Hey, there! Log in / Register
At least 2,000 people will miss the Super Bowl tonight
By adamg on Sun, 02/05/2012 - 10:29am
It's all hands on deck tonight at Boston Police: Every single one of the department's 2,000 officers has been ordered to duty tonight. Don't worry - the department will staff its regular shifts in the neighborhoods, so there'll be no mayhem in Mattapan, no rioting in Roslindale and no beatdowns in Brighton, at least no more so than usual.
Meanwhile, the previously announced lock down of the North Station and Kenmore Square areas is being supplemented by parking bans in certain other beer/student heavy locations, including Harvard and Brighton avenues in Allston, the area around Northeastern and the streets bordering Faneuil Hall.
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Gay Clubs Lockdown?
Are they going to have a lockdown on the areas around gay bars during the halftime show? If Madonna lips syncs there will be glitter-bomb mayhem.
Boston has gay bars?
I'm sure this will be welcome news to the LGBT community here!
Not too many gay bars left
The golden age of gay bars in Boston has long past. Apparently gay bars in general are considered obsolete in this day and age, which is rather a shame. Oh, there are any number of "gay nights" at high end local establishments, but this is just a grab to make money off of a certain demographic.
Yes, the golden age is missed
Sporter's, Buddies,1270, 119 Merrimac, The Napoleon, and of course the queen of them all, Chaps. It was a great time for gays bars here in Boston, especially if you're straight.
What happened?
What happened is
What happened is that at some point in the past several years it became extremely politically correct to be gay. The "cause du jour". Gay bars to some extent have become a casualty of this, as they could now be seen by both gay and straight as "segregating" LGBT people, who have the right to be at any establishment they choose. This is unfortunate. As one active in the gay bar scene of the 70s and 80s, I never felt "segregated". Certainly, for better and worse, things were not as open as they are now, but there was kind of a special feeling of having "a place of one's own" and a sort of "I know something you don't know" feeling. To some degree I miss that. Do not confuse my statements with condoning being opressed or forced to be "in the closet", if one does not wish to be. It was a whole different thing.
The other big factor, of course,, is social media as the new way of meeting and communicating with people. Gay bars used to serve that purpose. Even now, in the few that are left, people have their faces buried in their electronic devices and might as well be home.
Agreed
There's a certain faction of both LGBT and non-LGBT folks who think that just because we have a climate now where people can mostly be out, that we no longer have a need for networking. Yes, it's cool that we can now take a date to a straight bar (thank you to all our allies who made/make that possible!), but there are still instances in which most of us want to be in predominately queer space to be surrounded by people who get what it's like to deal with the stuff that we deal with every day, to not have to explain ourselves and deal with people's assumptions, etc.
A local house of worship used to have an LGBT networking group, but now thinks it isn't necessary since the non-queer people in charge think that homophobia, transphobia, heterocentricism, etc. are a thing of the past. The queer people there disagree, but when they suggest making an official group, are told that the place is inclusive of everyone and there's no need.
My employer doesn't allow one because they say it's divisive and political, but they do have a "diversity committee" which is makes it pretty clear that they only deal with diversity of race and national origin (which, while discussions that I personally support, find annoying that these are apparently not divisive or political, and are apparently the only valuable types of diversity.)
Sad that in gaining some ground in terms of rights, we've lost a lot of the idea of queer-positive spaces. :-(
Try it out with race or religion
Compare:
with:
or:
Zzzzzz.
Those aren't minorities. People in the majority don't need to seek one another out in order to find people who understand what it's like to have a world that overlooks them.
(Why do I even bother?)
So where's the line of moral outrage to be drawn, then?
So, how much of a minority does one need to be before "I want to go to a bar / club / coffee shop populated predominantly by my own kind" stops being hateful bigotry and starts being a legitimate expression of identity?
49%?
27.6%?
5%?
We need the number in order to decide where to direct our outrage.
No, you don't need a number
There's legalized discrimination against queer folks in terms of taxes, property ownership, healthcare, employment, child custody, government benefits, etc. etc. etc, but WE'RE the bigots if we want a support group?
Got it.
Who said anything about bigots?
Check again... I didn't call anybody a bigot -- I just pointed out the PC hypocrisy of decrying one group that wants an "us only" group while simultaneously praising another. Yeah, yeah, I totally get the oppressed minority thing; I'm just asking at what point (population percentage; mainstream acceptance; etc.) it ceases being OK to have such a group.
There are plenty of white protestants out there who feel like their culture is under siege and that they are legally discriminated against, etc. (That I happen to think they're completely bat-shit crazy is immaterial). Does their subjective feeling of persecution entitled them to an "us only" venue.
And you're twisting things by saying "support group". We weren't talking about support groups, we were talking about licensed public premises, e.g., bars.
De jure vs de facto
I don't think anyone's advocating for a bar where they check your gay card at the door. I'm certainly not, nor am I advocating for the sort of places that existed widely in the past where people were harassed or outright turned away for not being the right kind of modelesque gay male or not being leather enough, or whatever.
It would be cool though if there were more queer-positive spaces, like where queer families could go get a cup of coffee and some ice cream and be pretty sure that on any given day their kids would see other kids with two moms and two dads, places where a transgender person knows they'll never be the only one in the room and won't have to deal with ignorance from business owners who've never bothered to brush up on trans etiquette, etc.
White people and straight people have many many many many many places in Boston where they can go and see pretty much only people who share their experiences in that regard, where they're pretty sure the staff aren't going to say stupid ignorant things to them about their families, where they aren't going to have to explain themselves to people. Sometimes we want to just go have a good time and not deal with phobes.
The reason I mentioned support/networking groups is because we actually need permission from the (almost always straight) gatekeepers of the place of employment/school/house of worship in order to have one. To open a place of business that's queer-owned and queer-positive, no one needs permission.
Politically Correct to be Gay?
Um, that must be why there are still so many hate crimes and instances of discrimination against gay people. Anti-political correctness!
I suspect that gay bars have declined mostly because people don't have to move to certain areas of certain cities in order to be themselves anymore. They will hold a cocktail party after work for friends instead of congregating with their gay friends from their gay workplace in the local gay bar.
We live in a neighborhood with a surprising number of married gay couples who socialize with their gay and straight neighbors according to common interests. On my street, there are two houses next to each other where the gay couples are much more cozy with their straight neighbors to either side than with each other because of hobbies and general lifestyle interests. That isn't political correctness - that's just being allowed to live where you want to and be comfortable being who you are and bringing your lover or husband or wife along.
Hah!
There are a few, but of course too often gay nights are just filler for straight clubs.
Waste of taxpayer money
People were bitching about Occupy. Anyone care to guess the ridiculous amount of regular and overtime this stupid stunt is going to cost taxpayers?
this is how they get overtime
this is how they get overtime to make up for lack of police details during the construction downturn
Probably less than
the 5.1 million the city paid the family of Victoria Snelgrove (RIP).
A little over-reaching..
What if people have non-superbowl related business they need to tend to? What about an emergency run to a convenience store?
What if I live there (I don't) and I'm having friends over who don't have resident stickers? They would need to park in one of those areas.
(Add this to a number of reasons why there are, even now, some people who resent organized sports..)
Driving may not be the best thing tonight, anyway, but they don't even ban parking in bar-heavy areas on New Year's...talk about a freak-out.
Makes you wonder
What NY is doing. Somehow I doubt they're acting like it's the end of the civilized world.
Spent the 1998 Yankees WS win in Times Square
It's really no different than any other day. Also, NYC isn't where most of the action will be going down. The NY/NJ suburbs will see a lot more revelry than NYC will.
Either way, the NYPD won't be making huge plans. Unlike Boston, the bars aren't packed into clusters around the sports venues. Herald Square around the Garden is actually one of the worst areas of the city for this sort of thing.
This is absolutely
This is absolutely ridiculous. I live in one of these areas, and have nowhere to park today. 3/4 of the streets around me are labeled as no-parking and the remaining streets are packed. Despite the fact that I have no plans to riot (I assume that's what this poorly thought through measure is supposed to stop?) I'm essentially being taxed by having to park in a parking garage for the day.
What is this actually preventing? It won't stop Super Bowl get togethers happening because anyone from out of the area visiting friends wouldn't have been able to park in the resident only parking spots anyway.
One more reason to move out of Boston ASAP when my lease is up.
I left Boston after a long stint
After years in Brighton and JP, I wanted to stay in an urban-style environment with all its conveniences but leave some of the nonsense. I'm in a loft-style place in Lynn with stores on the first floor, a few good bars, restaurants, art galleries and all that - without the parking hassles. It's the areas best kept secret in that I can find parking right in front of my building almost all of the time and there aren't even residency parking requirements. The commuter rail is also right there - as long as they don't cut weekend service...
And get this.. it's safer, in general, than JP, and your car is actually less likely to get broken into than in Boston neighborhoods...
/not a real estate agent
//Lynn is not freaking out about the superbowl (not in a bad way, at least)
Yeah, well
I've got all that in Roxbury, except that I can walk to downtown Boston!
(I am, however, quite likely to have people running around yelling "woo" in my neighborhood this evening though. *sigh*)
Yeah, we'll have the "woo" thing too
and since I'm in downtown Lynn, I'm on an un-official parade route of yahoos every time a Boston sports team does something good. I don't mind it, though.
In 2007, Lynn was cheaper than Roxbury and closer to my work place in Chelsea. I drew larger concentric circles around Boston until I hit upon Lynn. I tend to root for the underdog city. I fit in just fine in an under-rated place. :)
You said it..
now shut the the hell up before it gets ruined.
Again.
Cool how Lynn residents are so tolerant.....
...of Giants fans!
;)
A chip on the ole Roxbury shoulder
eeka,
That must be a Roxbury Chip on your shoulder. I recognize it, cuz I have one, too.
But, but...Lynn is more than a decent place to live; it is a GREAT place to live. Excellent, inexpensive housing! The Beach! Cheap Peter Frampton tickets! Good parks! A daily newspaper. Restaurants, bars, civic pride.
Sure, Roxbury is an awesome place to live, but that doesn't mean we have to tear down Lynn.
Jonas Prang
Naw
I used to work in Lynn, and we actually looked at houses there too, but decided we didn't want to leave the city. I wasn't dissing on Lynn; I just like to respond to the misconception that there's nowhere in Boston that's awesome and affordable.
What did you do during the marathon?
There are more parking restrictions that day than there is tonight.
I only recently had to get a
I only recently had to get a car, so I didn't have to worry about parking during any of the previous marathons. However, a quick google search tells me that most of the streets that had parking prohibited were the streets that the marathon was on and a few side streets off of them. This means that the parking bans were more distributed and focused on areas that were metered parking rather than resident parking.
These bans however are focused around specific points (mainly universities) meaning that anyone living near Northeastern, BU, Fenway, etc are out of luck for trying to find parking in their resident areas. The focus on Northeastern and Fenway is especially bad because that essentially wipes out the whole Fenway/Kenmore neighborhood.
You're comparing apples and, uh, caviar?
The marathon bothers me a lot less because:
1) They actually need to close off streets, because the event actually takes place on streets, rather than closing them off because a bunch of juvenile adults whose parents didn't raise them right might start turning over cars over a stupid game. I don't mind taking a different route because streets are being used for a competition that almost anyone can participate in.
and
2) The marathon is a community-minded event in that pretty much any child can go see the marathon and be inspired to work hard and train to be able to participate in it some day, whereas the major professional sports only allow .000etc001% of people to even participate and create false hope in all the kids who sit in my office and say that they're going to be an NBA or NFL star when they grow up because they live in a society where they're not getting the message that kids from the hood can work hard and aspire to be famous in some other field where if they don't become famous they can at least have a skill and make a living.
How about new years then?
Or a bruins parade? The concept is the same in terms of crowd control in areas that can cause danger to the general public that might want to be in the area for good reasons (watch the marathon, watch the parade, go to a bar after the superbowlcto celebrate, walk home after work because you live there, etc.)
And why you might enjoy these events really has nothing to do with it. People like sports. I think it means something when the person who works hard and might not make that much money can go home and watch something that they enjoy. The nba lockout had what I believe a very negative impact on the African American community because something that meant a lot to a lot of people was taken away from them.
Hey, I agree that our priorities can be out of whack sometimes, but we need to face the fact that sports put a lot of joy into people's lives. And hey, it does help the economy in Boston and provides a lot of jobs.
The difference, at least to me
The marathon, the Bruins parade, First Night...all these events take place IN BOSTON.
We're having parking restrictions and road closures for an event that's taking place IN INDIANAPOLIS.
This is probably just my non-sports-inclined, hippie liberal mindset talking, but why aren't there NFL/MLB/NHL/NBA-etc.-imposed sanctions against rioting? As in, if your fans can't celebrate a win/deal with a loss without causing property destruction and general mayhem, then your team doesn't play next season? Or, if that would screw up the scheduling too much, then at least your team is ineligible for the playoffs?
Didn't most of us learn as toddlers that, if you can't play nicely with something, you don't get to keep it?
Sports championships are different
Because championship game doesn't always happen in that city but the celebrations do. You have to prepare for it somehow.
As for your other point, it just isn't going to happen. Why make the people of new England have to suffer for what people in Boston do?
For that matter...
Why make the people of Boston suffer for what a few drunken hooligans (I love that word) might do? Why is it acceptable to riot at all?
It isn't acceptable
But I think the city would argue that people aren't going to " suffer" with their plans for the night
Why should the people of
Why should the people of Boston have to suffer for what suburbanites and people from out of state do in the city of Boston?
This is the least of it
It's just one day. Well, and all the other days drunk out of towners come in and start shit. But even that's minor compared to all the damage done by highways, parking lots and the Big Dig. We have to live with that blight every day so that suburbanites can drive their SUVs into the city for work and play. And god forbid they raise the gas tax or tolls to pay for it.
It's technically for your own good
It may be ridiculous that you can't park where you usually do. But it would be even more ridiculous if your car got turned over or smashed up by parking where you usually do. Until Boston area students and/or young people stop acting out of control during major sporting events they will continue to have to be babysat. Blame the rioters not the police for trying to remove target objects from the riot-prone areas.
Not that it can be done this weekend
but how about if instead we spend all this taxpayer money teaching our youth to get excited about things that actually matter in this world, instead of putting billions and billions of dollars into an industry where grown men get paid a million dollars to run into each other and most of them act like assholes to their communities and families?
Oh, and also we could put it toward teaching our children that there's no fucking way it's acceptable to start riots and turn cars over for anything short of MAYBE a protest over a major human rights issue.
Oh my God..
are you not the cutest person ever?! I wish there were more of you to go around, you're just about my favorite liberal in the whole world!
Thank you
for disagreeing with me in a logical and factual manner. You did a fine job articulating an opposing viewpoint to mine. I appreciate it.
Only I don't disagree with you
professional athletes are assholes.
We don't get excited about the (expletives), Eeka
We make fun of 'em. Plaxico is a thug, Roethlisberger is at worst a rapist and at best an inconsiderate prick, Cromartie is a serial inseminator, and there are several more examples.
Believe me, we're aware that many people in professional sports are absolute garbage as human beings.
Own Good vs Constitutionality
I'd dare to say this is a classic example where the Government and Police need to back off. Closing down sections of the city and paying the entire police force to be on duty because of a possibility is pretty fraking extreme.
Then there's the fact that a bunch of cops in Stormtooper gear only with less than lethal weapons and riot gear tend to only antagonize rowdy drunk crowds into doing something stupid.
There's nothing proactive about this, because it's simply brute show of force. If anything, it's going to cause more problems then it solves.
What seems interesting ...
Anybody else notice that Boston didn't have a theoretical or even semi sort of actual riot "issue" until the cops started coming out stormtrouper uniforms in force and pushing people around in the 2004 DNC?
After that, it seemed like they had the "we have all these toys let's go use them for whatever reason we can cook up" mentality - and problems have escalated.
http://www.schneier.com/blog/
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/01/the_...
I pay taxes
I pay my taxes. Lots of them. So in return for that, I want the police to do their effin' job and prevent hooligans from overturning my car. Is that really that big an ask?
"We're closing the street because we can't keep it safe." is utter bullshit. If you you can't keep my neighborhood safe without locking it down, then resign, post haste, because that's at the very core of what the police are supposed to do.
Yes
It is too much to ask if the amount of your tax dollars that goes to excessive numbers of cops on the street is more than the insurance against idiots overturning your car.
It is too much if the risk of your car flipping is low, but the overtime is very high.
It is too much if innocent bystanders and civilians going about their business are injured, killed, attacked, or rounded up and arrested by police making a big display of how "needed" they are.
What was it Franklin said about liberty versus fear?
OBEY / CONSUME
"And I encourage you to all go shopping more"
Read again
I didn't say that I wanted huge numbers of cops on the street in a display of security theater, I said that I wanted the police brass to do its job.
Here's just one example: Detailed video of hooligans, ID them, build a case, and prosecute. It wouldn't take too many of these twerps going to jail for a year before people started getting the message that rioting was unacceptable. Doesn't take thousands of cops on the street in military gear.
Can't keep it safe
Unless we shut everything down. And even then, no guarantees!
At that point, I'd be pissed at exactly what I'm paying for. It's not even insurance... Only insurance for the assholes at the mayors office, as a way to shift blame post fact.
Here we are and 2200 officers got time or over time for nothing. If we won.... maybe we would have needed a fraction of them. The city wasn't going to go all Katrina on us.
An people were bitching about OWS Boston? Where the fucking outrage?
Millions were wasted tonight, because; fuck why not!?
doubt it was millions
doubt it was millions
In 2002
They were caught off-guard by the rioting after Super Bowl XXXVI. James Grabowski died on Symphony Road. Thus the over-caution.