The follow up to my previous rant….
(San Francisco, California) Mayor Gavin Newsom says he is considering canceling the Castro district’s annual Halloween festivities in the future after a shooting wounded nine people and left another person injured in the ensuing panic.
If you haven’t heard by now, there was several shootings at the Halloween event in the Castro last night. Today, the story is making nice soundbites across the blogosphere. If you read this blog on a regular basis you know where my insight comes from.
“Halloween in the Castro” used to be a really fantastic slice of San Francisco attended primarily by the neighborhood’s local gay/lesbian community. Over recent years the event has become a spectator event with 80% of current attendees from out of town. Since 2002, much violence has resulted, ruining this once-special event.
While I am a huge fan of Halloween, I hope they cancel the event next year. I hope they increase the police presence and flat out turn people away. Call me a party-pooper but at least folks won’t get hurt for just trying to have some good old fashioned fun. The event is no longer about the neighborhood getting together for a night of innocent revelling. Instead, it’s a bunch of condescending outsiders looking for an excuse to cause mayhem. Well, here’s your sign. We don’t want you. If you can’t behave like a civilized human being, stay your ass at home and cause grief in your own neighborhoods.
Two wrongs don’t make a right but I can’t help it. My grandmother was a big believer in an “eye for an eye”. I don’t condone violence however, it’s times like these that make me doubt that conviction. Sometimes a good ass-whoopin’ is the only way to get thru to a pig-headed fool.
Or more broo haha?
(full story) New Jersey’s highest court ruled Wednesday that gay couples are entitled to the same rights as heterosexuals, but that lawmakers must determine whether the state will honor gay marriage or some other form of civil union.
A very unfriendly lady told me today that “those people” don’t belong here, referring to a homeless couple who had setup camp on her block in a rather affluent part of town. Granted the homeless situation here is a major problem. Being a progressive city, SF has a large population of homeless folks. To me that sounds more like a contradiction than a definition. Yet, you find the same problem in every large city. It is not a crime to be homeless. And it should not preclude you from the human rights granted to any other human being. An important distinction often forgotten.
When you deal w/the homeless as much as I do in my line of work, it is easy to forget these are human beings. You see people who, for a variety of reasons, have been discarded by society. And it’s not a pretty sight seeing a human devolved to such a lowly form of existence. Living in squalor, stink, and filth, manners and cleanliness become unafforded niceties that are soon forgotten. In this scenario it is easy to forget. Yet, we musn’t. If we, as a society, allow people to live this way then we must also bear the burden of supporting them. We no longer live in age of wilderness where ever man is his own world and anything outside that world is unimportant. We live in an age where our planet is fast becoming overpopulated and the driving force behind our existence is money and/or the accumulation of wealth. Well friends, that existence isn’t free. You only need to look in your slums and ghettos to realize it.
I can’t help but notice the similarities in how the homeless are viewed here and how gays are viewed elsewhere. Homeless folks here are often mistreated, overgeneralized, stereotyped, looked down upon, and regarded as a stain on society. Sound familiar?
I’m always bitching to folks about the distinction between things. The same could be said of same sex marriage. There is a clear line between the civil and religious benefits of a marriage contract in this country. However, over time the line has become blurred because there was no reason to make a distinction. Now there is. We need to refocus our efforts on reminding law-makers of the separation of church and state clause in the constitution. The State needs to recognize we deseve equal treatment under the law. However, we [gays] need to remember a religious institution does not have to agree or support our right to marry. Nor do they have to allow us to “marry” on their property. Another distinction often lost in the flurry of self-rigtheousness indignation.
Very important dinstinctions like these are increasingly forgotten in our society today. We should be mor than a little frightened of that.
It’s no secret I’m a tech geek. I love all things techy. Wired Magazine is one of my favorite reads online and off. Well, up until today. I’m sure I’m making a mountain out of a mole hill here however, there comes a point when one has to say “no more”. I was reading Wired online today and this article really irked me and I said as much. Mainly, as the author recommends lying to increase your blog popularity. And I’m sure people do it all the time. However, a little white lie today, a big white lie tomorrow. History shows us, once we open a door to a certain behavior in isolated incidents, it often becomes acceptable to use the same behavior in any setting. If you doubt it, just look at our current leader’s challenges to long-standing constitutional policies. An even better example would be sp*mmers who use any tactic to get you. It’s ok, if it works?
Anyway, I’m getting off the point. If you feel you need to lie to get people to link to your blog, perhaps it’s time to turn off the computer, go out in the real world and make real connections.
…Pants On Fire.
I was the unfortunate witness to the head of Focus on the Family flat out lie on the Bill OReilly show today. Where is the moral outrage from all the “christians” out there? OH wait, I forgot, when their folks lie it’s called “point of view”.
Even here in SF, there are a lot of folks who don’t really care for “my kind.” While they’d never say it out loud, they routinely vote their conscience to keep me a 2nd class citizen. I’m just always surprised by their selective morality. When they fight for a cause, it’s god’s will. When we fight for a cause, it’s evil or wicked. And nothing like pesky facts will be allowed to get in the way. I mean according to FOF marriage has been a sacred institution between one man an one woman for over 5000 years. I guess polygamy sanctioned by religion doesn’t count. Tut-tut, silly faggot, what was I thinking?
Thanks for all those who shared on their flaws. I’m working on a description of my shortcomings however, I haven’t finished it yet so on to other less tantilizing posts…
I’m continuously intrigued w/America’s fascination w/reality shows. I guess there is some appeal to seeing every day folks on the “tele”. However, I’m disturbed at how often these every day folks are ridiculed, deuced, or downright made fun of all in the name of ratings. I think there is something fundamentally wrong w/that. It’s as if hollywood has discovered the success of the Jerry Springer show and is now thinks humiliation = ratings. I feel it is a sad day in hour history when that’s what our primetime line up consists of.
For all my bitchin’ there have been a few shows, I connected with. Extreme Makever, Home Edition comes to mind right away. Granted, it is riddled w/free consumer product plugs but at the end of the day, the show changes peoples lives for the better. Several episodes were so touching, I found myself bawling like a baby by the end. I think it’s still on the air and if you’ve never seen it, it’s worth a watch. If you are a big softy like me, bring your kleenexes cause you’ll need’em.
I’m not saying all TV shows should have some meaningful purpose. Being an avid scifi/horror junkie, how could I? What I am saying is if we reduce ourselves to the level of high school kids making fun of others as a form of entertainment, we really don’t deserve to be top of the food chain.
I’m sure many disagree but that’s my take on it. Much in the same way I refuse to watch movies or tv shows that show graphic depiction of torture or murders. Saw, Hostel, etc. I refuse to watch such shows as 1) it could really happen 2) it gives the really sick fuckers out there ideas. No, I’ll stick to my scifi/horror flicks. While filled w/blood and gore as a prerequisite, after it’s all over, I know it’s fake. A small distinction but an important one in my view.
Why is it in this country we always have to over exaggerate things? Take for example this clip from Towleroad regarding a hate crime.
The home of two gay men living in Aldie, Virginia, just west of Washington, DC was the target of homophobic vandals over the weekend. The vandals spray-painted “FAG” and other homophobic remarks on the lawn, driveway, mailbox, and street in front of their property. They also uprooted over 170 trees and shrubs and poured gasoline on the lawn before fleeing the area. (photos)
Said Equality Loudoun (Aldie is in Loudon County) President David Weintraub: “I am disgusted and saddened. The good news is that the homeowners do feel that this crime is being taken seriously and being investigated by law enforcement as what it is: a hate crime and act of terrorism.”
Webster’s defines terrorism as “..threat of force or violence by an organized group..against person(s) or property w/the intent to intimidate or coerce a soceity or government for ideological or political reasons”.
Someone please explain to me how a hate crime involving graffiti and vandalism of trees reaches the level of “government intimidation”? I’m not trying to belittle the event as it is a serious offense. The perps. caused significant property damage and who knows how much emotional turmoil. But come on folks, let’s keep things in perspective. This is NOT terrorism.
I’m probably overly sensitive to this issue. In my line of work, I hear people throw around the word terrorism all the time. I’m just sick and tired of the “ignunce”.
A little humor over the fallout of straight white America moving into the Castro. Leave it to the folks at the daily show to put it all in perspective for us.
*Not necessarily work safe*
Sometimes, I let my mouth run away w/me. Tonight, was case and point. I was catching up on my blogrolling and, as usual, Dunner always seems to come up w/engaging topics. One particular post was about the dangers of meth use vs the staggering deaths from legal tobacco and alcohol consumption. It is no secret I am anti-drug all the way. I’m usually of the mindset “all things in moderation” but, that does not apply when dealing w/deadly addictive substances such as tobacco, alcohol AND meth. I lost it after this particular response . . .
You’re so neo-prohibitionist it’s disgusting. How can you honestly take the stance that you’re pro-sexual freedom and then rant and rave about fucking tobacco and alcohol use? How is your desire to restrain others right to put what they want into their body different from fundamentalists trying to legislate away your right to put a cock in your ass or mouth? Tobacco and alcohol don’t lead to increases in HIV and meth use does. Long-term use of meth carries far more fatal side effects than a beer or a ciggie every now and then, yet you focus on an increasingly more absurd “war” against tobacco. What’s next, a ban on outdoor smoking? Or better yet lets follow the wonderful example of the 30 year “war on drugs” and ban it entirely. That’s just what this country needs more of, banned substances.
Excuse me? I was so stunned I had to read it twice to make sure I read it correctly. Rather than tie up Dunner’s blog (as I tend to do), I thought I’d bring it home and blather to my hearts content.
How is your desire to restrain others right to put what they want into their body different from fundamentalists trying to legislate away your right to put a cock in your ass or mouth?
Well let’s see, putting my cock in someone else’s ass, does not in itself, cause any lasting harm to either party. With the arrival of AIDS and super resistant ghonorrhea, etc, it certainly is riskier. However, if we plan on outlawing consensual sex, it should apply to both hetero- and homo- sexuals equally. And the “fundies” don’t care so much about harm as much as they do enforcing their own twisted propaganda.
Tobacco and alcohol don’t lead to increases in HIV and meth use does. Long-term use of meth carries far more fatal side effects than a beer or a ciggie every now and then, yet you focus on an increasingly more absurd “war” against tobacco.
While tobacco may not lead to increases in HIV, unless you are “dipping” there is no way you can indulge your habit outside your own home w/o polluting the airspace around you. Air space, I’m most often forced to endure. Are you so far removed from mainstream society that you have forgotten that alcohol has been repeatedly linked to an increase in risky behavior due to lowered inhibitions. And what about all the deaths caused from drunk drivers? I guess those don’t count because they aren’t related to HIV transmission and meth is.
Long-term use of meth carries far more fatal side effects than a beer or a ciggie every now and then
True, meth is a very insidious and destructive drug. It was recently discovered your body actually produces antibodies to meth. These means you must continually increase the dosage to get the same affects. No arguement there. But numbers don’t lie. Alcohol and tobacco related deaths far outnumber deaths caused by meth. Just because it is “legal’ does not mean it’s good for us. Nor should we as a society stand idly by why thousands die every year from ‘legal’ drugs.
But some reverse thinking might be in good order here. After all, if we remove all the “frivilous bans” on tobacco, alcohol, and meth, let’s go all the way. Let’s make everyone personally responsible for their actions. By that, I mean if you willfully choose to self-destruct, then I am not obligated to contribute or pay for your illness, treatment, and/or eventual death. That means no more insurance coverage for smoking or alcohol related illnesses. Think of all the money we’ll save. Why, we could divert those funds to so many other needy folks!
Such comments are foolish and hypocritical. Hopefully, my sarcasm has shown that to be the case. If not, I promise not to say ‘I told you so’ at your funeral.