Let Your Freak Flag Fly!


“Some of the times you just gotta let your Freak Flag fly,” my aunt said to her brother. I had no idea what they were talking about, and I didn’t really care, but I didn’t think any definition of this otherwise illusory idiom could remedy my dad’s issues. If Freak Flag is actually a thing and not something my aunt just made up, I thought, my dad may have been as far from having a Freak Flag as anyone on Earth. His primary goal in life was to fit in, and he did anything and everything he could to make that happen. My aunt was the opposite. She did everything she could to stand out as a hip, cutting edge, and appear young, or her definitions of all of the above. She knew more about the hip artists and songs in Billboard Top 40 than I ever have, she wore hip, cutting edge clothing better suited to women ten years younger than her, and she dropped whatever hip terms she heard young people say. When she dropped the term Freak Flag I thought it was yet another one of her embarrassing attempts to appear hip, but that particular phrase stuck with me for whatever reason. I never used it, but when I later heard someone on a hip, top-rated television show say it, I knew something was afoot. Then, one of my friends said it in school, and a week later I began hearing it everywhere.

“Where did you hear that phrase?” I asked my friend.

“Dude, I don’t know. I’ve been saying it for decades,” he said. Unbeknownst to me, this was the key to keeping it cool in the phraseology universe, for no one ever seems to know where they hear hip, cutting edge terminology first. To be fair, it can be difficult to remember where we first heard a phrase we’ve been saying for a time, but purveyors of this particular phrase appeared to conveniently forget where they heard it to leave the impression that they started it.

There’s apparently a lot of prestige wrapped up in starting a phrase, and if someone gets a taste of it, they don’t give it up willingly. Whatever the case is, when obsessively curious types pursue such matters, we often receive everything from blank faces to evasive and defensive responses. Even if the user just started using the phrase last February, those who are evasive and defensive want us to think they’ve been saying it for so long that they dismiss all questions about its origins as uncool.

If we found a truly reflective individual who didn’t mind talking about the first time they heard the phrase, it might result in a humdrum response, “My Cousin Ralphie is da shiznit, and when I heard bra say it I wanted his awesome sauce all over me.” If this individual were that honest, they might run the risk of being so over as to be drummed out of the in-crowd, for the clique might deem that confession a violation of the binary, unspoken agreement those in the in-crowd have designed for the world of phraseology. In their world, users want their audience to consider them the originator of the phrase, and anyone who insists on pursuing this line of interrogation runs the risk of being drummed out on an “If you have to ask …” basis.

Another unspoken rule in the hip, phraseology universe is that we better hurry up and use the terms we enjoy saying as often as we can before a kool kat steps in to declare that the days of using the phrase are now over. “Stop saying that. I’m trying to get the word out that that is so over. Tell your friends.” We might be disappointed to learn that we are no longer able to use words, phrases, or idioms that we enjoy using, but we know that when kool kats step in to warn us that it’s over, it’s a serious blow in this artificial architecture, and we know that by continuing to use such a phrase, we run the risk of being so over. This begs a question to the arbiters of language who declare they’ve been saying this for decades, how is it that you never encountered some kool kat who declared your favorite phrase so over in that time span? Did you ignore them, and if you did, why should I listen to you?

A work associate of mine attempted to play the kool kat by correcting me in front of a group of people. “Dude, stop saying that,” he said inadvertently using the tired phrase to end phrases. “I’m trying to get the word out that that phrase is over. Tell your friends.” Anytime we hear someone issue such a condemnation, it’s human nature to assume that it’s rooted in something the speaker learned from a person with some authority on the matter. In my experience, however, most of these self-professed arbiters of language consider starting a hip phrase fine but ending one divine. Those with no standing in the hierarchy of cool often take it upon themselves to issue such a condemnation without knowing anything more on the matter than anyone else, but they hope that by pushing us down a notch they might improve their standing in the hierarchy.

Like most of those in the lowest stratum of this hierarchy, I knew nothing about this confusing world of using hip, insider, kool kat language, so I was in no position to question my work associate, but by my calculations this feller was a doofus. He was such a complete doofus that I would no sooner consider seeking advice from him on language than I would his words of advice on dating. I still don’t know if this fella assumed a level of authority on this matter based on the idea that he considered me inferior, of if he heard this news from a more authoritative figure, but I decided he did nothing to earn a seat on my personal arbitration board. That situation led me to wonder how we determine our arbiters of words and phrases. My guess is that most people will not heed such advice from just anyone, as that might unveil their status in this hierarchy. My guess is that we make discerning choices based on superficial, bullet point requirements we have for those issuing them? Put another way, if the doofus was more attractive and a little less chubby, I may have been more amenable to his guidance on the matter.

✽✽✽

For fact checkers, a decent search on “Let your Freak Flag fly” suggests that it first appeared in a Jimi Hendrix song If 6 was 9 in 1967. It was later popularized in a David Crosby song Almost Cut my Hair that he wrote for the Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young album Déjà vu. Due to the fact that these first appearances occurred in an artistic venue, however, we can guess that the phrase made its way through the “in-crowd” circuit long before Hendrix or Crosby used it in their songs.  

The Urban Dictionary defines “Letting Your Freak Flag Fly” as: “A characteristic, mannerism, or appearance of a person, either subtle or overt, which implies unique, eccentric, creative, adventurous or unconventional thinking.” 2) “Letting loose, being down with one’s cool self, preferred usage to occur in front of a group of strangers. Your inner freak that wants to come out, but often is suppressed by social anxiety.” 3) Unrestrained, unorthodox or unconventional in thinking, behavior, manners, etc. One who espouses radical, nonconformist or dissenting views and opinions that are outside the mainstream. When traveling through the bible belt of the U.S., it’s best not to let your freak flag fly high. Otherwise, you’ll be harassed and attacked by these backwater, backward thinking theocrats.

Typical Freak Flag Flyers make very specific decisions to avoid titles. They tend to be abstract thinkers who believe they fly high over those of us who believe in nouns (i.e. people, places, and things). Freak Flag Flyers tend to know more about those nouns than the average person, “Because those people haven’t done their homework.” Some Freak Flag Flyers base their outlier status on anecdotal information of these nouns to whom others swear allegiance, on the idea that if we knew what they, the Freak Flag Flyers know, we would be just as sophisticated in our skepticism about allegiances.

Most people fly under a flag: Americans fly under the Stars and Stripes; the Irish fly under the Irish tricolor; and the British fly under the Union Jack. There are some people, however, who fly under no flag, and they eagerly provide this information to anyone who asks. Don’t expect them to admit to flying under a Freak Flag either, for the very essence of flying under a Freak Flag is designed to give its flyer an open-ended, free lifestyle persona that doesn’t conform to societal definitions such as allegiance or definition … Even if such a definition extends itself to a Freak Flag. They aren’t proud members of a country, political party, or a coalition of freaks. They’re just Tony, and any attempt we make to define them as anything but Tony –based on what they do and say– will say more about us and our need for definition, than it does them. Freak Flag Flyers tend to be moral relativists who ascribe to some libertarian principles when those political principles adhere to matters they find pleasing –those who suggest, as Dave Mason did, “There ain’t no good guys, there ain’t no bad guys. There’s only you and me and we just disagree”- but they tend to distance themselves from economic libertarian ideals, for that might result in too much libertarianism.

Some Freak Flag Flyers raise their flags in political milieus, but most Freak Flags involve simple eccentricities and peculiarities. An individual who prefers to listen to complicated and obscure music could be said to fly a Freak Flag in that regard, but they usually keep that information close to the vest when their more normal family members and friends are around. An individual who enjoys various concoctions of food, philosophies, and other assorted, entertainment mediums could be said to have a Freak Flag, but most of these people live otherwise normal lives. We can have a Freak Flag without being a freak, in other words, but the general term Freak Flag is reserved for those activities we engage in and those preferences we have that could be embarrassing if they found their way back to our normal friends and family members.

Even if we don’t have what others might call a Freak Flag, we can identify with the mindset of those who once dared to let theirs fly. Now that we’re all normal and stable, we might not remember the days when we strove for some sort of definition, or we may be embarrassed by it, but most of us can recall a day when we dared to be different.

A Freak Flag Flying friend of mine, a Dan, worked in a Fortune 500 corporation, and he was a corporate joe from head to upper calf. To maintain some semblance of his Freak Flag status, however, Dan wore a wide variety of loud socks and skater shoes that appeared out of place with the rest of his business casual attire that it was impossible not to notice. I’m not sure if it enhanced Dan’s Freak Flag flyer status or took away from it, but he did have flames of fire on those Converse Chuck Taylors, and he wore these notoriously short-lived Chuck Taylors for about a decade, so he must’ve purchased them on an annual basis to keep his preferred characterization alive.

When I asked Dan why he wore that ensemble, he said, “I just like it” in the typical “I’m just Tony” Freak Flag Flyer vein. I dug deeper, of course, and I saw a man who wanted to succeed in the corporate climate by being everything his boss wanting him to be while not being a complete corporate sellout. He wanted the best of both worlds, and he thought some flames on his feet allowed him to let Freak Flag fly.

I’ve met the “I’m just Tony” Freak Flag Flyers who can’t articulate their need to fly one, and they attempt to nullify any questions about their nature by asking you why you think they’re different. Some think we’re putting them on trial, and we are, sometimes. Sometimes, we’re just interested in their essence. I’ve met others who were just different people, and they were quite comfortable draping themselves in a Freak Flag. They taught me that the ultimate definition of a Freak Flag flyer is a relative concept defined by the individual. It’s almost the complete opposite of my aunt’s attempts to be younger and hipper than her peers, as the true Freak Flag flyer does not engage in Freak Flag flying, they just are who they are in a manner that is more organic than any character my aunt might dream up.

Do the Apophenia


Apophenia is the spontaneous perception of connections and meaningfulness of unrelated phenomena –The term was coined by K. Conrad in 1958 (Brugger)

We do the apophenia when we see the Virgin Mary in the grill patterns of a grilled cheese, when we see a baked turkey in a cloud formation, and in the unmistakable manner in which a river breaks. “Hey, that’s Bob Hope!” we inform friends that never see our apophenia. 

ChessusFor some of us, the physical connections we make are neat coincidences worthy of note, for others it could be a sign, but for others these connections take on a spiritual meaning. These connections are also made in science, math, the manner in which we study the universe, and the way we study one another.

One psychoanalyst sees child abuse behind every emotional problem their patients have. He may have seen one substantial and irrefutable case that proved to have profoundly affected one patient’s life, and it prejudiced that psychoanalyst in every case that followed. Another man of science achieves conclusions that back up the idea of penis envy in females when his females test subjects fail to return the pencils he gave them for the test. Another sees the old adage “don’t step on a crack or you’ll break your mother’s back” as a more substantial reaction to the fears of the act of intercourse, as the stepping on a crack represents the penis entering the vagina. Science, and the drama of daily life, has humans spotting patterns to explain why we do what we do on a daily basis. Some of the times, the patterns exist. Some of the times they don’t, but if we don’t have patterns to our daily life we fear we may go crazy in the chaos of our studies of who we are.

Seeking a Progressive Intellect

Humans are born with a brain that questions the world around them. When we enter our teens, we question everything we’ve been taught to that point in our lives. Our rock stars, movies, and books teach us something different about life, and they’re usually better looking, and cooler, than our parents, so we believe the rock stars. Our parents are idiots. We then enter our thirties, and we begin to then question our teen rebellion. We begin to think our parents may have had a point about certain things in life, even if we would never give them credit for it. We have experienced a little bit of life to this point, and everything the rock stars and celebrities told us about life has fallen apart. Our rock stars may know a lot about coordinating music, but most of their casual asides about life have proven to be short-sighted. Our favorite rock stars become the idiots. When we enter our forties, and experience even more in life, we finally reach a point where we have our own ideas about life that is an amalgamation of rock star advice, parental advice, and personal experience. We now think our parents were idiots again, but we now have confirmation that we were idiots for ever believing that rock stars knew anything about real life. The one consistent aspect of this consistent questioning is that we question everything. We need explanations. It’s elemental to our DNA.

We’ve even gone so far, at various points in our lives, to question the existence of God. Writer Norman Mailer once asked, “If God didn’t want us to question His existence, why did He give us a progressive intellect?” If He wanted ultimate authority, without dissent, why didn’t He just give us the brain of a chimpanzee and be done with it? If God were insulted to the point of damning us, in the afterlife, every time we questioned Him, why did He give us a degree of brainpower that exists somewhere between His and the chimpanzee’s?

He didn’t give us a brain that could comprehend the enormity of the universe He created, but He did give us a brain that wanted to somehow and in some way. He gave us a brain that would try to break it down into bite-sized morsels for easier digestion. He gave us a brain that sought out patterns and tendencies in the universe and developed mathematical and scientific hypotheses based on those readings. He gave us a brain that could develop findings that helped us understand one small tidbit of the universe with the hope that it would eventually lead to a representative pattern of the manner in which the entire universe operates. He gave us brains that will make mistakes, and learn from those mistakes, and laugh at those mistakes, but he gave us a brain that progressively seeks greater answers based on the small windows He gave us. The mistakes that we make are mistakes of apophenia, or connecting unrelated data in a meaningful manner, but in many ways we can’t help making such mistakes. It’s the way of our minds. Some have suggested that God may have made our brains the way He did for His own entertainment, and others have innumerable reasons that they believe, but no matter what the truth is, it’s hard to imagine that He would be insulted or aggrieved by us using the gift He gave us to its fullest extent.

Studying the Patterns in Life

We study the patterns of our politicians to try to understand why they act the way they do, and we study voting patterns to see how their rhetoric is affecting and influencing us. Employers study patterns to try to discover a manner in which they can make their employees more productive. Employees study patterns in their work to attempt to become better employees. Apophenia will enter into these studies, but we will correct those mistakes in the hope of eventually achieving a sound, representative pattern of the way all of our universes work.

We would love to have a comprehensive pattern for understanding the ways of humanity, but that would be as impossible as achieving a comprehensive pattern of the universe. So, we judge humanity based on the patterns we see, and some of it’s anecdotal, and some of it’s wrong, but we can’t help it, it’s the way our minds work.

The difference between the two studies is when one makes an incorrect, or incomplete, assessment regarding the manner in which the universe operates, he is then allowed to input the new data and correct the assessment. When one makes an incorrect, or incomplete, assessment of humanity, he is considered so wrong that he is eventually discredited. All of us read these assessments with the belief that they do not apply to us, so the assessments are therefore incorrect. We are all outliers in every study, because we’re all individuals, and the idea that the study may be based on general rules means nothing to us. It’s just wrong, and it needs to be corrected… Even if it does, in some manner, apply to us in ways we either can’t, or won’t, admit.

These studies do apply to our friends, however, and it pleases us to recognize their patterns in the studies. It gives us a window into an understanding for how they work. We expect them to be shocked when we spot their patterns, or even complimented by the fact that we have paid such attention to them. More often than not, however, they are insulted. They are insulted, because they live with the belief that they are random creatures that live lives that are so complicated that they cannot be figured out through a random sampling of their otherwise simple brethren. Those of us who study these patterns only do so, because we are generally curious and observant individuals that make the most of our progressive intellect, but before we get righteous and indignant we are forced to admit that we don’t think these studies apply to us either.

Our friends always tell us we are wrong, or these studies are wrong about them, and some of the times we are wrong. Some of the times, we read patterns incorrectly. Some of the times, we do the apophenia. What do we do then? Do we simply alter our perceived patterns accordingly, or do we buy into the idea that there may be a lot more randomness occurring than we originally believed. Most people abhor patterns when they’re informed of theirs. They often feel like they’re being calling them simple when another points out how predictable they are. Anyone that has engaged in such conversations has found that these reactions are simple and predictable.

Most people aren’t as complicated as they want us to believe. Yet, some of the greatest joys we may experience in life occurs when we are immersed in patterns. Knowing what’s expected of us, and fulfilling that task provides us the joy of accomplishment. Living inside that box that our employers are trying to get us to think outside, gives us a degree of comfort we don’t recognize until we venture beyond the border. Most people prefer routine even if it leads to some degree of boredom. Chaos and unpredictability often leads to confusion and unhappiness, but most people don’t want to be the one that points this out to them.

The endless loop of life’s patterns and trends may say more about us than the idea of a random world. We want to know why we loop, when we loop, and if looping in patterns and trends is productive or destructive. The study of this may tell us why we’re at the upper end of the animal kingdom, for while animals may seek patterns in their mating and hunting rituals, they are far more satisfied with the randomness of the world than we are. A lion may spot patterns in a herd of antelope, but he is not studying them to learn greater truths about the antelope. He is simply trying to locate the easiest and safest mode to attack them and satisfy his hunger. Humans seek patterns for greater understanding, and while it’s a noble pursuit we often do the apophenia in our pursuit of the truth.

A Study of Apophenia

In statistics, apophenia is labeled a Type I error, seeing patterns where no patterns exist. Mistakes are made in statistics when a statistician engages in apophenia. Of course patterns exist in statistics, and studying patterns is the purpose of the study of statistics, but a statistician has to guard themselves from proclaiming an answer is reached before apophenia has been weeded out. They don’t want to leap to a conclusion, in other words, before they have thoroughly tested these patterns against their own perceptions.

It is highly probable that the apparent significance of many unusual experiences and phenomena are due to apophenia, e.g., ghosts and hauntings, numerology, the Bible code, anomalous cognition, most forms of divination, the prophecies of Nostradamus, remote viewing, and a host of other paranormal and supernatural experiences and phenomena.{1}

Steve Jobs talked about apophenia as it applies to the random function of the iPod:

“As humans, when we come across random clusters we naturally superimpose a pattern. We instinctively project an order on the chaos. It’s part of our psychological make-up. For example, when the iPod first came out and people started to use the shuffle feature, which plays songs in a random order, many people complained that it didn’t work. They said that too often songs from the same album, or the same artist, came up one after another. Yet that’s what randomness does – it creates counter-intuitively dense clusters.

“We’re making it (the shuffle feature) less random to make it feel more random,” Apple CEO Steve Jobs confessed after Apple was forced to change the feature on the iPod in response to complaints from users. Jobs, and company, changed the programming behind the feature. In other words, each new song now has to be significantly different from what came before, so as to conform to our expectation of randomness.{2}

Customers required that Apple programmers build a feature into the iPod that would make it less random, so we were more comfortable with the idea that it fit our definition of random better. Regardless if there was a pattern to the order in which one song followed another, we spotted one, and we complained. To diffuse the complaints, Apple programmers built in a function that would cause a Metallica song to always follow an Elton John song, so we would see significant contrast in the random and thereby stop searching for the pattern. Say what you want about Apple being uncompromising in their pursuit of perfection with their products, but they are as susceptible to customer complaints as any other company when they receive them in volume.

Feeling Special

SpecialHumans have a need to feel special, but the patterns in day-to-day life normally don’t give one such a feeling. Day-to-day life is usually mundane, pedantic, and exceedingly boring, until you try dying. Dying, or experiencing a near-death experience, can revitalize life. It can give one that special feeling that allows them to appreciate the changing of the leaves, as if for the first time. Seeing a loved one die can wake us through comparative analysis, because we never view these moments as coincidental or happenstance. They’re seminal moments peppered with purpose: “I just talked to Ernie the other day, and he spoke about the death of Peter Sellers … It’s almost like he knew.” Or, “I was just on 158th and Main Street the other day. I went through that very cross walk one week before Ernie did. That could’ve been me.” This gives us a special feeling, an idea that there is a reason we’re alive, and that we must have a purpose or that would be us lying in that casket.

We also believe that special forces have a hand in our romantic entanglements. “I just happened to go to a bar that I never go to, and I just happened to go to the bar to order a drink at the exact moment she did. Fate had to have played a hand there. There’s no other explanation for it.”

The idea that true randomness occurs is impossible for us to grasp. It seems impossible to us that our company just happened to assign Mark and Brenda sit by each other three years ago. Now that they’re married, everyone at the wedding acknowledges that there had to be special forces at work. For some of us, this is simply theoretical fun. For others, it is an undeniable truth. There are no smiles when they say it. They consider such patterns almost creepy in the manner they take place. This is a connection of random coincidences that seem simply too numerous and too coincidental to be anything other than special forces at work.

“You mean to tell me that Tom just happened to be standing in the middle of the street. He said he never just stands in the middle of the street, but he just happened to be there at the exact moment our precious Judy was when a cement truck “just happened” to topple over and almost kill her, until Tom, who just happened to be there, just happened to reach out and grab her. You mean to tell me that all of those circumstances just happened that way? That there were no special forces at work?”

Do the apophenia if it makes you feel better, we skeptics say, but you’re never going to convince us that it was anything more than an incredible series of coincidences that occurred to save your young girl’s life. We’ll be extremely happy for you, and we may even cry with happiness (we’re not heartless), but we will probably be one of the few outliers that doesn’t buy into the fact that Judy is special, and she was saved by special forces that have a special purpose for her in life.

Special Forces at Work

How many moments in our lives have we appreciated all that life has to offer? How many times, after a life-altering circumstance, have the mundane routines and patterns that once zapped our energy, attained value with a revitalized mindset? We can’t even remember that person that used to wake without remembering the morning. We love life now, and that freight train, called the mundane, no longer has the power it once did. We think about how much time was wasted waiting for the minutes to click by, until we could go home. We think about all those hours spent waiting for the weekend, until the weekend arrived and we were just as bored at home, on the weekend, as we were in the workplace. When that life-altering circumstance came around and shook our foundation, we felt like there were no more coincidences and random occurrences. We realize that we walked around in a stupor through life, in the same manner we used to grow hypnotized driving familiar paths only to get there without remembering the drive. Our eyes are now open to a purpose we can never explain or achieve. We just know that we do things differently now. One would expect that a survivor of this sort would be more welcome to the random life has to offer, but more often than not it probably just changes the pattern temporarily.

{1} http://www.skepdic.com/apophenia.html

{2} http://smorgasborddesign.wordpress.com/2012/01/27/seduction-persuasion/