Wednesday, December 02, 2009
The Chron: Out of Touch with SF Readers.
For some reasons (we read the paper online, mostly, and we check once in a while what nonsense a specific writer - Carolyn Lochhead, Carla Marinucci, Phil Bronstein- would write) we missed out on this hilarious editorial:
Idea of sex tent is way out of line. Thanks to the SF Appeal for finding this pearl.
Editorial goes:
Public sex tents? Now there's an idea that should have been shot down the second it was announced from the mouth of a member of the "leather community" in response to complaints about public sex at Folsom Street Fair and its smaller sibling fair, Up Your Alley.
Sex tent are terrible ideas, according to the Chron. It's better than in-plain-sight public sex, but, goes the Chron, that should not happen either. So what's to do? No smooching at the Folsom Street Fair, says the Chron. SFPD must enforce no-public-sex state laws.
Fair enough, we concede, it's the reliably conservative stance we expect from the Chronicle. Most likely, whoever wrote this lives in Walnut Creek and is far removed from their days having steamy trysts in a car at Twin Peaks. Also typically conservative: fear of sex, and a wish to regulate other people's sex lives.
But guys: who are you writing for, your Marin County cohort? They won't be at the Folsom Street fair, so why would they care if the SFPD enforces the law? And your SF readers? Maybe they want to have sex in a tent on Folsom Street.
So writing this editorial, you did manage to titillate and satisfy your retired readership, and offend the bulk of SF. And, hint, hint, Chron, if you intend to survive, your older readers, they're stuck with you. It's maybe the leather community you should be courting.
Idea of sex tent is way out of line. Thanks to the SF Appeal for finding this pearl.
Editorial goes:
Public sex tents? Now there's an idea that should have been shot down the second it was announced from the mouth of a member of the "leather community" in response to complaints about public sex at Folsom Street Fair and its smaller sibling fair, Up Your Alley.
Sex tent are terrible ideas, according to the Chron. It's better than in-plain-sight public sex, but, goes the Chron, that should not happen either. So what's to do? No smooching at the Folsom Street Fair, says the Chron. SFPD must enforce no-public-sex state laws.
Fair enough, we concede, it's the reliably conservative stance we expect from the Chronicle. Most likely, whoever wrote this lives in Walnut Creek and is far removed from their days having steamy trysts in a car at Twin Peaks. Also typically conservative: fear of sex, and a wish to regulate other people's sex lives.
But guys: who are you writing for, your Marin County cohort? They won't be at the Folsom Street fair, so why would they care if the SFPD enforces the law? And your SF readers? Maybe they want to have sex in a tent on Folsom Street.
So writing this editorial, you did manage to titillate and satisfy your retired readership, and offend the bulk of SF. And, hint, hint, Chron, if you intend to survive, your older readers, they're stuck with you. It's maybe the leather community you should be courting.
Comments:
Post a Comment
