Readers: LGBT-Friendly Establishments Shouldn’t Be Pressured To Locate In The Gayborhood
The poll last week was interesting to watch, I’d wanted to do such a poll question for a long time but didn’t have a good reason. The new Hamburger Mary’s opening up in an area other than our gay village, The Grove, was a good excuse to do so. Here were the results:
Q: Should new LGBT-friendly places like Hamburger Mary’s locate within The Grove ‘Gayborhood’ or anywhere?
- Anywhere — no need to segregate LGBT businesses 89 [65.93%]
- Either is OK 26 [19.26%]
- In the gayborhood — strength in numbers 11 [8.15%]
- Other: 6 [4.44%] Â — these are listed at the end of this post
- Unsure/no opinion 3 [2.22%]
Of course we shouldn’t force segregation but minority populations tend to self-segregate, including the LGBT population (of which I’m a part). There is something comforting about going to an area, walking down the sidewalk, and for once you aren’t the minority. To the person just coming out such a place is very comforting.
The Castro in San Francisco is such a place:
The Castro is one of the United States’ first and best-known gay neighborhoods, and it is currently its largest. Having transformed from a working-class neighborhood through the 1960s and 1970s, the Castro remains a symbol and source of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) activism and events.
Chicago has Boystown, NYC has Christopher Street (and many more):
Many have worked to strengthen the LGBT credentials of The Grove and they think a high profile establishment like Hamburger Mary’s should build upon the other LGBT-friendly establishments rather than divide. I fall into the “either” viewpoint. It’s ok if a new business wants to be a part of the gay village and it’s ok if they don’t. But here’s a fun twist — substitute “arts & entertainment” for “LGBT-friendly” and ask yourself if you feel the same way.
The six “other” answers supplied by readers were:
- Why would we tell any LGBT-owned business where they have to locate?
- nowhere!
- In the closet
- I’ve heard Tower Grove South is gayborhood, true?
- The grove is dead. Midtown is on the rise. Theymade the right decision.
- Wherever they want to.
I guess I had to expect a couple of answers like #2 & #3. To #4, yes South Grand is on the list of gay villages in Missouri.
– Steve Patterson
Interesting…, no mention of gay villages in Kansas City.
Interesting…, no mention of gay villages in Kansas City.
The real nuance here is CHOOSE to versus HAVE to. Apparently, if one self-selects to segregate, it’s OK, but if somone else tells you that you can or or cannot go somewhere, it’s bad. Unfortunately, St. Louis has had a long history of minority groups being told that they could not locate in certain parts of town, so I guess we’re making progress because a “gay” business is not being forced to locate in a gay ghetto (ah yes, another nuanced word, loaded with multiple connotations, just like “segregate”) . . .
The real nuance here is CHOOSE to versus HAVE to. Apparently, if one self-selects to segregate, it’s OK, but if somone else tells you that you can or or cannot go somewhere, it’s bad. Unfortunately, St. Louis has had a long history of minority groups being told that they could not locate in certain parts of town, so I guess we’re making progress because a “gay” business is not being forced to locate in a gay ghetto (ah yes, another nuanced word, loaded with multiple connotations, just like “segregate”) . . .
apparently? yes, forced segregation is “bad” and self-segregation is “OK”. it’s about everyone having the same freedom to choose, obviously. you “guess” we’re making progress? i just don’t even understand what you’re getting at.
Segregation has both good and bad connotations. While many businesses (and people) choose to be near other businesses and people who share similar interests, the reality is that, historically, not everyone has had “the same freedom to choose”. And while being labelled “gay” no longer seems to carry a lot of negative connotations, locally, being labelled “black”, “african-american” or worse, most certainly does. My point, what I’m trying to get at, is that it’s very difficult to discriminate selectively. Either you label and pigeon-hole groups of people based on their physcial characteristics or you accept that we’re each all human, even though we each all have our own unique characteristics.
Soulard was listed in “gay villages”, Clementine’s does not a village make.
Soulard was listed in “gay villages”, Clementine’s does not a village make.
apparently? yes, forced segregation is “bad” and self-segregation is “OK”. it’s about everyone having the same freedom to choose, obviously. you “guess” we’re making progress? i just don’t even understand what you’re getting at.
Segregation has both good and bad connotations. While many businesses (and people) choose to near other businesses and people who are somehow “not responsible”
As a gay person, I would like choices of where to go that is safe for me other than just in the “Grove”. Â In fact, I think it is safe to say, The Grove has more straight establishments than gay anyway. Â Lets diversify STL…what would be awesome was if Hamburger Mary would have opened in NoCo or WestCo…
As a gay person, I would like choices of where to go that is safe for me other than just in the “Grove”. In fact, I think it is safe to say, The Grove has more straight establishments than gay anyway. Lets diversify STL…what would be awesome was if Hamburger Mary would have opened in NoCo or WestCo…
It is not entirely clear what is meant by “gay establishment”. It is a place of any kind owned by someone who happens to be gay and who formally apprises the public at large of that fact? What if it’s a business owned and managed by gay people but it attracts a largely non gay public? Is it a place owned by anyone, gay or straight, that for whatever reason attracts a large following of gay people as clients or customers? It seems that such stratification is vaguer and grayer all the time and that’s probably a good thing.
MoKaBe’s in Tower Grove South comes to mind. It is certainly “gay friendly”, though I would not refer to it as a “gay establishment”, simply because plenty of non gay people enjoy going there. It is simply a neighborhood place, like the BreadoCo on South Grand or Riley’s down the street. Gay people go to these places too, but they too are no more (or less) “gay establishments” than the entire Tower Grove neighborhood or the City of St. Louis itself.
It is not entirely clear what is meant by “gay establishment”. It is a place of any kind owned by someone who happens to be gay and who formally apprises the public at large of that fact? What if it’s a business owned and managed by gay people but it attracts a largely non gay public? Is it a place owned by anyone, gay or straight, that for whatever reason attracts a large following of gay people as clients or customers? It seems that such stratification is vaguer and grayer all the time and that’s probably a good thing.
MoKaBe’s in Tower Grove South comes to mind. It is certainly “gay friendly”, though I would not refer to it as a “gay establishment”, simply because plenty of non gay people enjoy going there. It is simply a neighborhood place, like the BreadoCo on South Grand or Riley’s down the street. Gay people go to these places too, but they too are no more (or less) “gay establishments” than the entire Tower Grove neighborhood or the City of St. Louis itself.
Good point, but two gay people would feel more comfortable being obviously a couple in MoKaBe’s compared with Riley’s or Bread Co.
I’m sure that’s true, though as you know, the majority of people patronizing businesses and/or living in the S. Grand/Tower Grove district are likely quite comfortable with the diversity that is a popular mainstay of the area. At Pridefest every year I see more straight families with children watching the parade and visiting the park later, along with grandma and grandpa. This is clearly a “gay event”, but it is also more and more a community one.
Granted, straight individuals who enjoy the Pride parade could still conceivably be uncomfortable sitting next to a gay couple holding hands at an establishment. This seems irrational to me, but in any case, it is changing. The less segregation/self-segregation we have, the more quickly it will continue to do so.
As a straight guy, I don’t think that it’s holding hands that bothers most people, it’s those tickle-the-tonsils french kisses that do, but then again, it doesn’t matter if it’s a gay or a straight couple that’s doing it . . . .
Good point, but two gay people would feel more comfortable being obviously a couple in MoKaBe’s compared with Riley’s or Bread Co.
@vicenza, It would have sucked ass if hamburger Mary’s had open in noco, westco or any co, keep it city baby. One of the (many) great things about the LGBT community here is how invested in the City they are. Keep it up!
@vicenza, It would have sucked ass if hamburger Mary’s had open in noco, westco or any co, keep it city baby. One of the (many) great things about the LGBT community here is how invested in the City they are. Keep it up!
I’m sure that’s true, though as you know, the majority of people patronizing businesses and/or living in the S. Grand/Tower Grove district are likely quite comfortable with the diversity that is a popular mainstay of the area. At Pridefest every year I see more straight families with children watching the parade and visiting the park later, along with grandma and grandpa. This is clearly a “gay event”, but it is also more and more a community one.
Granted, straight individuals who enjoy the Pride parade could still conceivably be uncomfortable sitting next to a gay couple holding hands at an establishment. This seems irrational to me, but in any case, it is changing. The less segregation/self-segregation we have, the more quickly it will continue to do so.Â
As a straight guy, I don’t think that it’s holding hands that bothers most people, it’s those tickle-the-tonsils french kisses that do, but then again, it doesn’t matter if it’s a gay or a straight couple that’s doing it . . . .
The gay villages stated were all once ran down. Amazing how the gay had gone in and rehabbed neighborhoods…..Central West End, Soulard, Tower Grove South, and now the Grove, making it safe for the rest to come in. On top of that, what is wrong with similiar places being grouped close together. isn’t that what walking distance is all about?
The gay villages stated were all once ran down. Amazing how the gay had gone in and rehabbed neighborhoods…..Central West End, Soulard, Tower Grove South, and now the Grove, making it safe for the rest to come in. On top of that, what is wrong with similiar places being grouped close together. isn’t that what walking distance is all about?