I would like to point out, though, that not all skinheads are racist, gay-hating, murdering assholes. Like everything else in the neo-racist movement, the skinhead image was stolen from another culture. In the early 1950’s, gay men started the skinhead movement as an underground means of identifying each other, as well as to show strength and unity. By the late 50’s, the style became a bit more popular and was adopted by the mainstream mod culture. The racist skinheads basically stole this image, not knowing where it actually originated… Today, there are still gay skinheads, who are ANTI-racist, and anti-nazi.

Like the swastika, and just about every other symbol used by the nazi and racist movements, the skinhead look was stolen from one of the very cultures they hate…

i love satire as much as the next person, and i don’t think that when people use satire and it offends people that they’re intentionally trying to be hurtful, or at least i hope not. but i also am no stranger to how often sexuality, and in particular men’s sexuality, is used in this way. so just saying that people shouldn’t see it the way i and others did respond doesn’t change that we did see it as unnecessary and inappropriate. intention and effect are different, and the effect on all of us wasn’t the same. that doesn’t mean i think someone is a “bad” person, it means i didn’t appreciate the approach and i appreciate that ck acknowledges that that was part of the risk. that’s the thing about satire — when you use certain things to try to create humor, some people will think it’s funny, and some won’t, and some may feel a mix of emotions of laughing but also discomfort. in hearing yours and other people’s responses, i get that for some maybe it draws out a larger point about these two guys’ actions being wrong, but it also still includes a conscious and subconscious message of using stereotypes around manhood and sexuality that i hope also discomforted people. my concern, and after reading the comment from a reader about “plot “twist,”" is that it didn’t. but for me, this method just wasn’t the way.

Some of us appreciate the use of satire and irony in order to make a broader socio-political point. I’d like to think that, in diametric opposition to the unfun and serious PC Police, I’m in favor of putting the “Gay” back into Gay.

Don’t misunderstand me. The points you make are geberally valid. Language and imagery are important in formulating societal consciousness, which inevitably translates into affecting the state of tolerance. I am only suggesting you restrict your attacks and critiques to those who are actually attacking and harming you. ck is unequivocally on our side and to see this post as anything other than the statement against racism, homophobia and intolerance that it is would be incredibly myopic.

Though we disagree on this matter, I’m glad that our little post-a-thon brought about your first post. I think Jewlicious is, well, just jewlicous….

Furthermore on what basis does Cole Krawitz (ck2?) make the statement “all people should be thoughtful about making choices in talking about communities, especially those they aren’t part of”? Does ck2 know for a fact that ck is not gay? I checked you know. All I saw on this blog was suport for the Jerusalem Pride Parade, gay marriage, gay rights etc. I didn’t see anything that pointed to unimpeachable heterosexuality. Their presumptuousness and general tone make ck2 and J. D. Edelman seem like the left wing versions of, dare I say it, Republicans.

Thanks for the opportunity to vent. I love Jewlicious and I am sorry that it took me this long to post my first comment.

I acknowledge that my post had the possibility of creating offense. I was clearly pushing envelopes and when you do that you take that chance. But dude, it’s what we do! There’s a reason why some right wingers think we’re hippies and some left wingers think we are Genghis Khan. In many ways we’re post-ideological and that causes confusion. BUT it also creates healthy discussion and in that respect I have succeeded somewhat.