So yeah, if you know tallitot, then you know the difference between a Tallit Katan and a Tallit Gadol and knew I was speaking of a Tallit Gadol. A Tallit Katan is rarely worn by anyone except the ultra-orthodox (Who, unfortunately, I see all the time, as I live in Flatbush, Brooklyn and regularly visit West…

The only way this could be better, Dodai, is if it were a gallery of Alex O'Loughlin cuddling baby animals in the nude.

Yeah, you're totally right. It was a total failure of reporting and editing, though, that the village idiots' comments were set up the way they were. Makes me wonder if a woman was at all involved in the editing process.

I'm not belittling the keffiyeh, just pointing out that there's a real difference between a culturally important garment and a garment that's part of religious practice.

Brisbane killed the NYT's response with that headline. Since when do you have to "balance" the story of an 11 year old child being gang-raped?

Fine, but there's a difference between a garment that's part of secular culture and a garment that's used in religious ceremonies, and that was the point I was making. People equating a keffiyeh with a Jewish religious garment are displaying their ignorance about both.

i was going to say exactly the same thing, but you beat me to it. Hannah Arendt FTW!

As I said downthread, that comparison doesn't really work.The keffiyeh has strong cultural meaning in the Arab world, but it's a piece of outerwear, not a religious garment.

No, it really does not hold. A tallit is a ceremonial prayer garment. For centuries, there have been very specific restrictions about where and when it can be worn. It's treated with reverence and is used ONLY for religious ceremonies and during prayer.

That doesn't work as a comparison. The keffiyeh has strong cultural meaning in the Arab world, but it's a piece of outerwear, not a religious garment. A keffiyeh is not used in religious worship and prayer the way a tallit is.

Having your Jewish lawyer speak to Ynet reeks of "public image reclamation project."

Are you Jewish? Because I am and I think I've heard the lawyer stereotype at least as often as the banker/media overlord ones. Which is to say, several times a week for most of my life.

This post compares him to Ann Landers, who was a mainstream advice columnist with syndication in most major newspapers. That's what I was taking issue with. I don't think he's anywhere near approaching Ann Landers in terms of distribution, syndication, or mainstream acceptance.

Polanski and Brown, like most rich people, can better avoid the consequences of their behavior because they're rich. You're helping to make them rich. And Tom Monaghan, founder of Domino's, is an ultra-right activist who donates his wealth to ultra-right activism, particularly radical anti-choice groups. You're making…

Then, yeah, you wouldn't be complicit in the same way (although some—-not me—-might make an argument that by wearing/displaying the art, you'd still be endorsing the artist). But I don't think that's what lollilove was talking about.

True. Although at the end of the day, someone has to buy his clothes to pay his bills the same as they have to buy movie tickets or music, even if the folks in Gallianos's circle don't see what they do as grubby retail.

You don't have to agree with them, but you're still giving them your money to fund their wrongdoing: Polanski's being a fugitive from rape prosecution, Chris Brown's lawyers/publicists who try to spin his abuse, Domino's creator's funding of Operation Rescue.

Wait, so if his creations are lucrative masterpieces that makes his abhorrent behavior different than if his lucrative creations are popular movies or music? Huh?

Especially when they sexually harrass women and then lead a propaganda campaign to smear their accusers as "a little bit slutty and a little bit nutty."