Thanks from Hole in the Wall
We’d like to thank our loyal patrons and much-loved friends for standing with us during our troubles this past year. To all who sent letters of support to the planning commission or signed petitions or penned articles about our situation, thanks greatly. Though we still have hurdles to overcome and nothing is certain yet, we would not have progressed this far without you all.

We’d like to thank Supervisors Ammiano and Dufty, as well. Mr. Ammiano truly restored our faith in government. When others at City Hall kept us at arms length, he personally sat down with us, fairly. And he actually treated us as human beings rather than evil denizens of the bar netherworld. We believe Harvey Milk would be proud. We believe that open, logical government is what he was fighting for and that Mr. Ammiano and Mr. Dufty carry on that tradition.

Anyway. whatever the outcome of our sadly epic attempt to relocate our little “Hole In The Wall,” we have learned one thing: that despite the years and the mountains of changes in this city, there does still exist a sense of belonging, solidarity, and an old school brotherhood in San Francisco and in many minds South of Market Street. Thank you all for that.

The Hole In The Wall Saloon & The Eagle Tavern

Why Cruising Still Sucks
As a DJ who’s created a number of clubs celebrating the music, aesthetic and sexual freedom of the period during which Cruising was released, i’ve noticed that a significant number of the gay men in attendance—-the 20- & 30-somethings in particular—-seem excited and intrigued by the film’s reissue on DVD. and why shouldn’t they be?

The film offers today’s youth much more than just a fleeting glimpse of the now long-gone gay NYC sexual underground enjoyed by their elders. In fact, Cruising works best as a travelogue of pre-disney-fied gay manhattan, a celluloid tour of the city’s most notorious bars, back rooms and bushes, refreshingly populated by non-tweezery, pedicure-free, steroid-deficient and un-cyber-tainted denizens of the night. as the camera pans various tableaux of lusty men-on-the-make, the viewer finds himself literally cruising the screen...everybody’s lookin’ good!

Cruising also presents contemporary hipsters with the opportunity to see where their current fashion affectations originated; those moustaches, hankies, key rings and aviator-style sunglasses which once served as sexual signifiers - and whose meanings have been rendered largely obsolete as they’ve been reduced over time to mere accessories for the trendy (gay & straight alike) - are on display in abundance.

Finally, we’re invited to marvel at the spectacle of a number of unintentionally camp highlights, not the least of which is Al Pacino’s out-of-synch, over-the-top spaz dance as he frantically tries to assimilate into a writhing crowd of rock-disco afficionados. also notable are a pair of uniform queens rather over-emphatically licking a nightstick, as well as an inexplicable scene of a giant jockstrap-clad black cowboy who seems to have wandered in off the set of “querrelle.”

But despite these attractions, as well as the studio’s current attempt to rehabilitate the film’s reputation nearly 30 years later (claiming it was “widely misinterpreted” by audiences of the day), Cruising remains as problematic now as when it was released before an infuriated gay public in 1980.

By that time we were fed up. After decades of being portrayed by hollywood as sick, suicidal and/or predatory, here was william friedkin dragging, however unintentionally, defamatory stereotypes into the 1980’s, ten YEARS after Stonewall, with a movie focusing on gay s/m serial killer(s). and, adding insult to injury, he was filming it on OUR turf, Greenwich Village and the meat-packing district. Needless to say, the by-now long-liberated queens of New York weren’t havin’ it.

During the Q & A following a recent press screening of Cruising (at the Castro Theater of all places), Friedkin praised the writing of one Arthur Bell, a columnist for the village voice whose articles on a series of murders in the gay s/m demi-monde had inspired him to make the film. What Friedkin didn’t mention was that it was Bell who loudly led the charge when gays hit the streets, not to cruise, but to protest. Bell in fact urged them to do whatever it took to disrupt the shooting; actions ranged from cutting power cables and blowing whistles to “a thousand guys yelling at Al Pacino,” recalled Friedkin, referring to a location scene where the star drifts down a dark alley.

To be fair, neither Pacino’s nor any of the film’s characters were saddled with the usual stereotypical gay mannerisms. and, perhaps to head off any criticism from middle-of-the-road gays, the script has a detective in an early scene describing the victims thus far as “not into mainstream gay life...[but] into heavy leather.”

Yet later on the screenplay describes leathermen / s&m devotees as “scared, weird little guys who don’t know why they do what they do.” and while local gays recruited as extras lend a fascinating authenticity to the bar scenes, these “real people” are in the end reduced to the most superficial level of participation, rendered as caricatures, props rather than actual human beings, aiding and abetting in the creation of a film that perpetuates distorted notions of the very lives they lead.

It’s important to remember that only a few years prior to the film’s undertaking that an incident occurred confirming society’s willingness to believe the worst about homosexuals, and s&m practioners in particular. In 1976, no less than 65 police commandos and two helicopters (!) descended upon an L.A. charity “slave auction,” organized by the Leather Fraternity, making mass arrests for “trafficking in humans.”

And so, emerging in a social climate such as this was the first widely distributed mainstream hollywood film with a full-on gay storyline, sensationally conflating a valid mode of sexual self-expression with serial-killer sickie-ness, featuring a plot replete with sadistically-explicit murder sequences which have the power to shock even today.
Yes, according to the filmmaker, “cruising” was simply intended to be a thriller set in one particular milieu. But is it any wonder we reacted as we did? (It should be noted that legions of men and women have entered into leather life and/or have suffered family disapproval of their sexuality—-an issue for the killer—-without degenerating into homo-cidal maniacs.)

One can’t really talk about Cruising without mentioning The Boys In The Band. Both had the same director, both were met with criticism from the gay community—-but the distinction here is that, despite its mixed reception,  The Boys In The Band spoke aloud many truths to gay men of its generation and beyond, addressing both our internal and external struggles. moreover, whatever flaws it has can be attributed not to its director, who merely had to aim the camera at a well-oiled veteran broadway cast, but to its openly gay author, Mart Crowley.

The responsibility for Cruising’s problems, on the other hand, lies squarely on the shoulders of William Friedkin. Despite his best intentions - he seemed like a nice guy at the screening and has made some great and important films - it was through his lens that the truth about gay people became further distorted in the eyes of the mainstream. his perceptions and misperceptions of our subculture were shot through the goggles of a rather clueless, if well-meaning, straight tourist, not a “member of the tribe.” His present claim that contemporary audiences are more “sophisticated” and therefore more receptive to Cruising, if not more friendly, doesn’t mitigate the damage done to our community at the time—-it actually comes across more like a retroactive condescension, trivializing the gut response of the thousands of people who protested the film’s appearance across the country.

As surely as it was William Friedkin’s prerogative to follow his creative muse and make “cruising,” it was our community’s prerogative to turn out en masse and call him on it. Ten years after Stonewall, the queens weren’t buying it.

Why should we now?

dj bus station john
San Francisco

Public Sex
I like to think of myself as a middle of the roader when it comes to politics. President Eisenhower warned us, taking that position will open you up to the extremes of both sides of an issue. Maybe, because of the fear... of being arrested, I never allowed myself to be involved in unlawful activities. In San Francisco during the 1960’s, I was invited to a Gay Rights Group called SIR (Society for Individual Rights) and many of their members advocated having open public sex, where ever and when ever... Needless to say, I did not join the group then, and feel now that public sex, whither gay or straight is unlawful. Maybe instead of using plain-clothes police in stings, they should consider placing uniformed officers near or in places that are used for public sex.

Jerry Pritikin
Chicago

Move Beyond the Shame
Senator Craig’s assertion that “He did nothing wrong” is essentially accurate. Even if he tried to make human contact in a restroom, to be gay in the world is not ‘wrong’...and gay tango is every bit as legitimate as the broader variety, whether the venue be the dance floor or the restroom!

Of course Senator Craig is being disingenuous... a ‘wrong’ of a different stripe. Rather than choose to take this opportunity to come out, he has chosen to remain fearfully in the closet. He has also supported anti-gay legislation in the past on more than one occasion, a tactic commonly resorted to by the closeted. Would a more truthful man behave differently?

What ‘furor’? Where the ‘embarrassment’? I believe we need to move well beyond these shame-based tenets, and pseudo-righteous indignations. The political parties, the press, all, must step out from behind their handy assaults or apologies regarding homosexual people and their practices and put and end to these public castigations.

Is the soft invitation for a dalliance equal on any level to the deployment of even one steel-jacketed explosive device releasing its killing force into the world?
I ask you.

David Walker
San Francisco

Michael Jackson
Here’s a tribute to Michael Jackson. I remember almost a year ago, being bored with wine and wine tastings, thinking there must be beer connoisseurs and there must be beer tastings. I researched San Francisco’s Library Catalog at Eureka Branch. Much to my delight, I found Michael Jackson’s The Beer Guide”. It was a sumptious, delicious book filled with pictures of 500 different brews from around the world. I learned about top fermenting ales and bottom fermenting lagers. I became fascinated with English bitters, Belgian ales, Czech lagers and American microbreweries. I grew captivated by centuries of “world beer history” and the labels that told stories. It was so much fun! Thank you beerhunter! You were the best!

Denise Jameson
San Francisco

Guinea PigsI just read a news article on the Internet, entitled: “Drug Research Causes Tragic Death”. (Washington Post; August 5, 2007.) So now I’ve decided to broadcast my own comments re. this tragic matter, through my very own Efficiently Automated Many-Years Gay Activist Filter. Here ya go:

Well, they were so successful with AIDS, why shouldn’t human experimentation expand? After all: such an EXCESS of people, and so much NEED for science. Uncle Sam sees queers as nothing more than fodder for medical experimentation...thanks to the overwhelming homophobia STILL so ubiquitous in our pathetic society, including among our most “liberal” and “progressive” groups. They like to pat us on the back, make us THINK they’re doing SO MUCH MORE for gay rights than ever before...and we have truly GOOD friends in them now, in these enlightened days.

WAKE UP PEOPLES! More and more experiments are being done on OTHER minorities, and women. Game over wo/man! Either take up your mantle of the Golden Rule, or be gone. And it STARTS with treating gay people with RESPECT.

ALL the goodness and badness that has been generated by the human race, is now amassing into one giant orb of karma...the Big Payback has begun! Homo sapiens is about to take a huge, evolutionary leap...but not without first CLEANSING its sins of history. The TRUE BLOODLINE is more likely found in the gutters of Paris, than within any HUMAN flesh.

Among many other good things, this suggests (very STRONGLY, I might add) the utter LIBERATION of sexual minorities. ALSO suggested, is that any minority—no matter how long suffering—will NEVER gain liberation, until they finally BEGIN to respect their own queer siblings. They should therefore EXPECT to be simple lab rats for the advancement of eugenics and vivisection, on behalf of The Neonazi Overlords & White Aryan Confederations. Until they learn to respect their gay brothers/sisters, they shall never be far from The Furor’s scalpel. (You can even be black as The Ace’s Spade...still, NO EXCEPTIONS!)!)

It has often been denied even within gay newsgroups, that homosexuals were actually the FIRST group to be targeted by the Original Nazis. While I suffered this ignorance for some years, I knew I’d eventually be vindicated. Access to the truth of this matter, lay buried in centuries of anti-gay repression...so I therefore lay helpless, bleeding on the battlefield, since no library or similar outlet possessed evidential records. Fortunately, since those dark years of my life, evidence has begun to emerge from obscure, forgotten records...records usually discovered among the inherited droppings of a recently deceased Gestapo party member. It is now considered common knowledge (at least, among the educated), that gays were first targeted, because of their new vulnerability (visibility): they had become the weakest plank of the Weimar Republic’s foundation. Gays were the lamb’s jugular to the Nazi wolf. The Nazi Party’s first mission was to denounce the Weimar Rule as a poison to Aryan-Germanic Family Values, due to their blasphemous support of homosexuals.

Goddess will soon STOP this mass/global experimentation/torture upon gays that first began with dissemination of HIV via the Hepatitis B testing way back in the late 70’s. But it will be stopped in such a way that all EVIDENCE will be secure, to PROVE the wicked intent of gov’t, industry, the military, churches/temples/mosques, etc. Those who declare that gays deserve their outcome as subhuman guinea pigs since homosexuality is the Ultimate Perversion & Crime (more, much more, than even raping a woman or little girl, then bludgeoning her to death after a prolonged scene of horror)...will simply disappear. I don’t know HOW they will be disappeared by Goddess. Perhaps in a sort of Satanic Rapture? Just kiddin’. Maybe they’ll remain alive, but just kept from doing harm. But what good would that do? Would you even want one to wipe your ass? Would they actually serve some purpose, no matter how trivial?

Ezekiel J. Krahlin
San Francisco