Talk:Gay skinhead
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page. |
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-class on the quality scale. |
[edit] Votes for deletion results
This page was listed on votes for deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Gay skinheads for the results of the debate. -- AllyUnion (talk) 04:41, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Rewrite per comments in Vote for Deletion
I urge all interested parties to review this page, especially anyone who has read Gay Skins: Class, Masculinity, and Queer Appropriation. I wrote from what I could glean via gay skinhead web sites, and from personal experience in the non-gay skinhead community, but I'm no expert. I was mainly trying to define what makes it a distinct sub-subculture, and to incorporate suggestions from the VfD discussion (including wikifying the title to singular, and I fixed the double-redirects and template).
Kappa points out that "Gayskin" receives many more Google hits than "Gay skinhead". Is it wise to re-move it to "Gayskin"? Will that harm the edit history? (I'm kind of new to WP.) Unconventional 07:01, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Generally, articles should be under the most commonly used name in English. (There are some exceptions and qualifications to that principle, but I doubt they apply here.) So if Gayskin is the most common name, go ahead and move the article. As long as the double redirects get fixed, it won't hurt anything. If you'd like help, or if you want me to move the article for you, let me know. Jonathunder 03:26, 2005 Apr 17 (UTC)
Being a (straight) skinhead myself I'd like to add into consideration that most straight skins dislike only gayskins who are only into the fetish side, or only claim skin for protection. Skins who simply happen to be gay, but are skins for the true purpose of working class protest, are not usually looked down on. Perhaps that should be added to this entry. -Tony
- Being a bisexual skinhead, and working class, I'd like to dispute the "true purpose" of skinhead: working class protest is a misapplied and unneeded justification. Skinhead is a style movement predicated on working-class values of group identity, exclusivity, authenticity and self-validation. Dressing skinhead for protection is a perfectly valid motivation, if the other cardinal values are respected. Being a self-validating membership, the extent to which one individual exerts their own personality within that group will determine to what extent they can get away with style innovations. Thus, brogue boots are one thing, and Rangers another, and though appropriate to different variants of the Skinhead look, only rarely would they crossover with success; but rigger's boots or Reeboks are beyond the pale. The (perceived)willingness of gay skinheads to put up with style illiteracy is principally what dedicated skins dislike about them, outside of those who are simply prejudiced.
- Incidentally, I have never found the conjoined gayskin to be current either among gay skins or skinheads in general. In fact, gay (and bi) skins tend to think of themselves primarily as skinheads. While this is undoubtedly no more than a description of sexual interest for some (like Bear), it is still a form of group identity with its own claims to authenticity.
- Nuttyskin 01:37, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Subucultures that aren't skinheads
By definition, if someone is a scooterboy, casual or mod, that person is not a skinhead. Those subcultures are related to skinheads, but they are different. So logically, a gay skinhead cannot be a a scooterboy, casual or mod. If he identifies as a member of one of those subcultures, he is not a skinhead. Spylab 02:43, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
