VOLUME 4, ISSUE 1 |Jan 06 – 12, 2005

Letters to the editor

America First

December 30, 2004

To the Editor:

Why does Paul Schindler think that once again the Americans should step up to the plate and act as “sugar daddy” to the rest of the world? (“This Is a Test—An Important Test,” Dec. 30-Jan.5)

Why should we be expected to empty our pockets in order to appear “credible” to the Third World? Let Mr. Schindler donate his entire 2005 salary to the cause. I, for one do not care a lick what other nations think of me or America. We have “disease, misery, and poverty” in this country that demands our more immediate attention.

Jeff Doster

Atlanta, Georgia

December 30, 2004

To the Editor:

It is not the responsibility of “the government” to provide aid to other countries, it is that of the people to help their fellow man. Just like it should not be the responsibility of “the government” to provide for those who do not take advantage of that which they are given by mere existence in this great country.

The U.S. government is giving away money yes, but what you fail to recognize is that this country is also the country that gives the most in private and individual gifts in times of need like this. If you look at the rate in which a people are taxed and then that money returned to them in the form of welfare to the amount of charity giving you will see that it is inversely proportional.

So for all your pet projects that “the government” should take care of, they can be taken care of even better if it wasn’t “the government” taking care of it.

Doug Cotton

Via e-mail

December 30, 2004

To the Editor:

There’s only one test—and the ultimate outcome will not be determined by governments. It will be determined by individuals here in the U.S.A. and all around the world. Government is nothing more than a necessary evil, evidence that mankind still has many miles to go.

The ongoing “controversy” over who is or is not helping enough in the tsunami tragedy is absolutely no surprise. The behavior is reminiscent of mongrel dogs, or brain-dead ideologues. This tragedy should bring out the best in people, and in my opinion, it does from many of us.

But a few mindless, selfish assholes can’t put their swords down long enough to focus all energies on helping these suffering people. What a shame. God must be blushing.

Royce Stanton

Charleston, South Carolina

December 30, 2004

To the Editor:

What you and your kind are forgetting that in terms of total aid—absolute dollars both from the federal Government and U.S. nongovernmental organizations—far exceeds the total of all the countries put together. The United Nations, the Washington Post, The New York Times and a whole host of other rags just hate Bush and the United States.

You people need to go on Prozac.

Henri Popell

Vista, California

December 30, 2004

To the Editor:

You weenie waggers kill me. You fruit hustlers are more worried about what the world thinks of us than you are of the people who are hurt. Put your pants on backwards and move to France. The U.S.A. will save the world like we always do and you faggots will be there to whine about it.

Just shut up already.

Jim Bratcher

Via e-mail

The “phantom” on broadway

December 30, 2004

To the Editor:

Thank you for your review of Phantom (“The Phantom Lurks Again,” by David Noh, Dec. 23-29).

I agree totally. “Phantom” without Michael Crawford is no “Phantom” at all. Sir Andrew seemed to be afraid that the movie would be “Michael Crawford IS Phantom of the Opera” instead of “Andrew Lloyd Webber’s Phantom…” Sad.

This movie has no place to go. The “target audience” the 13 to whatever young age that is not interested. Lloyd Webber could have had a built in audience, and over and over audience who would have rushed to buy the video. The fans of the stage show with Michael Crawford are enormous.

Why the ego, why the excuses of Andrew Lloyd Webber? All he has now is another movie flop.

And, what was that horrible version of “Masquerade”? Where was the color, the “joy” of that scene? And the red Phantom was a flop.

Lorraine Krofchok

Elk Grove, California

L.A. transgender murder

January 02, 2005

To the Editor:

I’m writing to protest your coverage of the murder of Felicia Moreno in your Dec. 30-Jan. 4 issue (“Marine Kills Trans Prostitute After Tryst,” by Mick Meenan.)

The article states that Moreno self-identified as female and went by the name Felicia. But this information is buried halfway through the story, as if it were an incidental detail. Instead, Mick Meenan refers to Moreno as “he” and “Feliciano.” And the article refers to the apparently false supposition that Vallor murdered Moreno “upon learning Moreno was in fact a male.”

It’s hard enough work to educate the “mainstream” media about transgender representation. But it certainly doesn’t help when lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender publications insult and degrade the victims of anti-trans violence. By stating that Moreno “was in fact a male” and using a male name and pronoun, you’re reinforcing the widespread prejudice that trans people are out of touch with reality.

Instead of respecting Moreno’s own pronoun preference, Meenan assumes that he knows better than Moreno which gender she was. In doing so, Meenan makes the murder of transgender people seem a little bit more acceptable, since we’re obviously delusional or deceptive.

Charlie Anders

San Francisco, California


Due to an editing error, the caption on page 14 of the Dec. 23-29 cover story, “East Village Art War Rages,” stated that the artworks at “East Village ASU” at B-Side Gallery “didn’t make the cut” for the “East Village USA” show at the New Museum of Contemporary Art. In fact, the two shows are exhibiting works by some of the same artists. The text of the story should have noted there were “more than 35” artists in the B-Side Gallery show, not 35, and while Rick Prol’s print is not included in the New Museum of Contemporary Art’s catalogue, his name is mentioned in the text of the essay by curator Don Cameron.


Address letters via e-mail to Editors@gaycitynews.com

Or by fax to 646-452-2501

Or by mail to 487 Greenwich St., Suite 6A, New York 10013.

The editors reserve the right to edit letters to meet space constraints.