From the Aug 21 – Aug 27, 2003 issue

Columns

Letters to the Editor

PRETTY DAMN STRAIGHT
DEAR STRANGER: Ever since moving to Seattle three years ago, I have enjoyed reading your fine paper. Anyways, my extremely opinionated roommate dropped a bomb on me. Let me just read back to you my recollection of the discussion we had:

Roomie, reading a response from Savage Love: "Savage is funny."

Me: "The gay guy?"

Roomie: "Which gay guy?"

Me: "The one with the relationship column."

Roomie: "They're all gay."

Me: "What do you mean they're all gay?"

Roomie: "They're all gay writers. It's a gay newspaper written by gay people for gay readers."

Now when The Stranger came out, was it originally a gay newspaper? Is there any factual evidence that can support my roommate? Would you say that The Stranger is marketed primarily to the gay community, or that a majority of the staff is gay? I always thought of The Stranger as an all-inclusive newspaper, not a gay newspaper. I know this is a stupid discussion, but I hate it when my roommate gets away with his one-sided one-mindedness. He's definitely not stupid, just a stick in the mud.

Paul, via e-mail

DAN SAVAGE RESPONDS: The Stranger isn't a gay paper. We've had seven editors in our 12-year history and only one--that would be me--has been gay. (And I'm only the second male editor, for you bean counters out there.) On the editorial side, our managing editor is straight, our arts editor is straight, our news editor is straight, two of our three news reporters are straight, our music editor is straight, as is our books editor, calendar editor, and arts calendar editor. In fact, the straights outnumber the gays almost three to one. On the business side, our publisher is straight, as is the overwhelming majority of our sales staff, production staff, and distro squad. The only person we're not really sure about is our receptionist, Mike Nipper. The Stranger has, however, always featured the work of gay and lesbian writers and artists.

FOR KIDS' SAKE
DEAR DAVID SCHMADER: As a father of two, I beg you to stop running these stories about kids being tortured by their fucked-up parents [Last Days, Aug 14]. Can't you go back to tiny-penis man walking the streets of downtown Seattle? I like the fantasy world where all kids are as happy--and safe--as mine. (I just got my daughter some Sea-Monkeys and they just hatched. She's really happy and excited about it. And I've never set fire to her or her brother.) Plus, if my wife reads your column this week, she may completely lose it, and that's never good for me.

Take a couple of weeks off from the burnings, duct tapings, [and] kids-living-with-dead-relatives angle, and allow me my sanity for a while. Otherwise, great column, as usual.

Daniel Royer

A RARE COMPLIMENT
DEAR JOSH: I feel compelled to write to you to congratulate you, once again, for saying something that has needed to be said for a long time, and for doing so quite eloquently and substantively [Five to Four, Aug 14]. You are a truly gifted writer and reporter and I wish that the major papers had just one columnist that was even half the caliber that you are.

You totally rock!

Jeanne Legault

ADS IN FILMS WORSE THAN ADS BEFORE FILMS
DEAR SEAN NELSON: Since when does it anger you enough to write columns slamming advertising in movies? I read your article about the now commonplace ads shown before the movie trailers [Erasing Hours, Aug 14], and I find it crazy that you aren't disturbed about, or at least failed to mention in your column, the ubiquity of ad placements inside of movies. You contend that it's insulting to show commercials dressed up as art films before the movie starts, but to this moviegoer, having to watch Trinity from The Matrix zoom around L.A. in a 2003 model Cadillac is certainly a lot more insulting than a five-minute "art commercial" directed by the always brilliant Ang Lee. Why not vent on the state of an industry that prevents its patrons from sitting through a two-hour movie without seeing dozens of corporate logos rear their ugly faces. At least the trailer ads can be enjoyed for the skill of the director who created them. In my opinion, it's far more insulting to have Austin Powers sell me Doritos (during the movie!) than Ridley Scott sell me a BMW by way of a rather enjoyable and artfully made action sequence shown as a prelude to the film. At least with the trailer ads I have some choice about whether or not I see them; I can always opt to take my first 10 minutes at the movies in the parking lot. Not so with ad placements.

Nico

THANKS FOR NOTHING
TO THE EDITOR: I just want to say thanks for the coverage. I e-mailed you five times. I faxed you and I called you. I made every effort possible to reach out to you guys at The Stranger, but no matter what, you ignored the biggest issue in America. You made your lead story in this week's issue a guy that founded the Hempfest ["Home Grown," Hannah Levin, Aug 14]. His efforts are terrific but you have ignored the very big group of cops, judges, and law enforcement people who have come out in opposition to the drug war. I don't get it.

Frankly, I'm offended by your non-coverage. This issue is gigantic. You have shown you really don't care.

Mike Smithson, LEAP: Law Enforcement Against Prohibition