Bike Brigade Continues
Cyclists still turn out for ride: I assure writer Joe Eskenazi that Critical Mass remains very relevant to me and my many friends who ride in it whenever we get the chance ["Critical Mass Goes Round and Round," feature, 7/24]. Why didn't Eskenazi interview anyone for this article who still rides in and enjoys Critical Mass? (Just interviewing the founders who don't enjoy it anymore obviously doesn't count.) Considering about 12K rode in the anniversary ride last September, there a still a few of us. And I say "a few" facetiously.
S.F. politicians should stop with all the talk of bike ballot measures: City Hall is bluffing about putting anything bike-related on the ballot, since even those dim bulbs know that the bike people are the most unpopular special interest group in the city. A citywide vote on the bike bullshit would put an end to all the "improvements" to city streets the SFMTA is now foisting on the neighborhoods.
Same old story, but critical mass rides on: There is nothing more predictable in this town than the occasional newspaper article claiming Critical Mass is bad and/or ineffective and/or irrelevant. But it's never done anything but just bring more publicity to the event. My prediction is that this Friday [following the article's publication] will now end up being be the biggest ride in months. And you know what? It'll be a blast. Thanks, Joe Eskenazi! The obvious fact is that hundreds, sometimes thousands, continue to find Critical Mass very relevant to their lives and community and continue to show up for this celebration of freedom, public space, and of course bicycles, every month, year after year. I could go on for days about why Critical Mass is incredibly relevant. But I don't have to. Anyone who shows up on the last Friday of the month knows this.
Escape From Bouncer
Column used cheap cop-out when explaining a bad situation: I was offended when I read the most recent Bouncer column piece by Katy St. Clair ["Escape from Muni," 7/24]. The author exploited someone's identity as trans in order to create an example of a situation that made her lose her "faith in humanity." Frankly put, it is not okay to use a trans person to emphasize how "looney" and uncomfortable the situation was. It is not okay to reference her "male alter-ego" to demonstrate how she cursed out the author, that's not the correct way to discuss trans identities and I really don't think anyone's laughing. It is not okay to hint that one knew the woman was trans (does it even matter?) by saying "her tone was just a few octaves above what any sane person might use."
The author should have found some creative way to describe a harrowing interaction, rather than resorting to stereotypes and inaccurate and trans-phobic depictions of a stranger to try and elicit shock and uncomfortable laughter.
I was disappointed in the author and disappointed in SF Weekly. When trans-phobic and exploitative depictions of already marginalized identities and people are accepted in popular publications, the maltreatment and misconceptions are perpetuated. Please get your shit together.