Recently some conversation of (university) clubs came up. University is in parens there because it seems that it isn’t required for the following discussion. a distinction can be made between types of social groups. Those that form on the basis of an activity and those which form on the basis of an identity. My intuition is that the former are far healthier (and a sign of a healthier culture) than the latter. There is a little overlap in this definition. A club of bike racers or cyclists may likely hold for themselves an identity as being a cyclist. However, they do not get together on account of that shared identity, but to share an activity, specifically riding. 

It was said that disallowing particular clubs is a sign of unhealth of a culture/society, e.g., a school that prohibits GALA clubs. 

So am I correct in this? Is my intuition that activity clubs are a healthy sign and the existence of identity clubs is not. This might just be me. I’ve never been drawn to or wanted to be part of any identity group, and hold such with some amount of distaste. 

But I don’t know why. Do you share that? Reject it? Do you have intutions why? 

Filed under: Consider the FollowingCultureMark O.

Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!