Nearly two weeks ago, I ventured into Levin Ballroom in order to view the spectacle of the Liquid Latex show, a mlange of painted-on clothing, suggestive dances and innovative concepts. While watching the show, which was, at times, rather racy, I became conscious of how relatively un-phased I was by their risqu costumes and mock promiscuity. It occurred to me how much I had changed since last year at this time, how an additional year spent at college had silently shaped my paradigms of thought without my notice. When I heard about last year's Liquid Latex show, I refused to attend, saying that it was a display of debauchery of which I did not wish to partake. Yet, this year, when confronted with the same choice of whether to attend or not, I had absolutely no reservations about going. I thought to myself, "How and when had this change occurred?" Had the intervening year been able to change my attitudes so much? It occurred to me that my mere presence on a college campus had slowly changed my views.

What happens when you put a bunch of young adults together in a relatively confined area for an extended period of time? The ponderous youths, just bubbling to explore their limits, are let free into what they consider the "real world," allowing the most liberal aspects of themselves, both politically and socially, to rise to the surface.

It is a process that is sometimes overlooked, until one day, you look down and see that you are wearing worn-in Birkenstocks and ripped jeans, toting a copy of Siddhartha, or at least some book on political philosophy or poetry which you tend to flip through in order to humbly draw attention to your astute intellectualism and individualism. You are listening to The Dave Matthew's Band for the hundredth time.

College, which is supposedly the realm of self-discovery, individualism, and lack of ridiculous high school conformity, has lent itself to a conformity all its own. This "new conformity" is the attempt to be individualistic. All of a sudden, at college, it is "cool" to be an intellectual individual with quirky charm, eclectic taste and an open mind. Ironically, in our attempts to be individuals, we have tended to conform yet again. There is simply a new paradigm of "cool." Whoever can appear to be an individual who regards the mainstream trends with indifference is "cool."

The title of "coolness" does not carry with it the same requirements as it did in years previous to college. It does not proscribe that one be obnoxious or exclusive towards fellow students, or proclaim that they may not join you at your lunch table if not "cool" enough. Yet, sure enough, a mainstream, a factor of normalcy, does evolve.

It is amazing how our assimilating mechanism inevitably kicks into action in every situation in which people are clumped together. We have people in our university from all regions, areas and walks of life, yet within a few months of attending Brandeis, most have already recognized what the "Brandeis norm" is and have begun to evolve towards fitting in with that norm. Often, it is not a conscious decision, but a process that creeps up on you and becomes manifestly evident only after the changes have taken place.

It is true that certain universities tend to attract a certain type of person. Is it that we were relatively similar before we arrived or that we have assimilated to each other once here? I believe, that despite obvious variations from person to person, we were relatively similar before we arrived. Those qualities that we share in common have only been magnified.

For example, as mentioned before, our campus is quite liberal. It is probably the result of the fact that the people who were drawn to Brandeis were already a bit liberal, yet have moved further to the left since attending Brandeis by virtue of being surrounded by other liberal students and professors. Accordingly, there is not merely a predominant "college culture," but a college culture that is college specific ("Brandeis culture"). By the sheer fact that we are surrounded by certain viewpoints presented in classes, casual conversations, programs, lectures and extra-curricular activities, opinions begin to shift. What is seen as the norm of the center shifts, shifting the rest of the social and political spectrum along with it.

Even if certain opinions are not expressed outright, a professor promoting his personal viewpoint in class, for example, the nature of discussed topics or assigned readings lend themselves to coming to a specific conclusion, whether this was the intention of the professor or not. Similarly, the nature of topics which are open to debate, or are on the public agenda, lend themselves to specific conclusions. This can polarize the constituency.

Gay marriage, which has recently leapt to the top of political and social agendas, is a topic that is quite polarizing; it is seen as a black and white issue. Many paint it as a religious issue and because America is a deeply religious country, the against gay marriage front has long been viewed as the mainstream opinion. This side was then able to paint the "for gay marriage" front as ultra-liberal. The perception is based on the items on the agenda and the spectrum placement.

The same is true for us. How we Brandeisians perceive each other, within the community and without, is based on what issues have been placed on the agenda within our small community and where we fall on the spectrum. We conceptualize each other based on the community we have formed and the norm we have created within it.

The next time you go to see a Liquid Latex show, you might stop to think about what that indicates about your community's shared political and social norms.