Regarding Patrick Range McDonald’s article on Prop. 8 [“Prolonged Battle over Proposition 8,” Nov. 7-13]: Almost 40 years after Stonewall, can we not agree (at least those of us of the liberal persuasion) that it is OK to refer to a gay person in print without qualifying it with “openly?” — as in “West Hollywood City Councilman John Duran, an openly gay man ...”
The implication, it seems to me, is an assumption that there is still something inherently shameful about being gay, so L.A. Weekly wants to make sure its readers know, “Hey, we aren’t the ones calling Duran that — he, himself, is open about his condition.” I’m betting you’ve never referenced Duran’s colleague as “Abbe Land, an openly Jewish woman.”
A reader commenting on the posts to Dave White’s story “Diary of a Gay, Traffic-Snarling Sore Loser” [A Considerable Town, Nov. 14-20]: Some of the comments I have read here seem abusive. But some of the comments break my heart with their dignity and transparency. I wish those types of comments could come from all sides of the issue. I believe in freedom of speech, but some speech is so much more constructive than others.
Personally, I totally opposed Prop 8, and I am a Christian heterosexual mother. Human rights are precious to me, and I applaud anyone who has the patience and strength to engage in non-violence as a way to achieve those rights.
Snarl traffic. Walk out of your workplace. Shout. Keep talking. If this is what it takes to eradicate hatred and oppression — fantastic. I would a thousand times rather thousands of people are inconvenienced than a single teenager get the message that one’s life is not worth living due to one’s sexual orientation.
Dave, I love your writing, and this article is no exception. Thanks for letting me see this protest through your eyes.
Comment by Jenna on Nov. 17
If you like this story, consider signing up for our email newsletters.
SHOW ME HOW
You have successfully signed up for your selected newsletter(s) - please keep an eye on your mailbox, we're movin' in!
I have to disagree with Robert Wilonsky’s negative review of Quantum of Solace [“Neither Shaken Nor Stirred,” Nov. 14-20]. I agree that Casino was a great re-envisioning of Bond (much like the two recent Batman films). I rather enjoyed Quantum — I thought the action was very well done, and thought Daniel Craig’s performance was excellent and more nuanced and humanistic than people seem to pick up on. Nice that Mr. Wilonsky cited George Lazenby’s take — but what about the two films with Timothy Dalton as Bond? He also played the part seriously and in a non-parodic manner. Don’t know why they weren’t mentioned in this review.
Comment by Douglas Kirkup, Nov. 17
Send letters to 3861 Sepulveda Blvd., Culver City, CA 90230. E-mail firstname.lastname@example.org. Or fax to (323) 465-3220. Letters, which must include a telephone number for verification, may be edited for purposes of space or clarity.