster @J4d_ @BeccaGaga
References
Bowlby J(1986) Citation Classic, Maternal Care and Mental Health
Brewer, M.B. (1979). Ingroup bias in the minimal intergroup situations: A cognitive motivational analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 307-324.
Maslow, A.H. (1943) A Theory of Human Motivation, Psychological Review 50(4) 370-96.
Meloy JR: Unrequited love and the wish to kill: Diagnosis and treatment of
borderline erotomania. Bull Menninger Clin 1989; 53:477-492
Munro, Alistair (1999). Delusional disorder: Paranoia and related illnesses. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Tajfel, H. (1970). Experiments in intergroup discrimination. Scientific American, 223, 96-102.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)