SFist: San Francisco, a Great Place to Visit, but....

aomsh

Wed, 24 Dec 2008 02:38:31 -0800

The issue I have with San Francisco is that yes, the great things about this city (the open-mindedness, the creative community, the geography, the size, etc) are all extremely likeable, the bad things are unbearable. It seems as if SF is in its own little bubble and sometimes forgets that there is a REAL world out that and that people in "those other places", like the Midwest and suburbs, are probably more like you than you think. I think it's kind of sad that most people who live here pride themselves on being so open-minded, but when someone tries to make a simple criticism of your city, you find something--anything--to attack that person about. "You don't know how to live in a city. You're stupid. You're from the Midwest." Or you blow them off. Sorry that the rest of the world isn't as smug or as cool as you are. Fuck, you're being just as ridiculous as the person you're attacking. It's not cute.

manys

Wed, 17 Dec 2008 13:31:41 -0800

chiot: both are federal, iirc. Reminds me of a movie, though... Clark: Excuse me, could you please tell me how to get back on the expressway? Man: Fuck yo mama! Clark: Thank you very much.

RinconHillSF

Wed, 17 Dec 2008 13:31:41 -0800

perceptions are everything .... just as folks who worked at Lehman Brothers or Washington Mutual. Tourism money is needed to keep the city going. One of these reports pointing out how god awful some areas of the City are can be taken in stride, but what if that becomes the typical write-up in travel magazines?

SquirrelMaster

Wed, 17 Dec 2008 12:20:39 -0800

Chiot- Finally, someone that calls the Tenderloin for what it is. It reminds me alot of the neighborhood I lived in for five years in hollywood. Not that bad. It's definitely no skid row. Now that shit is scary.

Chiot Moite

Wed, 17 Dec 2008 10:16:29 -0800

SF has a few problems. Overall though it is an awesome city. As many have pointed out, LA has a much greater homeless problem than we do. The difference between LA and SF though is that LA has quarantined most of their homeless to skidrow. I remember once when I was 18 I got off the freeway in skidrow by accident. It was frightening. Imagine a war torn neighborhood in Iraq and you have skidrow. The Tenderloin by comparison is practically a candy coated wonderland of wealth. Since SF has crazy homeless advocates that insist the homeless have more right to shit on your sidewalk than you do to live in a city with out fecal matter dotting your door stoop there would never be any sort of round up and dump. I personally think Angel Island would be a wonderful place for them to live, or how about the Farallons?

Brock Keeling

Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:51:04 -0800

brilliantly said, DeanoSF.

DeanoSF

Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:49:36 -0800

The only constant in this story is that this society is obsessed with nostalgia for times that didn't exist. SF was Always better before [insert date or social revolution here]. Kee-Riste, we're what 150 years old as a City. I left SF for seven years thinking that it was overrated and that other places had merit. I was wrong, at least in regards to other American places. Nostalgia was so much better in the 90s. San Francisco will carry on and The Mission will forever be on the verge of yuppie-dom. Anyone a futurist anymore??

craeg

Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:48:41 -0800

I find it pretty ironic that the people who complain about SF being a themepark for bougies are themselves bougie. You're all completely ignoring the sizeable portion of SF which is poor, living multiple people in a small apartment, living on food stamps, etc SF is as "real" a city as any other city.

The Angry Young Man

Wed, 17 Dec 2008 08:06:05 -0800

"Sounds like she's one of the sorts that wants to turn both SF and Manhattan into cute little gated communities for yuppies." SF and Manhattan ARE cute little gated communities for yuppies. Christ, it's like Logan's Run out there. If I ever encountered anything but 27 year old hipsters and their Financial District working girlfriends, I'd prolly have a heart attack from the shock of it all.

Belgand

Wed, 17 Dec 2008 03:23:09 -0800

So, googling around turns up that the writer there went to Berkeley and now lives in NYC. No wonder. This certainly makes sense of her negative view of Berkeley as condensed mainly down to "you'll feel like you're in college" and how this is only fun for a weekend. I mean, I don't really have an opinion on Berkeley, but that's an incredibly weak criticism. I do find it odd that she lives in NYC and homelessness and drug use are the problems she has with SF? Sounds like she's one of the sorts that wants to turn both SF and Manhattan into cute little gated communities for yuppies.

Belgand

Wed, 17 Dec 2008 03:21:41 -0800

Belgand

Wed, 17 Dec 2008 03:09:09 -0800

My bigger concern isn't so much her bitching about why she dislikes it, but the horrible yuppie cutesy things so thought were fun. Frankly I never understand why people would ever want to come here to visit. I mean, yeah, there are some museums, but you're not going to spend your entire trip going to museums are you? You want to gush over certain streets and such being cute? Neighborhoods more or less destroyed to gentrification and catering to tourists about how damn cute they are? Her little guide sounded more like a brief day trip to go eat at trendy spots along Valencia than a vacation. To me it's always been the opposite. Living in SF is great, I just don't see why people would want to visit a cold place where the only things to really do as a tourist are, well, just so terribly lame and touristy.

GlenParker

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 21:06:03 -0800

Largo, I agree if the open drug use refers to marijuana. No problem as I believe being able to light up and stroll the streets is a positive thing. It's just when I hear the words " open drug use " I picture crack or heroin addicts.

largo01

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 20:37:49 -0800

Kaypea: word. Though I wonder how the homeless feel about their freedom to shit on the sidewalk. If they consider it a luxury or if they'd rather have a public bathroom to use? hmmm... I guess every issue has two sides: those who benefit and those who lose. Landlords probably love SF. Tenants probably hate it. So if you own a house in SF, kudos. If you don't, kill yourself now, so I can move in to your house. =)

Kaypea

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 20:21:29 -0800

Ha, the travel writer doesn't point out anything we don't already know (and don't already tell people coming to visit). While I love SF and can't imagine living anywhere else, the city is kind of shitty in a lot of ways: The rents are high, which has forced out the glorious arts/music communities in a lot of cases, homelessness and drug use are rampant, there is literally shit on the streets (I walk past nice, mushy turds everyday) and lets not forget the uncounted numbers of exploited women working in the Tenderloin.

SFHope

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 19:42:59 -0800

The article's author makes it sound like she considers it a chore or battle to live here or something. o.O;;; I think we could send her to a nice place like Singapore, where she can have her 50's-propaganda life mandated to her in squeaky-clean bliss. ^^ Me, I'll take the stuff that comes with freedom. =)

largo01

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 19:07:20 -0800

GlenParker: Classy, definitely. Secondly, and most importantly, you don't have to feel threatened that your use of the wacky tobaccy on your way to work, or on a stroll through the park, will land you in jail--especially if it is legal. I like the fact that people who are for legalization of marijuana have a place they can call home and cultivate a polity. I know the writer of the article meant marijuana, because the writer probably would never bother going into areas like the TL at day or night. I know the TL quite well as I pass by it everyday, having to step cautiously over cranky crack addicts. That sort of drug use is a bit unsightly and can have disastrous consequences if needles aren't properly disposed of. So there is more of a valid argument there. Still? Tourists are not going into the TL, even though the city renamed part of it "little saigon" and put up two little statuettes to mark the "entrance." Yet I feel we can condone even that sort of public drug use based on the fact that we should be allocating our police power to things of more importance, like violent crimes. Our social policies, rather, and not our police power, should aim to help those who are addicts on the streets. But anyways, my main point here had to do with Marijuana. Who gives a shit. We all know it isn't that bad if you compare it with other legal drugs. So there is no good policy reason to enforce its illegality. Also, if you can't drink on the beach without getting kicked off, at least you have a valid alternative that doesn't leave broken glass shards in the sand. As to other controlled substances like alcohol. I've never understood why it was ever banned from the public in any case. Europe does just fine with open beverages in the streets, and you don't have to feel like you are breaking the law for doing something that is not violent and not affecting other people.

qviri

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 18:57:39 -0800

"... the right to live in a neighborhood where you don't run the risk of stepping on a needle on your daily jog." I know this is San Francisco, but perhaps wear shoes?

Brock Keeling

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 18:38:46 -0800

for starters, it's classy.

GlenParker

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 18:33:46 -0800

I'm curious Largo, what are the "positives of public drug use."?

GlenParker

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 18:20:01 -0800

Ha Ha you transplants are always singing the same song: "I don't want anyone else to move to SF so housing options can be better for me. " It's not working folks moving to SF that is the problem; it's the homeless drug addict riff-raff that we have here already.

SquirrelMaster

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 18:17:16 -0800

From the opinion as someone who moved here recently from LA.... I'm not that big a fan of either city. First off, there are just as many homeless people in LA. There may actually be more. If you were going to be homeless in the winter, where would you rather be? SF or Santa Monica? Blah blah, open air drug use, who cares? She's writing for MSN. My mother reads MSN. The midwest reads MSN. Everyone in america that would be scared and disgusted by public pot smoking reads MSN. Who cares about them? You know what the warnings should be about? Hippies. I've been stuck living in Berkeley for the past few months. Hippies... everywhere. Blind faith that everything green and organic is better for you. NOT LOOKING INTO ANY OTHER VIEWS. Actual conversation with a hippie last night: "Green is better, I don't need to see the other side." "But what corporation makes that green dish soap?" "Umm... *looks at the bottle* xy green co." "No, I mean what corporation owns that subsidiary that is calling itself xy green corp.? It could be a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson a big evil corporation." "Oh, I'm certain it's not a corporation. It's green! It's good!" *facepalm* Sorry for the tangent, I just really really hate hippies. Some are just as bad as conservatives. Blind faith that their side is correct. Why? Because it's the correct side. No need to look at anything else but the propaganda in front of themselves. *screams* I live with three hippies. Did you know they hate Slayer?

jacksevanroo

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 17:27:11 -0800

Open air drug use is the best. No one wants to be cooped up in their apartment when enjoying a smooth puff of the marijuana.

Brock Keeling

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 16:43:01 -0800

"Yeah, let's make sure SF is still full of badasses, like the line at Tartine on a Sunday morning." hahahahah23jmrifrenmggfdngn

thisis_

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 16:34:17 -0800

Yes! Predictable responses to a predictable prompt! Also? Predictable commenter commenting on predictable comment! This? Predictable commenter commenting on predictable commenter commenting on predictable commenter commenting on predictable prompt!

masterdave

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 16:27:46 -0800

The rampant open-air drug use was a pretty "woah" thing when i first moved here from another city. It's not like it's something that just happens because there are tall buildings and whatever else you consider a "big city" to be. (despite SF itself being smaller than 2 other lesser big cities I've lived in). It's something that's a part of the local environment that's been allowed to bloom. I'm not too thrilled with it, but if you start having cops crack down on it.. I think here you'd see way too many people defending the right of a homeless guy to shoot up on the sidewalk before you'd see people defend the right to live in a neighborhood where you don't run the risk of stepping on a needle on your daily jog.

Pearl May

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 16:15:50 -0800

We had two families cancel their annual December trips to SF to visit because they have all the high end retail stores we do and they found Chinatown all over the remainder of the City uninteresting. So, we are going to visit them in NYC instead. If tourism is SF's number one industry, the City is in trouble! We used to have artists and musicians and one-of-a-kind items but no more.

largo01

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 16:15:33 -0800

Open Air Drug use confusion? I resent her comments! That's what makes SF so great! Quality of life is great here. Also, it would be nice if she would have delved into reasons why SF has such a booming homeless population. Could it be perhaps that the suburbs had been bussing the homeless to SF for decades in an effort to clean up their own streets? Could it be perhaps that Reagan as Governor decided to close down the mental institutions? I think so! She doesn't talk about how we have striven to fix the homeless problem. All in all, she gets an A+ for continuing to scare America away from SF as a tourist destination, which is fine with me, since I resent America trying to change the way SF is. She also gets an A+ in asshattery for making generalizations without ever thinking to delve deeper into the roots of our problems, nor think about the positives of public drug use.

whataboutprom

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 16:13:38 -0800

I am totally fine with fewer sheltered, privileged people moving here. More apartments for us.

Generic

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 16:13:35 -0800

i can has beat dead horse? For the win.

travin

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 16:09:03 -0800

This all gets a big *whatever* in my book. You folks let pansy-ass trolls like this get you all riled in a tizzy? Oh please. There's nothing quite like granting authority to the obscure and meaningless.

fatherchristmas

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 16:06:43 -0800

jhatch is right. The article is bad. Nobody should comment on the article. Ho Ho Ho!

bluecanary

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 16:06:25 -0800

I guess smoking pot on the streets is "open air drug use" and I found it a little surprising when I first got here (well, what was really surprising was the cops' blase attitude). But after my first few months of living here, I kind of forgot pot was even illegal. When I think of "drug use" I think crack or smack, and I just don't see that very often.

davitydave

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 16:04:46 -0800

@ Joel: oh my, that made me giggle

Joel

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 16:02:40 -0800

Yeah, let's make sure SF is still full of badasses, like the line at Tartine on a Sunday morning.

AK47

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:56:14 -0800

Hahaha.. this is actually great. Let people read this and be scared to move to the city. Good way to keep the noobs out.

ChesterY

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:52:56 -0800

I think, perhaps, the open-air drug use is so rampant that some of us don't consider folks smoking pot in public as being "open-air drug use." But if pot-smoking on the sidewalk qualifies, then the MSN writer is right. Then again, I work right by a marijuana dispensary, so my sample pool is probably pretty skewed. Anyway...totally agree with IHartSF: the "authentic" phenomena that we have all gotten inured to (or revel in) are not things that most of America sees on a frequent basis. And they don't like it. Maybe they're being overly-squeamish, but like IHartSF, squeamish people spend money.

davitydave

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:46:06 -0800

"rampant open-air drug use? Where are these airy spots and how can we get to them?" On Stevenson Street, for starters. There's a transitory community living in boxes between the federal building and the Westfield Centre they regularly smoke the pot and leave their used dirty needles on the sidewalk. Have you never looked at the pix Omega It's Jameth or I post?

jhatch

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:37:09 -0800

I don't think the piece merits a response of any sort, from anybody. The piece doesn't even rise to the level of backhanded praise. Her list of drawbacks to living here consists entirely of received notions. Obviously she just visited for a weekend and wasn't funded or authorized to dig any deeper.

TheCharlie

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:30:52 -0800

I like the part about Death Valley.

Joel

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:29:36 -0800

Fuck the rampant open-air drug use, I want the bacon.

foghorn

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:28:11 -0800

I'm with ocelotsyeah, it's a typical MSN piece that is a waste of good electrons. At least SF got some specific critiques (and compliments). The worst that could be said of DC (why is it further down the list again?) is that it was hot in the summer. And restaurants change hands a lot. The end. Nothing worth worrying about.

Brock Keeling

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:26:55 -0800

Thanks, all. My weekend is booked solid!

murphstahoe

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:25:12 -0800

"rampant open-air drug use? Where are these airy spots and how can we get to them?" Go to Martha's on 24th St. There are half a dozen people mainlining Clomiphene and another six mainlining Petocin.

Joel

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:24:52 -0800

Anyway, she didn't even touch on Muni, which seems to be my and, I'd bet, a lot of residents' primary daily irritation with living here.

TeamAwesome

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:23:34 -0800

le sigh. if only she knew about bacon mondays. maybe she would understand why we live here.

ocelotsyeah

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:22:38 -0800

whatever. just a superficial fluff piece.

wallcloud

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:21:15 -0800

i can has beat dead horse? We're crazy to want to live here and they're crazy to not want to. I just prefer the former type of crazy.

Joel

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:19:06 -0800

What's so fucking predictable? Seems like every negative comment about the city is inevitably eventually answered with some butt-hurt lash-out at the suburbs or "Middle America." We like living here, Vadino didn't care for the idea. So what? Judging from a bio found quickly online, she was born in Philly and lives in Brooklyn; I'm sure she's seen a homeless person before, and understands what urban living is all about. The homeless issue is off-the-charts here, and for some people, walking over human shit on the sidewalk on a daily basis is something they'd prefer not to do. So what?

The Angry Young Man

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:10:52 -0800

"rampant open-air drug use? Where are these airy spots and how can we get to them?" Brock clearly never leaves Sketchy Valley or the Castro. The Haight is chock full of dirty hippies smoking the marijuana as they scratch their dreadlocks, haul up their filthy, oversized jeans, while dragging their decomposed sleeping bags behind them as they traipse up and down the turd laden sidewalks seeking spare change to buy more tattoos and/or piercings. Drug use is so liberal on our streets, no one ever even tries to peddle to me anymore as I try to make my way past the scabies laden masses. San Francisco is not really a viable city anymore and hasn't been since like the 80's. We no longer have any industry and our port only serves ferries and cruise ships. We're basically an over glorified gated community for the uberwealthy and a theme park for visitors who come here searching for the origins of Rice-a-Roni or whatever motivates them to visit this berg.

KeithFuckinMoon

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:09:15 -0800

F the travel writer. I want SF to stay exactly as it is. Love, Your yuppie hating-wearing the same jeans for three months-riding a fixie bike-vegan except for an occasional bean and cheese burrito-totally gay homosexual-starbucks bashing-white as a motherfucker-jackass that makes $23,500 per year- that has a roommate at the age of 42-american spirit "natural" cigarette smokin'-thumb ring wearin'-scarf with a t-shirt rockin'-Friend.

Brock Keeling

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:04:16 -0800

good point, ihartsf. i was surprised at how much i personally agreed with the writer.

Angrybat

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:03:28 -0800

@Joel - Which part? Identifying the location of the open-air drug use? Pointing out that homelessness is often seen in large urban areas? Or bluecanary opining that it's all the better if suburban wimps don't relocate here? Really, I'm curious. What's so fucking predictable?

icbalaam

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:03:15 -0800

I'm with you BC. Feel free to visit small town scaredy-cats but don't move here. I want to be able to buy my house one day.

sf_bikebike

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:00:09 -0800

She only makes me like SF that much more.

ihartsf

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:57:54 -0800

Tourism's the only reason we're not in a bigger financial mess than we are. Our leaders need to pay attention when out-of-towners, especially of the travel writing variety, come away with negative impressions of our city. You can come up with counterpoints or explanations, but you can't change the impressions she took away.

Joel

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:56:10 -0800

You people are so fucking predictable.

bluecanary

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:53:45 -0800

Good. Let the suburban masses read her and be afraid to move here. More rental options for me. The city's motto should be: San Francisco: it's not for cloistered wimps.

lionelhutz

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:53:41 -0800

Apparently, you've never been to the Tenderloin or spent any time walking around the federal courthouse on Golden Gate. Anyone working in that area can attest to walking by not one but several people shooting up at all hours of the day . . . on the sidewalk.

periqueblend

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:46:17 -0800

its a city. an unruly place where various races and class groups meet. whenever such a thing happens it is always intimidating to some. people are still afraid of NYC subways. LA's homeless population makes ours look like nothing, and Chicago has miles and miles of NO GO zones. So yeah, this is the problem cities. In america. Where income disparities are huge and social services are not distributed equally.

beeee

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:44:36 -0800

rampant open-air drug use? Where are these airy spots and how can we get to them? Stevenson between 5th and 6th. Don't say I never helped you out.