Talk:Straight edge/Archive 1

message: I think this is well said and should be kept as is: 
"Some straight-edgers feel that having a clear mind is a better way to approach life and/or spirituality. They tend to be atheistic or agnostic, often believing in self-responsibility and rejecting the idea of a deity or any divine moral law. However, in many circles the lifestyle has associations with Christianity, and there were at one time a significant Hare Krishna and Mormon straight-edge movements. There are also Muslim straight-edgers, especially in Islamic countries, most notably Malaysia."
Now, there are some people with religious agenda who will try to hijack this part of the article and edit something like: "Straight-edgers tend to be christians" etc (just removed one). To me it sounds like "Heavy Metal fans tend to worship Satan", and even that would be more of a fact than above. Straight edge, as everyone knows, has it's roots in punk and anarchy movement. This has nothing to do with any organized religion. Sure, some people are religious whatever they are, but being straight edge and religious are two separate things. --Nitret 01:29, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Spirituality

message: Straight Edge is more of a Counterculture than Subculture.
Counterculture is defined as - group's values and norms placed in opposition to the dominant culture.
Subculture is defined as - a world within a larger world of the dominant culture. Each subculture has a disctinctive view. 
But when Values and norms are in opposition to the mainstream values and norms it falls more into the Counterculture.
- A friendly Sociologist
Agreed. I don't think straight edge would have even existed had punk not generally condoned all of the things that sXe rejects now. --BDD 14:53, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Straight Edge is more of a Counterculture rather a Subculture 

message: The following excerpt from the article is meaningless and stupid. The shirt is not an attack or "backlash" against straight edge in any way. This should be removed. "As one example, on the submit-and-publish T-shirt website OMG Clothing, one phrase that can be seen is "Straight-edge girls are SXE."" 9-29-2005
Further, i think it should be noted that much of the negativity including the "gang" status in utah is a result of the hard-liners, not the straight edgers, though the line between the two gets a little blurry depending on POV Dreamer.redeemer 03:41, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  OMG Clothing & "backlash" 

message: There is a straight edge template for anyone who wants to put it on there user page.  looks like this: 
I made my own, which is all black.  You can copy it off of my user page if you'd rather use that. Fightindaman 03:44, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Userbox 

message: I re-added the links section a few weeks ago, because it is silly to not have a links section. Every good Wikipedia article should have links for further reading and information.
Today I have removed two links:
1: A merchandise site. I don't know if someone purposefully added their own store, or if someone just put it in to be helpful, but I don't think it is a good idea to start including links to merchandise for people to buy.
2: A link to sxe.com - there was already a link to it, it does not need a link to both it's main site and it's forums. One link is enough, which is still there.
New changes:
3: straightedge.com - is this site worth linking to?
4: sxe.com - After actually looking at this site, it links to a very poorly designed opening page with some inane ramblings and the owner asking for lots of money for the domain, then an obscure link to a very inactive forum. Hardly a necessary link?
5: straight edge online - this is a valuable resource, any reason aside from years old grudges, that necessitates the continual removal of this site from the links?
--------------
5. a valuable resource according to the owner? Since I'm sure this is probably the person writing this. You talk about grudges and then ask for the removal of 2 sites from links?  huh?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The external links section should be an inclusive list of links to websites which are about and are in support of straight edge.  I do not understand why straight edge community sites are constantly being deleted from this wiki page.
The purpose of the wiki is to disseminate information.  What better way to illustrate what straight edge is by linking to sites that are active straight edge communities?  Deleting such links is a disservice to those looking for information about straight edge.
I propose the following links be added to the External links section:
http://www.xsisterhoodx.com
A female oriented straight edge community.  This site has reviews, interviews, articles and an active base of users. 
http://www.populationx.com
Another straight edge community website with an active base of users. Its goal is to support the hardcore and straightedge community.
http://www.posionfree.com
The oldest European straight edge and hardcore community which is still running strong.  This site features an extensive FAQ on straight edge as well as a record label, interviews, articles, reviews and more.
–11/30/2006— 63.118.22.130 20:56, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is not a link farm.  The external links section should not be an inclusive list of straight edge resources.  Consider using info from these external links to build the article, then use the external sites as references.  Please read WP:EL.  Strobilus 03:20, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links 

message: The "X" is talked about in detail in the beginning, but then is given a shortened section in the "overview" as well. I think they should be combined to add coherence to the article, as in, only a short paragraph, and then the bulk of the section about it (especially the part about the CD cover, etc) should be moved into the main part of the article. --Ecurran 00:33, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: DIY, man! Be bold! Mgekelly - Talk 03:14, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  X 

message: The ranks of the straight edge culture, like fundementalist Christianity and fundementalist Islam, are filled with intolerant hawks. The majority of straightedgers I have met are at the very least condescending towards those fellow humans who do not choose to believe exactly as they do: the ethical decisions to abstain from drugs and meat-eating are viewed as binding upon all of humanity by many straightedgers, much as Jews view the Noahide laws as binding on all citizens of the world. Some straightedgers go further, escalating to violence in an attempt to 'convert' others to their thought.
It matters not if the ethical decisions made by straight-edgers are correct. It does not matter whether they are well or poorly reasoned, or for that matter reasoned at all, or just adhered to like any other social institution because of pressure from peer groups. What matters is that No man has the authority to make ethical judgments for another, and that the majority's concurrence does not make a particular statement correct.
I tolerate straight-edgers - who live their lives in a way disagreeable to my personal conscience and consciousness - every day of my life, but am tired of them preaching at me - to the point of verbal, and nearly physical, violence (intimidation in every way imaginable) - even more, far more so than your run of the mill Evangelical Christians. Here, I say my piece - hopefully someone will listen and talk to their friends - tolerance is a virtue, and no ethical decision is binding on everyone - only those who choose to accept it with their God-given free will.
-Christopher Mayo, freelance counterculturist and philosopher. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.60.242.103 (talk • contribs) 
Your point????
I am "close-minded" in many of my views (meaning, I will not change them on a whim or on another's demand), but not to the point of completely and utterly disregarding another's the moment I find it to contradict my personally-held beliefs. I do not believe it is necessary to accept "close-minded" worldviews in order to be open-minded, but that is for a discussion of logic or philosophy - not encyclopedia writing - and has no relevance to my rebuttal. 
This is an open-source encyclopedia - not the place for pushing an agenda, personal or political. In the name of good - even mediocre - journalism, works purporting to be factual must indeed be kept factual and unbiased to the best of one's knowledge and ability - Wikipedia calls this "NPOV". For the sake of neutrality, the author(s) of an encyclopedia or other reference book are compelled to keep an open mind to all ideas - even "close-minded" ones. Neutrality is not achieved by opposing groups hawking their equally-biased viewpoints at each other and leaving the reader to decode what has been written. "Close-minded" authors are not suited for encyclopedia writing, but the writing of editorials. 
-Christopher Mayo, freelance counterculturist and philosopher. 69.47.165.223 06:54, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Intolerance

message: I had a paragraph noting that the term "straight edge" as an indicator of vegetarianism or clean living has actually been around for at least 100 years, with citations. It's been removed twice now, on the grounds that the term back then wasn't associated with the punk-affiliated movement it is now. Which is true, but I still think it's quite noteworthy; especially since the article without it gives incorrect information, claiming that Ian MacKaye invented the term. What do people think? Korny O'Near 03:51, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless you can prove that Ian Mackaye had heard of/was influenced by this restaurant, then saying that he invented it is accurate.  Was he the first to invent it? No, but if he didn't borrow it then it makes no sense to point out that it was used earlier in a completely unrelated context. Fightindaman 04:05, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I disagree. I think the old and new term are close enough in meaning that it couldn't have been a coincidence. Anyone else? Korny O'Near 15:05, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There does not need to be an unbroken line of transmission for cultural trends. Asserting the predecessors are irrelevent because there is no evidence that the vocal spokesperson for this revival was aware of previous usage is a logical fallacy. Teetotallers and temperance are nothing new, and if "straight edge" has previously referred to such a trend it is indeed relevent. Vassyana 06:58, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins of "Straight Edge" term 

message: There is no source for this info, and there ought to be KurtFF8 04:03, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Backlash and criticisms 

message: I am surprised there is not a section in this article describing how Straight Edge has become little more than a self-righteous, condescending GANG who feel that they are somehow enlightened by their brain washed, disciple-like beliefs. Because of this, they find it morally sound to use violence as persuasion, or simply shoving their beliefs down the throats of "non-believers", but at the same time, threatening others not to shove their beliefs down theirs. Yes, I have heard straight-edgers refer to themselves as enlightened, but it is truely ironic. If anything, straight edge has degraded to a Neanderthal-like tribe with pseudomodern-day Christian morals. Sickening. At least African American gangs don't try to act somehow socially evolved, because they know they are not.
:Um, it mentions hardline. And not all sXers are like that, you are making blanket generalizations based on the actions of some sXers. If you can find neutral and reliable sources, feel free to add more to the criticism section, but please do so in a neutral tone. And btw, Neandertals were actually not that bad. Shanidar 1 seems to indicate altruism and compassion in the form taking care of the disabled. Ritual burials of the dead also seems to indicate respect and compassion for others in their group. Just thought you should know. And amazingly enough, there are even some truly compassionate christians in the world too. Some of them even respect other people's beliefs! Perhaps work on that whole over-generalization thing, since you're bound to upset people when you go on the offensive like that, especially with no prior provocation. Ungovernable ForceThe Wiki Kitchen! 09:31, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have truely been pwned; my hat is off to you sir. In all reality, I did this as an almost test, or perhaps experiment, to see what kind of reactions would spawn from such an opinionated, antipodal outlook on the matter. You probably handled the situation even better than I would--a self-proclaimed expert on the matter (from experience, naturally).
If you feel strongly enough to make statements like that, please back them up with some kind of useful facts.
24.105.131.196 23:35, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What is has become

message: The artichle is not particularly good at saying what seperates straight edge from just not using drugs or alcohol. It says they are very different, but not how. Also, the motivations for many straight edgers, or why some turn militant and how they are militant is never explained. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.85.180  (talk • contribs) 
:I don't see it saying they are very different without saying how. It does say "Labeling oneself straight edge is a conscious decision that someone makes for themselves and is generally not seen as a label that is obtained by default. One is not straight edge simply because they don't drink, smoke, or do drugs; it requires an active decision and participation in the subculture," which seems like an explanation. I might just be missing what you are talking about though, since I just glanced through it. Personally, I'd say the main difference is active identification, as well as participation with the subculture. For example, you wouldn't label some anime fan who doesn't drink, smoke or do drugs but has no affiliation with the punk or sXe scene as edge (despite the fact that my friend tried to do just that, lots of laughs from that one). You also wouldn't label a punk who doesn't drink, smoke or do drugs as edge if they aren't necessarily committed to that abstinence or just don't want to be associated with the sXe scene (like myself). That's how I see it anyway. Ungovernable ForceGot something to say? 06:49, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Difference from plain abstinence from drugs 

message: Even though there are anti christain sxe bands like limp wrist and xfilesx there are also many Christian sxe band, such as haste the day an 18 visions. I just wanted to say that. Saint Edge 18:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've seen Haste The Day, I don't remember ever heard that they are edge...--Danlock2 03:42, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bands 

message: A "straight edger" is someone who edges straights. Straight Edge is a noun. The origin comes from the Minor Threat song of the same name, and was described as something you posessed (an edge because you were sober):
------
I've got the straight edge
------
Not long after, people began phrasing it a little differently:
"I am straight edge."
The use of the term "straight edger" has been almost exclusively by people who are ignorant of the subculture: teachers/school officials, law enforcement, parent groups, etc. Straight edge individuals do not normally self identify as "straight edgers." It would lend more credence to the article to change references to "straght edgers" to a variation of "straght edge individuals."
24.105.131.196 23:11, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Straight Edger" vs. "Straight Edge individual" 

message: This article needs POV revamping; citations; a section on history and terminology; a criticism section; and a serious reorganization.  
71.110.68.228 21:34, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: DIY, tough guy. mgekelly 01:13, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Total Rewrite

message: "A subset of straight edge—often called hardline—had been involved in physical assaults in the United States during the 1980s and up to the mid 1990s."
I don't have the necessary knowledge to improve this section, but it seems like it emphasizes the role of hardline too much.  Also the hardline article itself states that hardline didn't exist until the early 90s.P4k 03:22, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: violence and hardline

message: I made these just if any one wanted them.Saint Edge 14:43, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Great minds think alike- I created  CattleGirl  talk 09:19, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  user box 

message: all the people that say a "straight edge gang" is a contradiction to the ideals of Edge are idiots. We work to keep our neighborhoods clean. The guys i roll with dont go out and beat people up for smoking, we take out drug dealers. Straightxedge 03:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Look in the mirror buddy. Subcultures and countercultures are rarely (if ever) perfectly unified in self-definition. A large subsection of the sXe scene feels gangs are contrary to their ideals. You, as representative of another subsection, may disagree but that does not make it gospel. It simply illustrates that there are points of contention regarding definition of the label within the subculture. It is worth noting both POVs are POV and my criticism of your comments applies to the assertion you reference as well. Vassyana 07:19, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  edge and edge gangs 

message: After reading this article I am still very confused about what exactly "straight edge" is.  Where do these "guidelines" come from?  What authority or source do these beliefs arise out of?  From this article, it appears that straightedge culture is simple self-imposed conformity to an entirely arbitrary set of beliefs.  Do these individuals abstain from drug use because they decided its a good idea, or because its straight edge?  Who decides what is straightedge and what isnt?  I don't get it.Colin 01:15, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a self-imposed label and there is no central authority rubberstamping "official" sXe beliefs. You will find most subcultures and countercultures to be just as nebulous and self-contradicting, except when they are stereotyped or parodied. Who decides what is "real" punk versus "sell-out" or "wannabe" punk? Who decides who is a "real Wiccan" and who is a "Wicclet"? Though there are broad guidelines that can be drawn from the consensus and majority views of such scenes, it is a matter of personal judgement. For the purposes of Wikipedia, proper sources documenting the consensus and/or majority views define the "authorative" view. However, in the interests of NPOV, minority and dissident views, as well as opposing/critical views should be included with proper sources. I know this probably doesn't clear the issue for you, but you are asking for something that doesn't exist. Vassyana 07:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

text: It's a fad, especially with people like CM Punk in the spotlight now. 8 years ago it was Backstreet Boys, Limp Bizkit, and Britney Spears, today it's the whole punk rock thing which drags this whole straight edge. It's best just to ignore it, there are bigger problems. Straight Edge is nothing to praise it refers to razors blades and it's for bitches. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.233.167.166 (talk) 20:46, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Weird fad that lasts for 20 + years... Diabolical 15:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I've never saw a 12 year old girl listening to anything like real punk like Minor Threat, Discharge or the Dead Kennedys. Who care where that kid saw it? There's pleanty of people who've never even heard of CM Punk. Diabolical 13:42, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confused. 

message: Ok, so I'm removing or altering a lot of the last edits and don't have enough room to explain in the edit summary. First, vegetarianism and veganism are affiliated with modern sXe as many sXe's do see it as important. It doesn't mean it's necessary for being edge, but it is clearly a common practice for many. As for the bit about religion, the entire section is about that and you don't need a summary at the end. As for the part about hardline, I like the part about more militant, but the caffeine thing doesn't seem incredibly important to mention, at least not in that sentence. I would think the strong environmentalism, animal liberation and conservative sexual attitudes would be more notable than their stance on caffeine. I'm also trying to clean up the part about mockery from other punks. Ungovernable ForceGot something to say? 06:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with all that however I've never seen any people who are serious about Straight Edge denying or down playing the sex element as you stated in the edit history. It's only ever been kids that don't wanna miss out on it that I've seen say that. I've seen you on this site for a while and I've also read & respect your views (on your user page) very much so it's not like you're the average Wikipedia (ab)user, I'm just wondering how I've managed to not notice/misunderstand this seemingly large aspect of Straight Edge. Diabolical 02:23, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm just saying that it isn't a necessary requirement for edge from the sources I've seen and people I've talked to. I see it as more of an optional issue, like the vegan thing. It should be mentioned, but I think what really defines edge is the lack of drinking, smoking and drug use. The other stuff comes second. I should also say that I am not edge myself, but I have several friends who are and I've been to several sXe websites, so that is where I'm getting my info on this. Ungovernable ForceGot something to say? 03:07, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Murderbike pretty much just summed it up. I know some edgers who are fine even with casual sex, a whole lot who are okay only with sex in a relationship, and some who are celibate. It's like edge and vegetarianism/veganism; they're associated, but not necessarily connected. It's secondary stuff, and it's not universal. ~Switch t 05:01, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I've always seen no casual sex mentioned in various places on the web, forums ect, maybe it's because not many people go by complete abstinence and "lower morals" if you will, in society that it has became less of an issue or that the definition of casual sex has went to extremes rather than occasional. I'm willing to accept what you're all saying though. Diabolical 01:51, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So have I, but I've seen others that have said it isn't followed as much anymore and isn't always considered a guideline. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of promoscuity personally, but I don't think it's considered defining for edge anymore. I'm glad we seem to have reached an agreement. And like I said, we definitely should mention that it is important for many sXe punks, just not all. Ungovernable ForceGot something to say? 06:34, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits 

message: The article says hardcore is a subset of the straight edge movement, but the alt.punk.straight-edge FAQ source gives evidence that hardcore had originated in 1976, well before the 1980 date that straight edge was started according to the article.
207.207.127.243 08:22, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction 

message: wikipedia is fact and if u actualy watched the movie he gets high and smokes put thats not edge —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.35.254.11 (talk) 20:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you don't like the way something is written on Wikipedia, you change it, that's how it works. JUst make sure you can back it up. Diabolical 15:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  no one in slc punnk was staight edge someone fix it  

message: The article as it currently stands strongly implies that MacKaye supports the current sXe movement, which he clearly in multiple interviews has said he does not.  If we're going to include early-80s quotes from him in support of it, we should also include some quotes of his later repudiation... those actually used to be in this article, but someone removed them it appears? --Delirium 03:41, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think we need them, it's hardly a movement for a start, for example, the feminist movement or the anarchist movement who actually do things. Diabolical 15:58, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  current article is misleading w.r.t. MacKaye 

message: should something be put in to relate to the emo page? i read there that straight edge is sometimes related to emo. can someone check this out?Jkalltheway 08:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm. This is on the Emo (music) page? There's only one mention of that, and that's in the development of early emo music with one band. I'd say leave it out of the article, after all, that's really just a coincidence if a sXedger listens to emo music as well. CattleGirl  talk 09:25, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  relation to emo? 

message: are minor threat a straight edge band cause i dont think they call themself one does that matter? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.106.142.220 (talk) 10:08, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  is Minor threat a straight edge band? 

message: There's a category for straight edge bands, but currently no category for straight edge people. Plenty of people who claim(ed) the edge weren't in explicitly straight edge bands. Thoughts on creating one? ~ Switch (✉✍☺) 03:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm for it. After all, there's a category to list teetotalers. I think there should be one for Straight Edge people. Sion 00:29, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Straight Edge people 

message: How was Earth Crisis *not* part of the Youth Crew movement? Youth Crew lasted up until the late 90s, and Earth Crisis were created back in the early 90s. It's simple.Xanarki 19:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Earth Crisis