myurbanrevolution.com
cities have the capability of providing something for everybody because they are created by everybody - jane jacobsThe No on 8 campaign offers some perspective
There is no question this defeat is hard.
While we knew the odds for success were not with us, we believed Californians could be the first in the nation to defeat the injustice of discriminatory measures like Proposition 8.
And while victory is not ours this day, we know that because of the work done here, freedom, fairness and equality will be ours someday. Just look at how far we have come in a few decades.
Up until 1974 same-sex intimacy was a crime in California. There wasn’t a single law recognizing the relationships of same-sex couples until 1984 — passed by the Berkeley School District. San Francisco did not pass domestic-partner protections until 1990; the state of California followed in 2005. And in 2000, Proposition 22 passed with a 23% majority.
Today, we fought to retain our right to marry and millions of Californians stood with us. Over the course of this campaign everyday Californians and their friends, neighbors and families built a civil rights campaign unequalled in California history.
We are humbled by the courage, dignity and commitment displayed by all who fought this historic battle.
Victory was not ours today. But the struggle for equality is not over.
Because of the struggle fought here in California — fought so incredibly well by the people in this state who love freedom and justice — our fight for full civil rights will continue.
Activist and writer Anne Lamott writes, “Hope begins in the dark, the stubborn hope that if you just show up and try to do the right thing, the dawn will come. You wait and watch and work: you don’t give up.”
We stand together, knowing… our dawn will come.
As Obama said on Tuesday night, “That’s the true genius of America — that America can change.“
Bridge School Benefit
I ventured outside the city last weekend for the Bridge School Benefit at Shoreline Amphitheater. In comparison to the clusterfuck that was Outside Lands back in August, I was impressed (I looked up the capacity of Shoreline, 20,000, which lends some perspective to the fact that 80,000 people were packed into Golden Gate Park, a venue not typically used for concerts). The lineup was solid for a festival style show, and we caught Death Cab for Cutie, Wilco, Sarah McLachlan, Norah Jones, and Jack Johnson in sequence. The main reason we went was because Kristen has even more of a thing for Sarah McLachlan than we both have for Alanis Morissette (both of which were heavy hitters on Kristen’s “LA Ladies” playlist which we used on our January road trip). Sarah stole the show as predicted and was singlehandedly worth every cent of the $35 I negotiated to pay for my ticket (in comparison to $85 which was the best deal I could get at Outside Lands when I only got to see Radiohead). Listening to Death Cab made me miss my sophomore and senior years of college (sigh, nostalgia), but Norah Jones was the surprise of the night since I didn’t expect to enjoy her so much. “Sunrise” has been stuck in my head ever since. Peninsula, you scored a point for once.
Seasons changing
Let’s take a moment to appreciate the view from my patio at 6:45 pm tonight. It’s sad when I wake up and it’s dark then I get home from work and it’s dark again, but I am looking forward to ski season all the wonderful and romantic things about the darker months.
Why doesn’t it surprise me…
that the only “Yes on 8″ bumper sticker I have seen in San Francisco (or anywhere but I admittedly avoid leaving my beloved city) was on a gas guzzling Yukon?
I was at least a little shocked to see not one but two stickers proudly boasting that this person has probably never knowingly been friends with a homosexual. I like to think that the driver has a large heteronormative family to move about in his or her SUV, but I’m probably just being optimistic. Or, since it’s an older car, maybe this person’s concern for the environmental impact of manufacturing a new vehicle has prevented him or her from upgrading to a greener option despite having become more enlightened in the past ten years. Maybe, you never know.
Urban field notes #10
My new favorite store in the Mission. It’s apparently been around for over a year.
My favorite shot from the last weekend of the Chihuly exhibit at the De Young. In general, I found the building to be more interesting than the exhibit but that was not unexpected.
Artspan’s gala to kick of SF Open Studios.
A house by Golden Gate Park that I thought would be fun to renovate.
The weekend after the opening of the new California Academy of Sciences.
A new facade in my neighborhood. I am rather fond of the poopy brown color.
Another visit to Flora Grubb, one of the best stores in the city.
David made funny notes for us to leave on cars who park in our favorite spots without pulling up enough to leave space for MINI Coopers. Vigilante justice!
Another Plant project in process downtown–this time a new Diesel store.
Why I support California high speed rail (Prop 1A)
There is a lot to think about in this year’s election, especially for those of us living in San Francisco where there are 22 ballot measures (thank goodness few of us are fretting over who to elect on the national level). If you have not seen it before, I strongly recommend that you check out SPUR’s voter guide which I consider to be one of the greatest services the organization provides to the city. I won’t talk about all of the measures here but offer a few excerpts regarding the measures I find most important, starting with high speed rail:
The EIR/EIS demonstrated the feasibility and profitability of the Los Angeles-to-San Francisco route. With trains using one-third of the energy of cars and one-fifth the energy of airplanes, per passenger, California’s trains would save 22 billion barrels of oil per year and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by an amount equivalent to removing 1 million vehicles (about one in 30 cars now in operation) from California’s roads. In the report predicted that in 2030, with 14 million more Californians than today, California’s trains would obviate the need for 2,970 lane miles of highways, 91airport gates and five airport runways.
High-speed train systems are developing and expanding throughout the world, even in places far less wealthy than California (such as Vietnam and Algeria).
The alternative to high-speed rail — more highways and expanded airports — is not only more expensive, but it also would increase pollution at a time when we are moving to reduce the level of pollution in the state.
Los Angeles to San Francisco is the most highly trafficked air corridor in the world. Compared to air travel, the proposed high-speed trains would be much more comfortable, offering passengers the ability to walk around, access the Internet and mobile phone networks, and avoid onerous security checks. With roughly equal door-to-door travel times between San Francisco and Los Angeles, many business travelers would prefer the train and pay a premium to use it.
The system not only would facilitate high-speed travel between San Francisco and Los Angeles, but also improved commuter rail and regional intercity rail, giving Californians throughout the state important transportation alternatives.
Further, while connecting downtown San Francisco to the downtowns of other California cities with fast and efficient train service would have a positive benefit to San Francisco’s economy, it could transform the economies of struggling downtowns in the Central Valley, as well as help expand jobs and increase the number of residents in and around downtown San Jose. Suburban office sprawl is as dangerous a contributor to global warming as residential sprawl. High-speed trains give us the opportunity to vitalize downtowns that need it.
Finally, the system is planned to minimize the effects of sprawl and maximize the potential for transit-oriented development throughout the system. In response to urging from SPUR and others, the California High Speed Rail Authority chose to place the route along the populated U.S. Highway 99 corridor instead of along the Interstate Highway 5 corridor. It also agreed to place the train stations in the city centers instead of at the edges, and it has developed principles and guidelines that must be followed before cities will receive a station. These decisions slightly increased the cost of the project but dramatically increased the benefit, as city-center stations would lead to transit-oriented development and limit the sprawl inducing effects that might otherwise be the result of a high-speed train system that makes it easier to commute long distances.
The meaninglessness of choice
The LA Times editorial “Gay is a choice” is old news but postworthy nonetheless. One way in which I differ from most of my liberal friends is that many of them will adamantly insist that being gay is not a choice, and that’s why it’s ok. As the article points out, calling homosexuality a choice has long been a way of signaling that it is a wrong choice or that homosexuals are being self-centered by not considering those around them who might feel uncomfortable with such a choice. I’ve always felt that life is–or at least fairly should be–free will colored by natural inclinations.
But insisting that homosexuality is wholly involuntary does little to defend gays and lesbians from social disapproval. After all, the subtext of the “choice” debate is that opposing gay rights is only appropriate if gays select their sexuality, since it is unfair to punish someone for something one does not control. Yet this reasoning raises a larger question: Why should equal treatment of gays and lesbians hinge on whether they have chosen or inherited their identities? Whether our DNA or our free will are “at fault” really only matters if being gay is a bad thing.
Indeed, when it comes to other aspects of our identity and behavior, we generally don’t dwell on the question of choice. To ask whether a practicing Catholic or a professional dancer has “chosen” to be a Catholic or a dancer seems bizarre, not because we entirely deny that an element of choice is involved but because we recognize that the lives we lead are the layered products of our experiences and passions, our convictions and longings, our judgments and follies.
The concept of choice should be no more — and no less — applied to sexual orientation than to our religious, political or vocational identities.
It is this understanding of choice that embodies the noblest meaning of American freedom. It is a conception of freedom that invites us to choose to do what we think we ought — to act in accordance with our deepest convictions.
For once, Sarah Palin is right that we don’t need to know the cause but that’s because we also don’t need a solution.
“I kissed a girl and I liked it”
I may be completely out of the loop, but Katy Perry’s background as a Christian recording artist is news to me. Perry, who turned suburban America upside down this summer with the somehow mainstream smash hit “I Kissed a Girl” (I am still waiting for my parents to comment about the song since I know they must have heard it), is just a bit younger than me and released her first album as Katy Hudson at age 16. Her web site indicates that she has indeed been in the music industry for some time but glosses over the most interesting parts:
Though, just 23, the Santa Barbara, CA-born Perry has been writing songs and playing guitar for several years, and possesses the flair and confidence of a veteran storyteller.
It turns out that she has practice telling stories like “Faith won’t fail.” Katy is in fact the middle child of two conservative evangelical preachers! I was curious to know how they reacted to their daughter’s recent success and found an article by Joanne Brokaw on beliefnet:
The UK’s Daily Record reported yesterday that Katy’s mother, Mary Hudson says, “I hate the song. It clearly promotes homosexuality and its message is shameful and disgusting. Katy knows how I feel.” She tells the British paper that she and her husband are “deeply ashamed” of their daughter and say that the song “promotes a sin.”
She calls her daughter’s recent antics (which include jumping off the stage to land a lip lock on a 16-year-old female fan and offering a kiss to Miley Cyrus; Cyrus declined) a period of rebellion, and adds that she’s praying for her daughter’s salvation, despite the fact that Katy apparently assured her, “Oh Mum, I’m not going to turn into Amy Winehouse.”
[...]
And here’s another question: even if you don’t agree with your parents’ beliefs, do you have a responsibility to not flaunt your opposition? Or is there an age at which you can do whatever you want, regardless of who you hurt or embarrass?
That is a good question, Joanne.
Conclusion: while it may still be a little offensive that Perry calls girls her “experimental game,” this information certainly sweetens the story a la Alanis Morissette and makes her perspective a bit more authentic. Now I can rock out to the overplayed song without guilt.
