Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
Culture Vultures

Are Hipsters Stealing Gay Style? Or Something Else?


I would rather be on a bus in the Gaza Strip than anywhere in Williamsburg, Brooklyn.

When I entered college in 2000, “hipster” was solely a reference to the beat poets — not some white, faggoty-looking-but-straight Hampshire College graduate with a penchant for the visual arts and film. I recently asked a 20-year-old self-described hipster what makes him a hipster. He said: “You know, the music I listen to, the clothes I wear.” Really. Deep. Shit. It might have even held up to some relaxed litmus test, except as any real hipster knows, you never admit to being one.


In Time Out New York‘s “Why the Hipster Must Die,” Christian Lorentzen eloquently defines hipsterism as being the “province of whites, its acolytes raid(ing) the cultural stores of every unmelted ethnicity in the pot. Similarly, they devour gay style…these aesthetics are assimilated—cannibalized—into a repertoire of meaninglessness.”

I would add: Hipsters are emulating queer style, not gay style. To me, “queer” implies a resistance to assimilation which is ironically (and you know how much the hipsters love irony!) the very thing hipsters are doing: assimilating.

You can’t just reap the benefits of the queer struggle, you over-privileged white man — not without some payment. If you want to continue copping my queer style, I want blow-jobs from you on demand.

I have straight male friends who transitioned from appropriating black style to appropriating queer style overnight. They literally went from throwing up gang signs in every MySpace photo and trying to spit freestyles while passing a champagne flavored blunt to attending gallery openings and wearing Buddy Holly glasses. Are these Christopher Columbus culture vampires incapable of an original thought? Must they usurp from every fringe identity?

Queer style, of course, was around back in the day, and it took balls to carry out. We liberated and inspired our terrified gay brothers by being visible and expressing our intrinsic, precious queerness through our style. There were physical and emotional consequences to our unabashedness. Now that we’re mainstreaming queer style, the straight hipster boys are (as Lorentzen points out), devouring it.


In 1968, Quentin Crisp wrote that the symbols he adopted 40 years earlier to express his sexual type had become the “uniform for all young people.” And that’s exactly what the male hipster look is: a uniform, a costume, something out of a plastic bag from Hollywood Toy and Costume that comes complete with tight pants, a hoodie, and white Ray-Ban Wayfarers. (Instead of Herb Ritts taking your photograph, it’s The Cobra Snake.)

I look at these boys in Williamsburg, Silver Lake, the Mission, and I think to myself, “YOU BETTER BE GAY.” You can’t just reap the benefits of the queer struggle, you over-privileged white man — not without some payment. If you want to continue copping my queer style, I want blow-jobs from you on demand. Then we’ll be even. Choke on my dick and you can keep the suspenders and the Members Only jacket. Eat my ass and you can keep the fanny pack.

Hipster or Gay is a blog that contains an archive of photos of maybe/maybe-not-gay male hipsters plucked from across cyberspace. Photos + captions = Instant relevancy and authority. The site poses important questions like, “Is there a difference?” and, “Does it matter?” The site’s anonymous creator says no, the difference between hipsters and gays is dissipating and it doesn’t matter.

I disagree.

There is a major difference between hipsters and gays and to overlook it would be dismissing a courageous, vibrant history of a people that fought for autonomy at all costs. Hipsters are defined by a vapid, superficial purely external identity that could emanate from an Excel spreadsheet. Queers are organic, whole, and raw: the expensive fruit at Whole Foods. Our style is a by-product of something innate and more important than our physical appearance — our queer sensibility. And you can’t buy that at American Apparel. It doesn’t even come in a waif-thin small.

Matt Siegel is a private liberal arts college-hopper who began at Sarah Lawrence, left his stain at Eugene Lang and finally finished at Hampshire. His unwillingness to commit now resides in L.A., where Matt has unsteadily worked for a random assortment of prominent folks, including Adam Carolla, Jill Clayburgh and Arianna Huffington. Other of his writings can be found on his blog The Unabashed Queer. Siegel previously filed from the set of the Absolutely Fabulous remake.

(Photos: Hipster Or Gay)

Tagged: , , , ,
    • Andrew Twigg

      Matt, your essay misses a major point. Mainstream cooption is a predecessor to equality. It either signifies a cultural shift that something isn’t a big deal any more or begins a chain reaction with the same end result.

      When something is coopted, its signification loses power, yes, but it also means that it has an inherent positive value to the people doing the coopting. The conclusion: that whatever negative value being gay (had) doesn’t outweigh the benefits that come with coopting its dress? Translation: so what if someone thinks I’m gay by the way I dress?

      To me, this means that an emerging generation doesn’t care about sexuality; this is a shift that will lead to equality. As far as I’m concerned, they can keep my white Ray-Bans and my Members Only jacket if I can have my equal rights.

      May 4, 2009 at 6:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scott

      amusing piece

      May 4, 2009 at 7:05 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Qjersey

      When the straight boys pick up on a gay fashion trend…it’s time to find a new trend.

      May 4, 2009 at 7:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Phil

      I love this piece. You articulated exactly what I have been trying to explain to people for a while now. Thanks Matt!

      May 4, 2009 at 8:10 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Helga Von Ornstein

      I wonder if somewhere buried in this article the reason why strait boys with big beautiful round butts hang their pants low while wearing breifs during the summer months.

      I already picked up the author did not like the person he was interviewing. That has been happening a lot lately. I have no doubt whoever was sent by BET to interview BowWow clearly did not like him. And I don’t blame the author either.

      May 4, 2009 at 8:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John

      The only thing less interesting then hipsters are articles about hipsters.

      May 4, 2009 at 8:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 7SnowyNights

      The only hipsters that I know ARE gay…and I’ve kinda slept with all of them.

      Does that make me a bad person? Cos I do feel a little guilty about it…

      May 4, 2009 at 8:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ask ena

      I’m surprised our tween writer has even heard of Quentin Crisp. I am fairly certain most gay hipsters out there (yes, gay hipsters…we ARE our OWN ENEMY) have not. And to me, that is the greatest problem of all. It comes around full circle. The signifiers lose all their significance, even to the margins of society that invented them.

      Now what?

      May 4, 2009 at 9:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jane

      Goodness. So much rejection of sexual fluidity and the ability to wear whatever you want. Yeah, I think it’s weird when people become a giant mob of fashion victims, but should we really care whether they are stealing trucker hats, thug styles, or “gay” fashion (because all gays dress the same?)?

      Yeah, hipsters can be kind of annoying attitude-wise, but they’re really the least of our worries – most are liberal-leaning, young, generally progressive. They usually buy media whether gay or straight, and support independent everything. Is that really so bad?

      May 4, 2009 at 9:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Miss Understood

      No one is stealing anything, it just takes styles time to go around. Yes, certain gay people wear styles first but I wouldn’t be so fast to throw around the label “gay style”. Your youth is clouding your perspective. When you have been an adult for few decades and see trends come and go you will begin to see how little it all means. When you get all bent out of shape by how other people dress YOU are creating the problem.

      This anti hipster thing is so silly. The whole concept is a media creation. There have always been artsy young people. It’s not new. The clothing has just changed and it will continue to change.

      I would certainly rather hang around with straight artists from Williamsburg than straight football players from Long Island.

      May 4, 2009 at 10:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • timncguy

      @John: less interesting THAN hipsters, not THEN.

      Sorry, just a pet peeve on mine. Then, than. There, their, they’re. Less or fewer, when to use each.

      May 4, 2009 at 10:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hardmannyc

      “I would rather be on a bus in the Gaza Strip than anywhere in Williamsburg, Brooklyn.”

      You lost me after that first sentence. There’s a term for this kind of writing: jejune.

      May 4, 2009 at 10:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John

      @TIMNCGUY: pet peeve OF mine, not ON.

      May 4, 2009 at 10:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bob

      Who the fuck cares what anyone wears or why they wear it? Seriously, are we this fucking shallow?

      May 4, 2009 at 10:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Larry

      There is something to be said about straight, white people appropriating the cultural products of marginalized people, and I’m glad this author said it.

      Honestly, instead of complaining about 20yo hipster boys’ appropriation of gay fashion and culture, let’s help them along and actually proposition them. I mean, look at how cute those little twinks are (and they do know what a “twink” is, right?)!

      May 4, 2009 at 11:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Casper O

      I think this article is entertaining, but as serious journalism, it is just badly researched.

      As many journalists and writers already stated, the basic function of clothing as an identifier of social status and cultural belonging started to fade with the rise of the post-modernist aesthetic and modern consumption culture.

      And being since most hipsters argue themselves as part of a counter-culture, the “queer” aspect of clothing is easy to understand.

      But remember also, that e.g. the nu-rave aesthetic comes from London’s club culture, where hipsters and fashion students of all orientations mix organically and unforced. The slim-jean-scene look is originated from Paris (Hedi Slimane) London (the music scene) and Stockholm (the providers of the brands) and the NYC indie scene is now copying large parts both of these scenes. So in the style of this article; Does NYC gays copy straight European club-kids?

      A big chunk of all these “hipsters” and “scenesters” are gay too, and for an entire culture to grow with a mutual way of dressing no matter what orientation you consider yourself, is so much bigger than “Stealing Gay Style”. It is a liberal movement, it is an equal, understanding and allowing culture.

      When it comes to the entire early adopter angle of fashion, we unfortunately need to realize that even though the fashion offices are almost entirely gay, lot’s of them aren’t, and the LGBT crowd is far from the only avant-garde.

      May 4, 2009 at 11:55 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dubwise

      Striaghts have been coopting gay style trendz for years…this is nothing new.

      May 4, 2009 at 12:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dubwise

      straights even

      May 4, 2009 at 12:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Julian

      Too bad one of the “hipsters” in the photos is actually gay. The lines are blurred, though, aren’t they?

      May 4, 2009 at 12:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • timncguy

      @John: LOL, good catch!!

      May 4, 2009 at 12:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Casper O

      Recommended research:

      The books by Richard Florida, especially The Rise of The Creative Class.

      May 4, 2009 at 12:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nickadoo

      First it was the “metrosexual,” now it’s the “hipster.” (yawn)

      Attacking others for something as meaningless as simple fashion choices is little more then a childish, modern day game of “smear the queer.” Do we really need to enable and abet this behavior?

      May 4, 2009 at 12:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bertie

      I recall late 80s when city gays appropriated the work boots and letterman jackets from straight nostalgia and fetish imagery.
      it all comes out in the wash…
      within seconds (of a person opening their mouth and speaking) you can tell if they are a poseur or truly hip — so what they wear doesn’t mean much to me. I have known amazing bohemian types who looked more like homeless vagrants than Details cover models.

      May 4, 2009 at 12:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • josh

      this is a joke, right?

      May 4, 2009 at 12:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • coalbee

      I think the appropriation of “gay” styles stems more from 70’s punk and glam stars, the iggy pop’s, the david bowie’s, the marc bolan’s, than anything. and it’s the emulation of that time period that these kids are aiming for. ambiguity is intriguing, and people like richard hell and johnny thunders made it sort of macho and hip.

      May 4, 2009 at 12:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • clarke

      Lame article,to imply that hipsters are vapid and empty in contrast to some sort of gay depth is silly. We are all the same people . Being gay does not make you smart, cool. or full of innate fashion sense. Witness all the tacky, stuck- in -a -generation gays out there.I get that trendiness is off putting to some people ,you would rather be in a war torn country than hipster Brooklyn ? pretty stupid.

      May 4, 2009 at 12:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • cufflinks

      Exactly, @Andrew Twigg

      There is nothing healthy or powerful about a culture that never gets copied or co-opted. Sure, it’s amusing that the kids are trying to look like us, but imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. The gays are starting to experience what the blacks have experienced for decades. Our style is copied and accepted into the mainstream and that forces us to adopt new styles to differentiate ourselves. That’s what culture is all about: movement.

      May 4, 2009 at 12:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AlwaysGay

      Gay people are on the cutting edge. Society builders always.

      May 4, 2009 at 12:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mention

      what a fluff piece! this reeks of an older generational “queer” author attempting to claim ownership over style? When anyone starts to decipher style, we all should run. and in this piece, with its curious and WTF point we should all remember Quentin’s famous quote: “Fashion is what you adopt when you don’t know who you are.”

      May 4, 2009 at 12:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • rogue dandelion

      why does this article’s title sound like it was written by a lol cat?

      May 4, 2009 at 12:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Josh

      I mean, I understand the author’s outrage, but…were neon hoodies, skinny jeans, and Ray Bans really in chic in the 60s and 70s queer community? Is the assumption that tight-fitting clothing equals “queer” clothing and therefore hipsters are copping our style? What about gay hipsters–are they wearing the right clothes for the wrong reasons?

      Isn’t demanding an association between sexuality and style just as superficial as the hipsterdom you criticize in this piece?

      May 4, 2009 at 12:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dee


      “Our style is a by-product of something innate”


      May 4, 2009 at 1:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • linda

      Dee, maybe you just have shitty style.

      The point of this piece is well-made. Many gays were looking like freaks and getting harassed for their style and now that it’s safe and mainstream, straights are ready to rip the style off.

      It’s true.

      May 4, 2009 at 1:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mention

      bike messenegers should have unionized..everyone knows that is where fashion comes.

      May 4, 2009 at 1:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK

      “hipster” was solely a reference to the beat poets — not some white, faggoty-looking-but-straight Hampshire College graduate with a penchant for the visual arts and film.

      ROTFL! Thanks

      May 4, 2009 at 1:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • exit

      what the fuck is this shit?

      May 4, 2009 at 1:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Gay Numbers

      Blah, blah, blah- boring lack of orginally by gay, straight, queer (whatever you call them) white 20somethings- blah, blah, blah. Seriously, the minute everyone else looks like you- there’s nothing creative about it. Or unique. It’s rebelion if everyone else is doing it. The minute say “trend” that means comformity. Boring.

      May 4, 2009 at 1:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hardmannyc

      “Matt Siegel is a private liberal arts college-hopper who began at Sarah Lawrence, left his stain at Eugene Lang and finally finished at Hampshire. His unwillingness to commit now resides in L.A., where Matt has unsteadily worked for a random assortment of prominent folks, including Adam Carolla, Jill Clayburgh and Arianna Huffington.”

      So he’s a dilatant friend of yours.

      May 4, 2009 at 1:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hardmannyc

      @Bertie: That was actually early ’70s (the “clone” look), but your comment is still valid.

      May 4, 2009 at 1:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bertie


      well I was in the midwest then — and they grab trends much later than LA and NYC then.

      has anybody else seen in the biothat the writer is now working on the AbFab remake for american TV. yipes. how “cutting edge”.

      May 4, 2009 at 2:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bertie


      oops nevermind on the above ^^^
      The writer had simply REPORTED on the Abfab remake taping.

      May 4, 2009 at 2:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tor

      The first commenter was absolutely right. When you’ve been around long (read: you’re old by comparison with the author of this article) enough, you can observe how fluid fashion trends have been between various social and income groups. Although, as the author rightly points out, some folks will always make peer acceptance their priority, people mostly just like to look good. Adopting looks that started in one part of our community is like any imitation: take it as the sincerest form of flattery, Matt.

      @Andrew Twigg:

      Yes! Cooption, at this point in our culture, demonstrates how the youngest adults among us intuitively seem to understand equality for all in unprecedented numbers.

      @Matt Seigel

      And isn’t it fun to complain about being a trendsetter?

      May 4, 2009 at 3:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mr. Joe

      “I would rather be on a bus in the Gaza Strip than anywhere in Williamsburg, Brooklyn.”

      first off. no, you wouldn’t.

      second. don’t minimize a real tragedy with something as superficial as this article.

      May 4, 2009 at 3:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tucker

      Clothes have a very real meaning as signifiers of identity. So all commenters dismissing this article as meaningless need to check out Dick Hebdige’s excellent book : Subculture: The Meaning of Style.

      If you get Hebdige’s message, it’s that the co-opting of style from marginalized social groups is part of a fluid process of larger class struggle, where the dominant classes and social groups reinforce their hegemony by appropriating the look of defiance, turning it into fashion, moving the signifying sign further and further away from the signified struggle that gave rise to the sign in the first place. Perhaps what is indeed missing from this article is a discussion of how the appropriation of a very specific segment of queer culture (ie under30s, white, single, urban middle-class/upper-class, educated males), will effect the signifying power of that very subculture. How will these queers rework their own style to keep ahead of the straight poseurs?

      Fredric Jameson quipped that the postmodern condition is a nostalgia for the present. Perhaps this is really at the heart of the hipster sense of style because all these skinny jeans, neon colors, big shoulders and mismatched patterns really seem to be about a nostalgia for late 80s, early 90s visual culture – a time period most under 30 hipsters only vaguely remember, didnt live through, and can therefore appreciate only for aesthetic value without an experienced understanding of the political and cultural values originally associated with those images/fashion movements. This is not a bad thing, per se. Its just how a new generation remakes culture, dusts off their parent’s junk and dolls it up, makes it relevant to their current situation. The queers appropriating the looks of early Grace Jones, TV’s Dallas, and Klaus Nomi, and many others are simply participating in a very refined form of cultural production; this is how fashion happens.

      At least the breeders look good.

      For years queers used the hanky code. maybe a discussion of how this phenomena trickled up and down into straight culture would be a good starting place.

      But congrats to Matt. The mark of a good article is always the discussion it generates.

      May 4, 2009 at 3:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bunion

      Huh? Kids today take their cues from Hip Hop. It is with irony that while gay people spend $$$’s on their designer underwear, it is the straight kids who show them off (and they are usually $4 boxers from the Gap). This is a little like suggesting drag queens inspired couture, while surely the opposite is true.
      Gay men were inspired by beat poets, movies by Kenneth Anger and anything that starred Marlon Brando. The 70s, a predominately disco era featured the machosation of gay men as they turned to their uniforms of Levi 501’s (because one’s cock showed up best in those) and by the late 70s, the gym craze was in full bloom. The fact is gay people essentially denied individuality in these periods. Klaus Nomi was a freak, not a fashion icon.
      This “queer” passage in time has little to offer about sartorial matters other than the Silence=Death logo, which can hardly be discussed as a fashion. So where and what is it gay people, other than gay fashion designers have lent to straight culture is a mystery. It’s like gay people taking credit for the resurgence of a cocktail—can you really make the case for it?

      May 4, 2009 at 3:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock

      This is ridiculous.

      Do you think more than half of that “style” wasn’t stolen from other fashion trends?

      Even the petulant outrage has been done better – by the mods, punks, glam and new wave “purists”.

      Stop complaining and be happy someone is paying attention

      May 4, 2009 at 3:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK


      Thanks, Tucker. that was the most pretentious piece of codswallop I’ve read in a week.

      May 4, 2009 at 3:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK



      It just sounds cranky…

      May 4, 2009 at 3:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Paul

      When I was in in my teens early 20’s it was the whole punk scene transcending into “new wave” scene. We who were into the hardcore scene would look at disdain at the “new waver” posers. They were making punk “cutesy”. We punks were probably mostly straight but there were those of us who were gay. Their were the straight guys getting their dicks sucked occasionally (they were at least claiming to be straight). But it was not a scene that was started out by one sexual brand. Being a punk finally fell out, you would never get a job outside of dishwashing unless you did. But then you either went the route of a Flock of Seagulls or
      went the route of the Smiths, Depeche Mode where you shopped at thrift stores, wore baggy old over coats, paisley shirts and combat boots. But it was a great period because people really were creative with their clothing. Finding that really cool old vintage shirt was like hunting for treasure. Nobody gave a shit about Dior or Prada, it was about putting together your own interesting take on the fashion times. The woman, whose name escapes me, who is the stylist for sex in the city, had a shop in New York that was amazing, she collected the most cool and interesting things. This laying claim on fashion cause your gay is crap. Yes, we have had our influence on underground fashion but we have never owned it.

      May 4, 2009 at 3:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Gianpiero

      Whoa. Members Only jackets and fanny packs are gay and hip? Huh?? Am I that out of the loop?

      May 4, 2009 at 4:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock

      Not sure why you seem to be spoiling for a fight, but you’re acting kind of desperate.

      May 4, 2009 at 4:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK

      hey, don’t laugh at fanny packs…that’s where I keep my kashi bar and juice box in case I have a violent drop in blood sugar and I’m busy. It’s so much more “macho” than a man purse, too. And, it glows in the dark in case I’m walking around at night to prevent getting hit by a car… Actually, people are tempted to hit me since I started wearing it for some reason. I wouldn’t go anywhere without my fannypack and rainbow suspenders.

      May 4, 2009 at 4:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK


      Yup. I’m “spoilin'” for a fight, peepaw. No, It’s just a little hypocritical for you to piss all over the justification of don’t complain because others have it worse, or at least you’re getting something rather than nothing…and then use it to silence criticism… Dontcha think?

      May 4, 2009 at 4:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • joel

      I was once a huge fan of Towleroad until I realized that the same fifteen queens were always the ones making comments. This is only a problem when it becomes personal and misses the point: it’s a discussion about something, not one another. So Tank, if its seems cranky, so be it. You have an odd sense of humor and I see you seem to have no work other than commenting. Keep it real, girl.

      May 4, 2009 at 4:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Virilene

      With this little “essayist’s” rage toward privileged white men, he damned sure better be a racial minority himself.

      How many queer boys have been stealin’ black women’s head-bobbin’ rage and makin’-it-real-clear hand gestures and sassy rhetorical expressions…..and for YEARS!

      Indignation? I don’t THINK so….

      May 4, 2009 at 4:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sal

      there is nothing wrong with “gay stylin”…there is nothing wrong with “gay”!!!!!!!!!!!stop using it as an insult …..i dont get how any style is “ours”??what about the gay guys who dress(so-called)str8??????do we hate??no we love cause that is “normal” dressing……….STOP THE NEGATIVE SPIN ON INDIVIDUAL

      May 4, 2009 at 4:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sal

      IT is not a shallow thing cause men ,sr8 men have always been in this small “individual”box..now they get to push image envelopes and we attack em??!!!!that makes me really sad and angry…

      May 4, 2009 at 4:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan Thompson

      I’m sorry but the guy at the top and the guy in purple would be gay. And if they’re not gay, they’d stop dressing like that because they’d get sick and tired of guys asking them if they were. End of story.

      Oh, and by the way, we invented the popped collar. Then preppy college-age assholes stole it.

      “If you want to continue copping my queer style, I want blow-jobs from you on demand.” LMAO ^_^ AWESOME! And the author has worked for Adam Carolla? No wonder I loved this article.

      May 4, 2009 at 4:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock

      There’s a little bit of a difference between a dubious accusation of fashion theft and telling a U.S.-born person to leave and go to Asia if she doesn’t like it here.

      May 4, 2009 at 4:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK

      It’s the same principle, being that one has no cause to complain because it could be worse. That’s the hypocrisy…

      Your charge of racism is overkill PC hand wringing.

      May 4, 2009 at 5:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK

      You are sorry…for finding adam carolla funny.

      May 4, 2009 at 5:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ali

      Hipster guys are dressing more like lesbians than anyone else, at least here on the west coast. You’re right to call it “queer” style and not just “gay” style.

      I am constantly finding myself going, “Oh wow, that lesbian looks cute” from the back only to find the person in question is a 20 year old dude with dyke hair and Rachel Maddow glasses. And I can say with authority we had these styles first.

      Stop confusing me stupid hipster boys! You are not Tegan & Sara! Don’t dress like them!

      Rant over.

      May 4, 2009 at 5:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John from England(used to be just John but there are other John's)

      @Casper O:

      Exactly!@Casper O:

      Uh huh…one of our readings for our MBA in Creative Industries Management course!

      May 4, 2009 at 5:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock


      ummm…. TANK:
      And there’s my own criticism of the term a few posts up (#13).
      But as you say…. irrelevant.

      If you to carry on with that other discussion, let’s at least do it in the right thread.

      If you want to stay here…. well we can talk about the need to document and enforce copyright for proprietary gay fashion styles and prevent their perversion by straights (or at least shake them down for BJs).

      May 4, 2009 at 5:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK

      Yes, irrelevant.

      Pass on the shake down. They don’t know what the fuck they’re doing anyway. I’d sooner stick my in a lawnmower–same effect.

      May 4, 2009 at 5:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John from England(used to be just John but there are other John's)



      Well said.

      May 4, 2009 at 5:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ohnojulian

      Interesting perspective…

      Still. The real hipsters don’t think they’re hipsters.

      May 4, 2009 at 5:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ragemanchoo82

      Tank, dude, fuck off. Really. You’ve never even heard him. And besides, like I said, you liked this blog entry, right? You’re talking out your ass.

      May 4, 2009 at 6:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK


      Are you drunk or, perhaps, have a few chromosomes over 46? WTF are you talking about?

      May 4, 2009 at 6:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • tinnyfolk

      Hipster is a derogatory term used by fashionable young people to talk about other fashionable young people they don’t like. People who talk about “hipster culture” are just referring to urban youth culture, or more often, the current version of it. Predictably, the complaint always seems to be that it is inferior to some older, whitewashed-by-memory era of youth culture.

      May 4, 2009 at 9:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DeAnimator

      Hipsters are stealing gay style…except that gay culture appropriated that style from cinematic stereotypes (which were heterosexist stereotypes of gay people) and the other random artistic/fashion dark alleys of the world.

      Yeah, it sucks, but it’s the cycle of life. Get over it.

      May 5, 2009 at 12:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tim in SF

      Hipsters are our fans.

      Don’t beat up on our fans. Love them while we have them. (love them twice, if you can).

      May 5, 2009 at 2:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mang

      This ‘gays whining about “hipsters” coopting gay fashion’ meme has been around for a couple years. It’s boring and it’s selfish. If I were you, I’d be celebrating young peoples’ willingness to look more gay and identify with queer signifiers. A more complete acceptance of actual homosexuality seems to go along with it, unless the kids turn less gay-friendly when obamaphoria wears off.

      So, seriously, anyone who thinks they own any particular bit of fashion can fuck off. You don’t own anything and you probably don’t dress as hot as you think you do.

      May 5, 2009 at 5:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Casper O

      @John from England(used to be just John but there are other John’s):

      Haha, it is also a recommended reading in my Managing Creative organisations course at Parsons for my Design Management BBA…

      May 5, 2009 at 12:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • andrew

      didn’t this happen before in 2005? with the whole “metro sexual fad”?

      May 5, 2009 at 5:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • bodega vendetta

      sean de lear kenny kenny leigh bowery freddy mercury the cockettes karl lagerfeld jeremy scott bruce la bruce
      aa bronson timothy cummings jasper johns david sedaris
      page rip taylor elton john the guy from judas priest justin bond
      john waters robert maplethorpe willie ninja james baldwin
      richard simmons bob mackie felix gonzales torres harvey milk
      andy warhol taboo ! valentino divine vaginal cream davis………….um,so,yeah…… i think we’ll always just be…… a little bit fiercer, i’m super not worried.

      May 6, 2009 at 2:43 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • prvtdncr

      fact: do not write comments when you are baked and coked out of your mind. it ruins friendships and hurts young peoples feelings. fact: bodega vendetta is right. fact: the gays just need to get even weirder and start wearing bullshit those freaky hipsters would never wear and we will solve this important problem very quickly. for instance: right now i have on a garfield fringed and beaded oversize beefy t with way too small tight terry cloth shorts with satin piping and all my junque is hanging out the bottom, purple tube socks and platform roller skates and my hair is piled on my head in a trump hump. i’m going to the market for more cocaine and a giant tub of vaseline. eat me hipsters.

      May 6, 2009 at 11:01 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MichaelSavage

      I hope they emulate your penchant for bug catching and die off in equal numbers.

      May 6, 2009 at 11:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • johnny

      I agree 100% that fashionable gays (this term is not redundant by the way) are infinitely more imaginative and original than hipsters — though that’s not really saying much. What I don’t agree with is the notion that gay style has involved no assimilation. How does any style (be it punk, goth, hipster or gay) ever get noticed, defined, and eventually blogged endlessly about, if people haven’t started dressing similarly…or assimilating?

      Also, while the gay struggle is something incredibly real and praiseworthy, gay style isn’t. At all. Would it really take much digging to find that people wore raybans and hoodies before gays did? Do you really want to be this fiercely protective of suspenders and a damn fanny pack?

      May 6, 2009 at 12:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MommaM

      As a 40 year old woman, I can tell you that members only jackets, raybans and cig leg pants have been around many many years, as have fanny packs all of them circa 1981-86 and the straiight community was wearing them. Obviously, someone decided to go to AArdvark with $10 to buy an entire ensemble and this is all they could afford! I’ve seen them come in and out of “fashion” once and my Mom, probably twice. As for the straight boys wearing them, I don’t get it. I’ve never been attracted to whimpy men, to me, they aren’t men…much more androgynous..like PAT.

      May 6, 2009 at 1:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK

      Oh fuck you, you bigoted ass (mommam). NO one cares about what or who you’re attracted to, let alone about your narrow life and empty headed bigoted opinions. Get a life, you ignorant cow. You aren’t a woman. That you spawned is a disservice to the gene pool.

      May 6, 2009 at 2:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK

      Mommam is simply clueless. Spouting reversisms of all kinds as if that makes a point anywhere but at wingnut daily.

      May 6, 2009 at 2:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • stephan


      What the hell are you doing on this website?

      Please go away, bigot.

      May 6, 2009 at 6:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK


      What offer for sex? LOL! I’d sooner chop my junk off fucking a woodchipper…ewwwww, goddamn….ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww, pwt pwt pwt…

      May 6, 2009 at 6:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MommaM

      @stephan: Free country and I have internet, deal with it!

      May 6, 2009 at 11:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MommaM

      @TANK: You might as well chop it off, you can’t miss what you never had!

      May 6, 2009 at 11:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • getreal

      @MommaM: Why do enjoy insulting people so much? What is the point of being such a fountain of negativity? Why don’t you spend time trying to make the world better do some volunteer or do something positive in your community. If you did that maybe your idea of fun would not be posting bigotry.

      May 6, 2009 at 11:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ragemanchoo82

      Tank, you obviously don’t know who he fucking is. Did you even graduate high school? What the fuck is your problem??

      May 7, 2009 at 12:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ragemanchoo82

      “Its a free country!”

      Mommam you’re 40? You sound 8. Get the fuck off the site if you don’t like what you see here. Really.

      May 7, 2009 at 12:15 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK


      The author of this editorial? Right, I don’t know who he is… What’s your point? I have no idea what you’re yammering about.

      May 7, 2009 at 12:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Issac M.

      horrible writing and a horrible premise. the author doesn’t get it and sounds like a mean little girl. no one is stealing anything, this is how the world works. and the gays “borrow” from other cultures as well so it is a 2 way street MATT.
      and if you do not like it, do exactly what PRVTDNCR told you to do and that is just wear weirder stuff and you will be safe. stupid story.

      May 7, 2009 at 12:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • neal

      There is an incredible the amount of negativity being expressed on this page about things that are fairly inconsequential in the great scheme of life. If we want to make a better future we simply must be more positively focused. Negativity usually indicates personal frustration and a lack of empowerment and it does not help our cause. Beyond the anger is much too much judgmentalism of others. Is this what we want to be, to show to the world, and to take up our time–and on such petty things as other people’s fashion choices?

      It’s intellectually vacuous to generalize about groups of people, especially when the generalities are based on superficialities and appearances. Of all people, we especially should avoid generalizing about others, since what we are up against is narrow-minded bigotry, prejudice and generalizations.

      As for Mommam, what can she possibly gain from expressing anger at gay people on this site? Do her comments merit a response from us? Ignorance is usually overcome through understanding and communication; name calling and anger do not work.

      My suggestion is to focus on things and people that will make life better and richer for yourself and others, and this includes not judging and condemning everyone and everything. We need greater subtlety, intelligence, and positive direction in our thinking, and we need to concentrate on actions.

      May 7, 2009 at 4:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • shaun fletcher

      Smart piece but it fails to address ‘queerness’ as the internal difference it is. There’s great irony in faux-queers assimilating the look of diffident difference as a hipster fashion statement, but in turn doesn’t that call on those of us that identify as truly queer (in thought, politics, sexuality) to stop playing out queerness with stupid clothes, stop looking queer and start acting queer?

      May 13, 2009 at 3:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Gene

      androgyny wins. all subcultures will congeal into the undefinable. it’s not that hard.

      May 27, 2009 at 11:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • brian

      I think we’re confusing camp with gay. Dressing up and all that sort of stuff is camp, not gay. Acceptance of camp does not necesssarily mean acceptance of gay.

      I think it’s important to draw that distinction. The liberal mainstream media likes to PRETEND society is more accepting of us. It’s a phony form of public relations designed to keep us gays on the side of the Democratic Party, a party with links to papers like the New York Times .

      When the New York Times publishes a picture of two men kissing on its cover, that will indicate acceptance. A guy dressed in hipster glasses and tight trousers is no more gay than James Dobson wearing a fur stole.

      May 27, 2009 at 11:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • queer_mutiny

      re :: Andrew Twigg

      “Mainstream cooption is a major predecessor to equality.”

      your predictable use of the word “equality” as the supposed end all and be all to the queer struggles that this author invokes shows that you don’t understand the struggle that a lot of people who identify as queer are engaged in – one not for assimilation but liberation. which is beyond any liberal notion of equality in the traditional sense.

      mainstream cooption involves a watering down of a culture and its meaning (in this case, a culture forged in struggle that no straight person could understand).

      and i cannot tell you how many outright homophobic (and subtly heterosexist) hipster dudes i’ve encountered. boys in skinny jeans who sling around words like “faggot,” which is a slap in the face to those generations of homos who’ve protested, rioted, come out of the closet, faced down firing squads in some instances, been murdered and beaten and spit on and jeered at just to love one another openly and express their gender as they please, without whom these very same hipster boys wouldn’t be able to step two feet outside their door without getting the shit beaten out of them for being dressed that way.

      it’s maddening to see them still exercise their ridiculous privilege in the garb of a culture forged in the context of struggle (kuffiyes, anyone?). i’d like to see just one of these boys walk hand in hand with another boy in public for a month – then maybe they’ll be in a place to understand what ppl like us are on about.

      Aug 17, 2009 at 6:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan Thompson

      I agree with the person who wrote earlier that if hipsters are going to keep co-opting gay style, I’m going to have to ask for a blowjob.

      Hear hear.

      Oh, and Brian, this is America. Straight males don’t know what “camp” is.

      Isaac, get lost.

      Aug 18, 2009 at 4:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • byoboi

      The article brings up an issue, “cultural diffusion,” which any minority group deals with when the majority appreciates some aspect of its style, food, music and customs. Black culture constantly deals with this e.g., Elvis Presley, Justin Timberlake, Bill Clinton, Eminem.

      Being from LA, I am not sure which came first, the hipster or the gay … Read Morehipster. It seemed to be a fusion of both when I was coming to age, going out every night, listening to the new electro band and shopping at vintage (because we were in LA)/thrift shops.

      We are trying to guard our culture from being misrepresented by the masses who we feel are bastardizing the authenticity of what we knew. There was once a standard and now the bar had been lowered to include many, many more individuals. But how can we lay claim to culture? As if we were the first to rock bow ties, jeans that fit as if they were painted, matted hair, an excess in jewelry, androgyny. For me, we should embrace the evolution of the hipster. I mean, now the hip hopster is rocking the socks which is actually an awesome fusion for the Black, Gay and hipster in me. Yes, I admit to being a hipster.

      Nov 2, 2009 at 3:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DALB

      “Queer” is an intrinsically disgusting and biggoted word that I would urge all homosexuals to stop using. Adopting the word “queer” for someone who is gay is like adopting the word “nigger” as a black man. It is entirely ridiculous and implies a sense of acceptance of biggotry that is not worth encouraging.

      Jul 12, 2010 at 3:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • collegedude1993

      If someone’s “identity” can be reduced to a set of clothes and eyewear, then that person’s identity is probably nonexistent. That goes for gay, queer, trans, pansexual, and hipster. I know this is supposed to be a cute (ugh!) article, but it rang pretty flat for me. For a people that supposedly hates restricting labels, self-appointed gay spokesqueers love to label everyone else. Here’s me: I am sexually attracted to men and women, I actually enjoy art galleries, independent films (as well as action movies), restaurants, hiking, and the list goes on. Yes, I have a beard and glasses. I’ve never thought of myself as a hipster, but I thought it very refreshing that it’s OK now for heterosexual men to not act like stereotypical boneheads in order to be MEN. So it’s now just straight morons I have to contend with, but narrow-minded homosexuals who are threatened by other people who aren’t afraid to break stereotypes. If gay men don’t stand for anything other than clothes, mixed drinks, and shallow non-masculinity, then gay men need to reevaluate themselves, not blame “hipsters” for enjoying their lives.

      Feb 20, 2011 at 8:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Walt!

      This all sounds fine on a first glance, but the whole thing is incorrect. Most hipsters style seems to appropriate from the 70s, including the early punk looks from the late 70s, rather than gay culture. Don’t believe me? Look here:


      The writer just comes off as a horn-dog who wants to have sex with hipster boys but is sexually frustrated from rejection. Also for the record, Members Only jackets are retro, not gay.

      May 19, 2011 at 12:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • neal

      “Collegedude”: Did you really use the noun “homosexuals”? Really? Really? Wow. “Homosexual” is a derogatory term coined by “psychotherapists” in the late 1800s to stigmatize same-sex attraction as aberrant, depraved, and psychopathic. I suggest, Mr. Metro/Bi-Sexual, that you abandon that term immediately–it reflects very poorly on its users. And speaking of nomenclature, I have found most self professed “bisexuals” I have met to be fundamentally dishonest about their sexuality. Whatever they are, they tend to hate the thought that someone might think they are gay. Hey, we don’t care.

      Jun 11, 2011 at 1:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sceth

      I understand a possibly implied argument that communities should control their own symbols, and need to call that out as bullshit. I read this is a satire of that. It possibly wasn’t intended as that, but it would have worked that way. An individual has license to use community symbols ad libitum, and the hilarious irony of all of this is that the mainstreaming process encourages equal regard (a situationally stronger term than equal rights) to become more mundane.

      Sep 4, 2011 at 2:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • HUGBOT


      Sep 4, 2011 at 4:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert Andy Coombs

      You could give me some photo credit! Just to let you know, I am both.


      Jun 28, 2012 at 5:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • Copyright 2017 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.