▼
Letters >>
October 4-10, 2012 • BAY AREA REPORTER • 7
Let’s live in the present It would be hypocritical for me not to mention that in the 1980s I had some of the best times of my life at the Eagle: The theme parties, great discussions about music with David the DJ, drinks with Sylvester, Sharon McNight, and many local celebrities [“New Eagle owners prepare to open,” September 20]. But I can’t help thinking some people may be hoping that reopening the bar will hurl us back to the exciting and carefree pre-health crisis days for which we all have such warm memories. Come on, folks, that era has passed and is gone for good. Bars should be low on our list of priorities at this point in our history. Let’s live in the present instead of pining for the past. Verden Allen Alameda, California
No on Prop A I have read your ballot recommendations in the September 20 edition of the Bay Area Reporter [“San Francisco ballot measures,” Editorial]. Nearly all of them stink. I will start with Prop A. In endorsing Prop A the editors of the B.A.R. have demonstrated total ignorance of elementary economic principles and utter obliviousness to its moral dimension. City College’s problem is that it has increased employee fringes and pension costs to a point where it cannot afford to pay them. I am sure the financial officer of the B.A.R. is quite aware that there are limits to what the paper can pay the employees and stay in business. The paper has a limitation because its revenue stream is composed of voluntary payments. The B.A.R. cannot force its customers to pay more just because the employees want to wallow in overly generous compensation packages. Public institutions like City College do not face the same limitation because their revenue stream is largely composed of compulsory payments. The trustees of City College have allowed their compensation packages to balloon way beyond what students are able to afford and taxpayers are willing to pay. There is no level of taxation that will satisfy the employee demand for more money and benefits and the student demand for more education. A tax increase will not solve their problems unless the employees (which includes the teachers) moderate their demand for compensation to something more reasonable. The moral dimension consists of the fact that the parcel owners who are being asked to bear the burden of these bloated compensation packages are a minority of voters. Many of the parcel owners are people of very modest means who are being asked to give up their money to subsidize the benefit and pension bloat at City College. Many of the voters are not parcel owners and they will not have to bear the cost if this measure passes. I am 65. I don’t get no pension. I have to live on Social Security and my 401k. My means are substantially less than the people who I will be forced to subsidize. No one needs vote for Prop A to give their own money to CCSF; they need vote only to compel someone else to hand over money. You ought to be ashamed of yourselves for urging your readers to plunder my nest egg to benefit people who are much, much better off than I am. It may be that CCSF provides valuable services to SF, but then costs ought to be borne more equitably by a wider class of citizens than just the parcel owners. Leslie E. Mangus San Francisco
Visitor praises nudity in SF As a frequent visitor to San Francisco, I appreciate the fact that it is one of the few cities in the nation where nudity is a commonplace event and a natural part of what makes San Francisco unique. I attend nude beaches, regional nude events, and I go on naked walks with the friends in the city when I’m there. Since it has been proven by esteemed psychologists that natural nudity has no deleterious effects on children or people in general, there is no reason to ban nudity in San Francisco [“Nudity ban would exempt parades, fairs,” October 20]. It is so commonplace in some European countries that it is viewed nonchalantly by most residents there. No sexual display occurs by the nude guys, since it is only naturism not exhibitionism. It’s hard to believe that there are gay prudes who themselves fought for their right to be different, who are now being discriminatory against nudist guys. I strongly support the nude guys in San Francisco and their right to express themselves on the streets in a non-threatening way. I believe that if nudism is restricted, then the danger exists of other rules being imposed on the city in the future by conservatives who want to “take back” their city from the gays. Daniel Brookshire Austin, Texas
SF’s unrivaled tolerance One reader suggested that nudists return to “colonies” and this struck a nerve with me [Mailstrom, September 27]. One of the most endearing things about San Francisco is the unrivaled tolerance to alternative lifestyles of all kinds. I’ve been a practicing nudist for almost 40 years and never thought of what my wife and I do as “parading around.” We happen to enjoy the liberating feeling of not wearing confining clothes on a warm afternoon or evening and for the most part have relegated our activities to designated beaches, clubs, resorts, etc. For the moment,
San Francisco represents the only city I’m aware of where we can freely enjoy our chosen lifestyle out among society and we’re always respectful to those around us. We have witnessed unacceptable behavior from a very few rude individuals who, as one reader astutely pointed out, are not nudists at all but simply self-serving exhibitionists and this is a very important point. The vast majority of folks who you see naked on the streets are well intentioned and I dare say not unlike you. My wife and I are both professionals and lead relatively “normal” lives. Can’t we deal with the offenders without driving away everyone else? Our amazing city can do one of two things with this current controversy. We can choose to set the bar for tolerance and progressive thinking and remain a benchmark for other urban areas or we can simply conform to the “standards” set by everyone else. My wife and I have been approached several times on our nude strolls, always with positive comments. One young woman surprised us by emotionally thanking us for being “the kind of people who make San Francisco unique.” I’d certainly like to have the chance to continue down this path. Pete Sferra San Jose, California
Urban nudist weighs in As an urban nudist, it saddens me to see the neighborhood I have considered my home for two-thirds of my life become so intolerant and unwilling to listen to logic and reason. The human body is only offensive and obscene if you see it as such, offense and obscenity rests in the mind. Many complain that we are two old, fat, ugly, hairy, etc. My body carries the record of my lived experience, its triumphs and failures, its successes and tragedies. To assert that my body should be censored from public view is to assert that my lived experience, my very identity, should be censored from public view. Some cite children as a reason for us to cover ourselves. I ask, why are you teaching your children to hate their bodies? Some insist we are all straight men who do not live here. It is funny, but when I go to other neighborhoods some who do not like me call me and my fellow nudists “faggots.” Body freedom belongs to everyone, gay, straight, bisexual, and transgender. Some say we are ruining business, keeping people from coming to the neighborhood to shop. I ask, why do we need to cater to the intolerant and uneducated? We nudists could be used as a learning tool, a symbol of our neighborhood’s and our city’s openness, tolerance, and respect for the beliefs and ideals of others. This is what I had thought San Francisco and Castro values where. Woody Miller San Francisco
Castro nudist speaks I am one of the Castro nudists frequently in Jane Warner Plaza. There is a core group of about a dozen of us who live in the neighborhood or are very frequent visitors to the neighborhood. We have been around for a long time. We have not been beamed in from outer space. We have stable incomes and living situations. We pay taxes and spend our money in the neighborhood. We are the same as everyone else. The only difference to many of the general public is that by the demonstration of our urban nudism, we show that we are more comfortable with our body image and selves than most others. Nudism really shouldn’t be a big deal, but apparently it is. It’s irrefutable that the overwhelming majority of tourists and visitors find us interesting and for many a highlight of their visit. At first, most people were cool with the nudists in the plaza. What has happened is that the plaza has attracted more nudists from all over the region and world. This happens in a plaza designed for about 50 people to hang around and a major pedestrian flow. During weekdays, there are rarely more than three or four nudists often zero to one nudists. Some of the weekend nudists are, even to me, a little goofy and exhibitionist. Still, no one is really getting harmed by this sideshow. Now lets get to the politics of the situation. District 8 Supervisor Scott Wiener is feeling pressure from some “squeaky wheels” to put out two fires. The overpopulation of nudists in the plaza and excessive posing/exhibitionism. The simple solution to overpopulation at the plaza is for the nudists to go to other parks. Guess what? The Castro plaza and the other new parklets are the only public places the nudists can meet. There is a 1960s-era anti-hippy park and recreation nudity ordinance in the city parks. A group of nudists had a recent conversation with Wiener mentioning making sections of Dolores, Golden Gate, and Yerba Buena parks clothing optional as a solution. This could be done quickly without legislation, like suspending the nudity ordinance for Bay-to-Breakers, Anarchist Book Fair, and other special events. Because of possible blowback from other special interests, Mr. Wiener refused to take any kind of supportive or leadership position on this simple, effective solution. With new parks to take off Castro plaza population pressure, it then becomes possible to exert peer pressure to tone it down on the more exhibitionist of the remaining plaza nudists. George Davis San Francisco