Radio show trans remark was ‘offensive’
Dear Editor,
In San Diego, there is a radio program on Star 100.7 called “The DSC” show, short for the Dave, Shelley and Chainsaw show. They are usually pretty open minded and fair when talking about LGBT issues. This morning (Feb 20), during the news segment at 7:45, they mentioned Chaz Bono’s weight loss. Dave made a comment that said, in effect, Chaz should be called “that”. He also said that you can’t be a man without a penis. I don’t think that they were being malicious at all, but it does point out that perhaps they should get a phone call or two, or an email, that helps them understand trans 101. My bf is a trans guy, and I found the “that” comment particularly offensive. If you have time, send them an email, or call so they can understand that what they said was wrong. Please don’t attack them, just nudge them into understanding. They are, all in all, very supportive of LGBT issues.
I would like to see a positive dialogue about this, rather than an attack of the show. What do you think?
STEVE SALLIS
San Diego
In response to Nicole Murray Ramirez’ ‘SOHO is wrong’
Dear Editor,
Nicole Murray Ramirez wrote (San Diego LGBT Weekly issue 113 Feb. 14), “The leaders of SOHO are wrong when they say” most San Diegans are opposed to the Jacobs Plan for Balboa Park.
He continued, writing “A vast majority of us supported this plan …”
Nicole has a great history in this town, but he writes on this subject wholly unburdened by facts.
At the City Council hearing on the Jacobs plan held July 9, 2012, more than 800 citizens attended and opposed the plan. They were all volunteers, and passionate in their love for the Park, its history and beauty. Jacobs had well-paid designers, builders, lobbyists and lawyers speak in favor of the plan. And Jacobs, his family and Qualcomm had all given very generously to those Councilmembers who voted in favor of his plan, including Todd Gloria.
The Jacobs plan would have placed a freeway off ramp on the majestic Cabrillo Bridge, converted the quiet beauty of the Alcazar Garden into an annex to a valet parking complex, forced the removal of at least 15 100-year-old trees selected and planted by Kate Sessions, destroyed the seclusion and beauty of Palm Canyon, resulted in the loss of the designation of the Park as a National Historic Landmark and introduced paid parking for the first time in the Park’s 100-year history.
The Jacobs plan was actively opposed by thousands of San Diegans. Ramirez says “a vast majority of us supported this plan,” but cites no factual foundation for his assertion. Because there is no factual foundation for such a statement.
Perhaps most importantly, thanks to SOHO, the court ruled the City Council and then-Mayor Sanders violated the law when they approved of this plan. SOHO was not “obstructionist.” SOHO was following the rule of law, and seeking its enforcement.
Ramirez would seemingly approve of illegal actions and the destruction of the historic fabric of the Park.
San Diego should be grateful for SOHO’s defense of the law, and the Park. And Ramirez should be required to support his assertions with facts.
DAVID LUNDIN
President and creative director, Son Appareil Photography
San Diego
David Lundin,
In regards to your comments about SOHO and Nicole Murray’s support of the Jacobs plan.
It is unfortunate to see someone of our community spouting the same half-truths and outright hysterical lies that SOHO has used throughout this entire debate on the Jacobs plan.
Perhaps you should have read Judge Taylor’s ruling a little closer. The judge ruled in SOHO’s favor only on the beneficial use claim, but threw out their other two misguided and false claims.
Firstly he ruled that it will be legal to charge for parking in Balboa Park. There is no legal standing to the “Free and Public” stricture of 1870 ordinance founding the park. He said “It exists as a historical curiosity only,”
This settles the hysterical lie spread by SOHO that there would be no free parking whatsoever in the park if the plan was approved.
Nothing could be further from the truth, and in these days of civic fiscal austerity how should we expect parking structures and their maintenance to be paid for?
SOHO also lied by saying that no municipal park in the country charged for parking. One need look no farther than San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park and it’s new and well received underground parking garage at the DeYoung Museum to dispute that assertion.
Secondly the Judge ruled that in fact the Environmental Impact Report was not biased in favor of the Jacobs Plan, and it did in fact involve due diligence to cover all alternatives.
SOHO time and again kept claiming other alternatives were superior, yet the EIR, if you had bothered to read it, showed that the suggested Lewis concept would involve significantly more disruption to the Park with even more road building and grading.
To claim that SOHO’s noisy and rude supporters at the Council hearing, who personally attacked and insulted Dr. Jacobs, some even with anti-semitic remarks online, somehow represented a majority of San Diegans is an insult to all of us. The crowd behaved completely outside the civility and decorum that such a hearing deserves. No one should be proud of that behavior, and I suggest even our community would not tolerate such hateful and rude behavior in a public discussion.
You show that you have truly bought into SOHO’s lies by bringing up the cutting down the dozen or so trees at the bypass bridge. It is in fact now SOHO who is claiming that those very same trees should be trimmed “to restore the 1915 views” in their recently released parking plan proposal that reads more like a 6th graders homework project. Read it yourself in detail.
This backwards looking myopia might be fine for period costume Drag, but should we in the gay community also return to the past and our 1950s closets too?
Look forward to progress, not outdated and anachronistic sentimentality for a time long gone past.
SOHO once played a vital role in our community, and I used to support their endeavors, but they have gone off the deep end with their ego driven tactics in opposition of the Jacobs plan. The Plan may not have been perfect, but giving our city a permanent black eye towards philanthropic giving, spreading hysterical lies as if god given truths to their extremist faithful, and obstructing needed improvements to a crumbling Balboa Park for it’s next century, is not the sign of an organization that has the public’s or the Park’s best interests in mind.
I rarely agree with Nicole Murray, but she was right on target in her shaming of SOHO, as you should be ashamed for supporting their position too.
John Thurston