Categories
The Editor's Desk

Mailbag

Driving factors

I am writing in response to John Borgmeyer’s article on the Meadowcreek Parkway controversy [“A walk in the park,” Fishbowl, January 6] and his response to Mandy Burbage’s recent letter to the editor [Mailbag, January 20]. In his reply, Borgmeyer concedes that in 2000 a majority of City Council approved the Meadowcreek Parkway only if other conditions were met first. However, Borgmeyer asserts that the Meadowcreek Parkway is still bound to be built because the current Council majority wants to build it even without these conditions. In reality, the Parkway is far from inevitable.

In order to build the Parkway, Council must first transfer a portion of McIntire Park to the Virginia Department of Transportation. According to the Virginia constitution it takes four councilors, not three, to sell parkland. This supermajority does not exist. So the three pro-Parkway councilors are investigating giving VDOT an easement, instead of a sale, to get around this protection of parkland, which would not be in keeping with the spirit of the law. If the pro-Parkway councilors insist on taking this route, they will be leaving Charlottesville open to a lawsuit, which could prevent their attempt to evade the State constitution.

As Borgmeyer mentions, City Council approved the Meadowcreek Parkway only if the State funded a grade-separated interchange and an eastern connector highway between Pantops and 29N. Currently, VDOT cannot meet these conditions because of budget issues.

Another condition for Council’s approval is adequate replacement parkland to substitute for the portion of McIntire Park that would be lost due to the Parkway.

A pro-Parkway majority of three would like to build the Parkway now, even without meeting the aforementioned conditions. However, it is unconstitutional to sell parkland without a 4-1 majority. On its own, City Council can stop this road at any time and Council elections happen every two years. Many Charlottesville citizens have voiced displeasure with the proposed Parkway, and rightly so. The millions spent on the Parkway could support other transportation alternatives that actually serve Charlottesville citizens instead of sprawl developers. How about improving our public transportation? Charlottesville voters who don’t want their tax dollars spent on paving our central park still have opportunities to voice their dissent. The general election for City Council is this May.

Borgmeyer’s journalism should reflect the complex and unresolved nature of the Meadowcreek Parkway issue and not instill its readers with a false sense of hopelessness. The fight for a sustainable future is far from over.

 

T. Alex Davis

Charlottesville

 

Botched proposal

Two wrongs don’t make a right. Balancing your back page with opposite ideologues lowers you to Fox’s level. Their hyperbolic biases corrupt decent dialogue with brainless conflict.

Case in point: Rich Lowry’s piece on Bush’s marriage proposal [“’I do,’ welfare don’t,” Right Turn, January 20] was pure administration gibberish.

Fact: 1.4 million more Americans fell into poverty in 2002. Today, 34.7 million Americans live below the poverty line. America’s food banks are emptying. An America’s Second Harvest director says: “Last year’s food bank donors are now this year’s food bank clients.” In Virginia, one in 10 Virginians lives in poverty—and we’re better off than most.

Yet, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) welfare recipients fell 4.3 percent last year, from 5.19 million to 4.96 million. Huh?

That’s how welfare programs work. They are devised to move people off welfare rolls—not move them out of poverty.

And that’s the thought (or lack thereof) behind Bush’s marriage proposal. A mother with two McJobs should wed any jerk with two McJobs so they can scrape together enough to be disqualified from welfare. Hey, it looks good on the books.

What happens when you kick people off welfare? A study by the Joyce Foundation reports that half of former welfare recipients were couldn’t pay for food or utilities. A tenth became homeless. Republican Douglas MacKinnon, aid to former Senator Bob Dole, says: “Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows: Most welfare recipients who left or were knocked off the welfare rolls are struggling to survive.”

It’s all a cruel ruse. And Bush and Lowry know it. Seriously, what fool thinks marriage leads to prosperity? It’s the opposite. Prosperity leads to marriage. And, likewise, poverty leads to divorce. A 2001 study found that whenever unemployment rises 1 percent, 10,000 couples divorce.

Want more proof? The Minnesota Family Investment Program helped families out of poverty through job training and child care subsidies. Guess what happened? Marriage rates rose among welfare recipients. Lesson: Want people to stay hitched? Give them economic stability first.

What’s the best precursor to financial independence? Education. Research shows that just one year of post-secondary education reduces poverty rates by half in single-parent households.

Here’s the real zinger: Bush’s thinly veiled come-on to the Christian Coalition diverts $100 million annually to churches…from TANF job training programs.

Please, stop publishing the rhetoric—from both sides. This nation’s problems won’t to be resolved by a shouting match, or a marriage certificate.

 

Brian Wimer

Charlottesville

 

Anger management

Ahhh, The Rant—a space of free opinion, chicken heads and painstakingly manicured arguments. This time around The Refuter was driven crazy by a ranter about a Humvee, seen in the anniversary issue of The Rant [January 27]. Although I agree with the ranter’s fury over the pompous joke of “Global Warmer” on the gas-guzzling Humvee’s license plate, what struck me was the thought of keying the car in an attempt to remedy their fury. So I’d like to offer the refute:

Hi. I just wanted to rant that I read an obnoxious rant yesterday—one with the license plate “Will Key Your Car If Need Be.” And I, uh, just wanted to say in case that person happens to read this, that I don’t think they’re cool and I think they feel powerless and I think they’re a red and green status symbol of envied spitefulness. I think they’re probably overcompensating for a very, very teeny body part—their parochial-minded brain. Although it is somewhat open since they don’t agree with the ill effects of gas-guzzling Humvees. Geez, why are there always two sides to the coin?

But to say the Humvee deserves a keying? First, your line of thinking perpetuates Americans’ desire to destroy what is not theirs (hint: think of imperialism). Second, they have what they possess and you have what you (don’t) possess. Put yourself in their shoes, would you enjoy having your car keyed? Third, you will never be that person and they will never be you, but if you were then you would be in a Humvee and would have some chicken head wanting to key your car. Understand? A keyed car only symbolizes the ineptitude of the perpetrator.

Taking your frustration out on America’s character of material-based, capitalistically driven bystanders does not solve or help the issue. Sure, the guy may be a pompous pig, but if the industry did not harbor such an identity then maybe he’d be driving your car, taking the bus more, or riding a bike instead. Take a look at the culture industry and its ramifications. But don’t key a victim of the industry, he’s just trying to live and buys according to what this image-driven society shoves in his face. How about instead of keying someone’s car, dear ranter, you key the industry that produces global warmers? They’re just asking to have their egos keyed. Cheers.

 

Joseph Reilly

therefute@yahoo.com

 

Blade runner

Regarding the shaving article “Smooth moves” [FLOW, January 27], I learned a little trick to keep my blade lasting longer. I store my Gillette Track II (blade only, not the handle) in a small Rubbermaid container of alcohol. The water and shaving foam degrade the sharpness of the blade when it’s being used. I found that storing the blade in alcohol is not only sanitary, but seems to help the blade stay sharper longer.

 

Richard Miller

Staunton

 

Correction

Due to an editing error, the chicken dumpling recipe included in “Food for thought,” an article about comfort cooking that appeared in FLOW, a January 27 supplement to C-VILLE, was incorrectly attributed. The recipe came from Gail Hobbs Page of the Mark Addy Inn. C-VILLE regrets the error.

 

Categories
News

Sex 04 – Second Annual C-Ville Sex Issue blends love and lust.

You’ve got love
Hope and hookups on match.com

When “Cynthia’s” husband died last year, the 51-year-old mother of five grown children felt lonely, but terrified to reenter the dating scene.

“It was like I had to get a whole new life,” says Cynthia, who asked not to be identified by her real name. “And they say it’s so hard to meet people in Charlottesville. When you’re past the half-century mark, the odds are definitely not in the female’s favor. Guys start dropping like flies.”

Suddenly single after decades of marriage, Cynthia says she didn’t have any single girlfriends to spend time with. A conservative country girl from Northern Virginia, she wasn’t about to start cruising the bar scene. So Cynthia joined the more than 3,000 people in the Charlottesville area who use match.com, one of the most popular Internet dating sites.

“My mom and my sister started screaming when I told them,” says Cynthia. “They didn’t want me going out to meet strangers.”

Match.com evolved when a group of San Francisco techies started an online classifieds business in 1995. The exploding personals section soon became the sole focus of the new business. In its first 10 months, match.com registered 60,000 new subscribers, says Kathleen Roldan, the company’s director of dating. These days, Roldan says the site registers 60,000 new members every three days. Match.com boasts 12 million active users around the world, with 27 international sites using the local language and currency. In 2003, match.com raked in about $185 million for its parent company, InterActiveCorp—a giant e-commerce company that owns Ticketmaster, Expedia, Lending Tree and Hotels.com.—the company’s website states.

The rise of match.com can also be charted by observing the demise of newspaper personal ads. In 2000, the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies lamented a nationwide decline in newspaper personals that began in the mid-1990s.

C-VILLE introduced an expanded “Personals” section in April 1995, the year match.com launched. One month later, in May 1995, there were 58 personal ads in C-VILLE. The ads were punchy, jam-packed with acronyms and humor. For example: “SWF ISO SWM who aren’t gay, married or hung up on their mothers. No wimps. Able to hike Humpback in less than 17 minutes.”

By the May 30, 2000, issue, the number of personals was at 36. Two years later, that number was 31.

 

The statistics are troubling for us newspaper folk, but even we have to concede match.com has distinct advantages over print personals—the most obvious being that on the Internet you can see pictures.

A 42-year-old gay man who asked to be identified as “Bob” says via e-mail that personals are “too difficult to manage.” He says he uses Internet dating because as a gay male, Charlottesville “has limitations for dating in my 40something category.” His profile on match.com yields about one meeting per month. “I’ve met some nice people. Not THE one yet,” Bob writes. “It’s kinda like being a door-to-door salesman. You keep knocking on doors and never let them get you down. You believe in your goods and make the best presentation possible.”

Cynthia says she likes match.com because she has unlimited space to write as much as she wants about herself and the type of man she’s looking for. Users adopt pseudonyms and set up match.com e-mail accounts that allow people to send anonymous messages to each other.

“I’m very careful about giving out my name and phone number,” says Cynthia. “At my age, most of the guys have been around the block. It’s hard to find somebody who’s a decent person, not a kink.”

 

Good news, men—match.com’s male/ female ratio for Charlottesville is 55:45, while the overall average is closer to 60:40, says Roldan.

For insights on modern courtship and for sheer entertainment value, it’s hard to beat the profiles on match.com. The site functions like newspaper personals—it’s free to post a profile (and a photo) and free to browse the site. But if you find someone you like, the site charges $25 per month (with discounts for three- and six-month memberships) before you can start wooing the object of your affection with e-mails or voicemails.

Locally, 18- to 35-year-olds make up the majority of match.com users. Their profiles tend to be shorter, full of humor and irony, with liberal use of the abbreviations (“u” instead of “you,” or “LOL” for “laugh out loud” after a joke) that have come to mark e-mail discourse.

Until recently, Internet dating sites were viewed as a refuge for the socially inept. But as match.com’s popularity has surged, more attractive, straight young people like Eric Wang, a UVA law student, are shopping the match.com marketplace to supplement their normal social rituals. Still, there’s a stigma about Internet dating—Wang is the only person I interviewed who agreed to give his real name.

“I signed up for the first time recently because I was tired of the bar scene,” Wang says via e-mail. “I’m comfortable with the idea of Internet dating because I do almost everything else on the Internet too, from banking to shopping to research.”

Match.com is fun for young, straight users, but for people outside Charlottesville’s dating mainstream, such as gays or people over 50, match.com represents a vital window into potential mates who are otherwise difficult to meet.

“It’s very good for those with special needs,” says Amy Alkon, who writes the syndicated Advice Goddess column published in C-VILLE. “If you’re a transsexual, you can’t walk into a bar and meet somebody. You have to seek out somebody who’s looking for you.”

Alkon says people should take common sense precautions when using Internet dating. It’s important to set and stick to standards about who you want to meet, she says. Don’t be so desperate that you overlook bad qualities. Post a picture, and be honest about things like age and body type. And don’t go on the Internet looking for The One.

“I hate that term,” says Alkon. “I think it’s healthier if you’re just going out and trying to meet someone new.”

Because users are meeting people without context—no common activities or mutual friends—it’s easy for people to stretch the truth in their profiles, to exaggerate their good qualities or outright lie.

Alkon says it’s important to be skeptical about match.com profiles, and she says that carrying on long “pen pal” relationships over e-mail can lead to disappointments.

“What happens is you start to invent the other person in your head, and convince yourself they’re something they’re not,” says Alkon. “Talk to people on the phone, and don’t be afraid to ask questions. The only way you can tell if someone is telling the truth is time.”

 

Deception ruined Cynthia’s first match.com date. A man from Maryland spun an elaborate tale about how he was coming to Charlottesville to buy some dogs in Keswick, so Cynthia made plans to meet him at a restaurant. He never showed.

“It turns out he set up a double-header that night,” Cynthia says. “The first woman told him she had two lovers, and wanted a third. He couldn’t get home fast enough. It felt like I’d been slapped in the face, but I was tickled. That SOB got what he deserved. After that, it got a lot smoother.”

Cynthia says her best date so far was with a man from Virginia Beach. The two attended a New Year’s Eve party in Charlottesville, but afterward, she says, he told her, “’If you’re ever in Virginia Beach, give me a call.’ Well, I’m not going to go chase a man.”

While many of the younger users post snarky, funny profiles on match.com, older users tend to be more sincere. Cynthia quotes liberally from song lyrics (“Sometimes I’m an angel, sometimes I’m cruel/ but when it comes to love I’m just another fool”), movies like Bridget Jones’ Diary and from the many self-help books she’s pulled from the shelves of the “Relationships” section at Barnes and Noble.

Cynthia says she’s started calling the site match.comic, because many of the men who contact her are recently divorced (or sometimes still married) and looking for a kinky hookup or a nursemaid.

“There’s a lot of unhappy men looking for a woman to bring them happiness,” she says. “I can’t be that. They need psychotherapy or something.”

But Cynthia says she’ll stick with match.com, and she updates her profile every few days. For her, the rise of Internet dating has given her something she might not have had in the pre-cyber era—hope. Cynthia recently had a glamour shot taken at a photography studio, and posted the picture on her match.com page.

“It’s a good thing to keep an old gal going,” she says.—John Borgmeyer

 

TONGUES! Heinies!
Unmarried couples!

Virginia’s crime
of passion

The following is a fictional criminal account:

On the night of February 14, a 25-year-old male and a 24-year-old female were seen leaving a Charlottesville restaurant. Witnesses saw the two alleged perpetrators, who are unmarried, leaving the restaurant and entering their shared apartment. The couple’s behavior was described as “affectionate.” Acting on a tip from a witness, police raided the apartment later that night and caught the two suspects engaged in an illegal activity. Specifically, the male suspect was apprehended while performing oral sex on the female. A soiled prophylactic was also discovered at the scene, leading investigators to believe that the couple had engaged in sexual intercourse earlier in the evening.

The couple was arrested and both were subsequently charged with misdemeanors for fornication, misdemeanors for lewd and lascivious cohabitation and felonies for sodomy. If convicted, both alleged perpetrators face up to five years in prison and fines of up to $3,250.

 

This hypothetical police blotter entry may seem farfetched, but the laws cited are indeed real. Though the police are hardly knocking down doors to arrest fornicators, sexually active Virginians beware—only married couples who avoid oral or anal sex can safely assume they are obeying the law in their bedroom.

However, the days of rampant lawless sex in Virginia may be numbered, as the Virginia General Assembly is set to consider several changes to the Commonwealth’s sex laws. Among the proposed changes is a repeal of the fornication law.

Currently, fornication counts as a Class 4 misdemeanor—the least serious category for a misdemeanor—and carries a maximum fine of $250. For those unfamiliar with the nature of the crime, the law defines the violation as, “Any person, not being married, who voluntarily shall have sexual intercourse with any other person, shall be guilty of fornication.”

In addition to debating the legality of fornication, Virginia’s legislators will decide whether cohabitation should be a criminal offense.

The law now states that, “If any persons, not married to each other, lewdly and lasciviously associate and cohabit together,” they are guilty of a misdemeanor and can be fined up to $500. However, roommates may no longer have to fear the long arm of the law whilst succumbing to lewd urges, because the proposed change would make such fraternizing illegal only when committed in public.

 

Though fornicators and cohabitating couples might soon enjoy newfound legal freedoms, those who dabble in oral or anal sex seem unlikely to catch any slack from Virginia’s legislators. The law that governs this felonious behavior resides deep within a chapter of the Virginia Code entitled Crimes Involving Morals and Decency. In this chapter, a short scroll below the rules for a legal duck race, is the “crimes against nature” law, which states: “If any person carnally knows in any manner any brute animal, or carnally knows any male or female person by the anus or by or with the mouth, or voluntarily submits to such carnal knowledge, he or she shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony”

Loosely translated, this edict means anyone on either side of a round of fellatio or cunnilingus is committing a felony, and could face a penalty of between one and five years in prison and a fine of up to $2,500. The same goes for anyone who gives anal sex a whirl: felonies all around. In the above fictional crime account, both the man and woman could be charged with a felony for being caught with his head between her legs. Sure, they might talk about it on “Sex and the City” but this is Virginia, and hot oral sex is not just fun and games.

The controversial sodomy law has persisted in part because of its symbolic status as an anti-gay statute. Under this law, any form of serious sexual contact between two people of the same sex is a felony.

Last summer, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the Texas anti-sodomy law, which was similar to Virginia’s law. Anticipating possible challenges to the constitutionality of the Virginia sodomy law, the State Crime Commission has recommended adding a new law to the books that would prohibit sodomy in public. The General Assembly would then be able to retain the proposed public sodomy law if the broader “crime against nature” law were to be struck down. But in the meantime, the old sodomy act will remain in effect.

The Virginia General Assembly will consider the package of sex law reforms in coming weeks. Until then, many diversions of the bedroom will remain decidedly prohibited in Virginia—perhaps adding an extra thrill for Virginians with a penchant for the taboo.—Paul Fain

 

boy toys
A consumer guide to online sex aids: pumps, handles, spreadersthe whole package

E-mail spam for sex toys and products has exploded in the past year, cramming inboxes with missives about herbal breast-growth pills, cheap Viagra and magic lubricant. Sick of it all—and more than a little curious about what’s so “magic” about magic lubricant—C-VILLE put their money a little lower than their mouth, ordered a few of the more interesting intimate items off the Internet, and gave them to intrepid reporter Ace Atkins. Who then gave them to moi.

See, my big brother Ace might have the tenacity to track down rampant City rumors and corner feisty Carmike kitties, but he’s a bit of a pill in the sack. I have applied the legendary Atkins tenacity toother areas. And so, armed with nearly a half-dozen sex toys, plenty of lube (magical and non-magical) and a willing and able assistant, I got the lowdown on what these online sex products are worth. And let’s just say there’s a reason they’re called spam.

After opening the unmarked, FedEx’d box, there was clearly only one place to start: The Fireman’s Pump. (Mmmmm, firemen!) With a mixture of intrigue and horror I examined the bright red, clear plastic apparatus that, according to the box, packed “super suction power” “for the man who wants that real fire hose.” Who doesn’t? But I was a little hesitant about sticking li’l Pierce into an enclosed, tight-fighting object with lots of suction. Well, a mechanical one, anyway.

Taking no chances, I actually read the instructions. (I may be a man, but these are my meat and two veg we’re talking about.) The pump manufacturers advise using lots of lubricant, and after taking a peek at the fairly tight rubber seal, I concurred. Appropriately greased up, I gave it a try. After a couple of squeezes there was a slight twinge of pressure and thenmy penis exploded! Kidding. I got nuthin’.

I’m quite happy with my fire hose as it is, but I thought the point of a pump was to get guys large and in charge. A little irritated, and slightly chaffed, I turned to the Internet for answers. I found them at www.goaskalice.columbia.edu. I have no idea who the hell Alice is, or why this chick knows so much about penis pumps, but girlfriend explains that they aren’t for adding inches. They’re for making erections firmer. And since I’ve never had a problem in that area, I gave the pump to Ace. On to the Nipple Suckers.

 

Yep, Nipple Suckers. Or, as I refer to them, the “shovel handles.” We’re talking three-inch-long, hollow black rubber tubes that you squeeze to create pressure over the nipple. Liking nipple play as much as the next open-minded guy, I gave them a shot and gotnuthin’. There was a little discomfort, but not a lot of sensation. Worried that maybe I was having an “off day” I called over my able assistant to see if the old-fashioned way still worked. It did, and the Nipple Suckers didn’t stand up to the Pepsi challenge. They just sucked.

But they didn’t suck as bad as the edible condoms, technically titled Le Sensuous Sheath. The “condoms” come in four flavors: cherry, strawberry, orange and lemon. We gave strawberry a try first, and, thinking there were two pieces joined together, ripped it in half before realizing that there’s only one of each flavor—you have to wrap the split piece around your piece and then create a condom-shaped product through saliva and heat.

This presented several problems. First, the “condom” tore easily. Second, it actually stuck to his skin like a paste, which could be lots of fun to clean off—if they tasted like anything remotely edible. Imagine a Fruit Roll-Up with the consistency of wax paper and even less flavor. Ultimately, my able assistant had to wash the remainder off since I was alternating between chugging water and gagging.

To its credit, the “magic lubricant” didn’t make me gag. But nor did it do any tricks. We ordered Feathre Luv Macho Magic lubricant in kiwi (it also comes in hazelnut. Hazelnut?). It didn’t taste anything like kiwi, just lightly sweet. And as for its other promises—that it’s a “stimulating” gel for “enhancement and increase of male performance” that “gently warms while you play”—not so much. It did the basic lube job just fine, but there was no abracadabra. And, after comparing the ingredients to plain ol’ KY jelly—surprise, surprise—they’re the same. But KY is much, much cheaper.

The final product was the only one that actually met any kind of expectations. The Ball Spreader (go ahead and giggle) is a kind of modified leather, adjustable cock ring with an added loop to go around your member. Now, here’s a little primer for the more vanilla of Pierce’s readers out there: A cock ring loops around the base of the penis and under the testicles, separating them from the body proper. The fit must be extremely tight so that blood flows into the penis, but not out as easily. This can lead to a slightly larger erection, or at least a more rigid one.

We got the latter. Mind you, it took two of us to get the gizmo onto my able assistant, but it worked—although not any better than a regular cock ring. The extra loop seems mostly for decoration. But what a stylish decoration it was.—Pierce Atkins

The SEX files
Does Charlottesville prefer hot monkey sex or something “real”? The truth is in here

At last, the secret is revealed. C-VILLE’s second annual sex survey provides the answer to the age-old question, How do you find that special someone? “Tell your best friend you need to get laid,” responded one 20something woman, “that’s how I met my future husband.”

Sex and love. We always knew they went together.

A couple of months ago, we polled readers to get their pulse on sex and relationships, figuring that Valentine’s Day would be an apt occasion to deliver the results of the survey. And it comes down to this: You’d rather be close than closely entwined, if forced to choose. Not that sex ranks low on your list of concerns. But it just doesn’t seem to mean as much without that trust and commitment. Or so you say.

In the words of one 50something respondent: “Like a meal, any course is only part of the overall experience. Sex is only part of a good relationship. You can leave off a course and still have a most satisfactory meal. Where if you have five courses of dessert, for instance, you don’t have as good an experience. So, I’d rather have a good, satisfying relationship, sex included, than a one-course sex-only life.”

The writer was a woman, as were two-thirds of respondents. Overwhelmingly, people between 20 and 34 took the most interest in this topic. Nine out of 10 who answered said they were in relationships and nearly everybody seemed to have had sex just hours before filling out the surveys.

 

We asked you if you’ve ever placed personals ads. Half of you hadn’t, but 80 percent of you figure the stigma is mostly erased from that activity (online dating sites still make a few people cringe). We asked you if you’d cheated. No, you mostly said (except the guy who answered, “One word: bridesmaids”). But with a collective dash of bravado, you said you’d tell your partner if you did.

You’re all over the map on the question of sharing details of your sexual history—as well as the particulars of your fantasies—with your partners. One 20something man adopts a simple guide: He keeps to himself “whatever might make me look like a pervert.”

A woman in the same age bracket tells but doesn’t really tell: “If I think something will hurt my partner, I don’t tell him. For example, I’ve always fantasized about having sex in the back seat of my old clunker, largely because of a really fun night I had with a boyfriend in high school in that same back seat. Though I’ve told my boyfriend about my desire to make love there, I’m not about to tell him why.”

Other keys to the limits of honesty include “Dr. Phil,” and “a man’s egoand how much he can handle.”

But if sharing fantasies turns you on some of the time, talking about your relationship almost never does. “It makes me mad,” said one 40ish fellow. Talking about sex, another subject of our survey, makes you hornier. And everyone professes to want to know the clinical points of their lover’s history: STDs and other health issues are must-shares.

Carrie Bradshaw may be a fashion trendsetter, but according to the C-VILLE Sex Survey, she’s not blazing a trail when it comes to sharing the details of one’s sex life over omelets and decaf double lattés. Those surveyed prefer to keep the details of their love lives between the sheets.

Said one young woman, “Cardinal Rule: Don’t kiss and tell.”

But another will bend that rule for the important woman in her life: “I rarely talk about our sex life with anyone except my mom. I can tell her those thingsbut I would never tell him that my mom knows. NEVER!”

Yes, that’s the plan. Stick to it.

 

So if relationships are the gold medal, how do you go about winning one? As noted, some just blab about their libido to their friends and the next thing they know, they’re married! Others take different routes. A 19-year-old man threatens to “cruise 29 with the top down and Culture Club on the deck.” One older woman takes a more cerebral approach. She formed what she calls an “intellectual group” with other women. “As a group, we specifically advertise for males to join us to balance discussions at our meetings.

“Resulting from this,” she continues, “I met my partner.”

Some are keen for personals ads and online dating sites—about half of those who responded. But the presumed view of those who use the hookup aids is pretty checkered. “Psycho and weird,” said one woman. “Desperate,” said another.

“I think personals ads intervene with fate,” one 20something philosopher opined. “Plus, why is everyone so hell-bent on relationships?”

But another romantic soul allowed for how “some people benefit from them.” She’d recommend personals, she said, because “my dad met his current wife in the C-VILLE Personals.” Aww, shucks.

A handful of respondents found their own partners, for better or worse, through anonymous listings. One mid-40s respondent replied that yes, she did develop a long-term relationship with someone through a personals ad. “I ended up marrying the ass who answered mine!” she declared.

She’s been divorced five years.

Even among those who say they’d reveal the facts of an extra-curricular tryst to their honey, they don’t take that to mean that all facts on their own dating profiles have to be, er, factual. One woman allowed that, yes, indeed she had lied on a dating profile. About what? “My sense of humor.” LOL!

Others confess that weight and eye color have been interpreted. For others, the lie has concerned employment status.

Don’t get the wrong idea, though. The lying doesn’t have to be ill intended. It can be born of courtesy. “I usually describe my package as being smaller than it is to not scare off women,” said one thoughtful gent in his mid-30s.

 

Could anything ever cause you to call off the quest for partnership, we asked? Sure, you said. Marriage, for one thing. Death, for another. Or maybe, old age.

A 19-year-old lass says she’d hang it up if she were “60 years old and still single.” By definition, she says, that means she’d be done with sex, too, because “I’d be 60 years old. Ew!” To which we say, isn’t that supremely cute! Get thee to Something’s Gotta Give.

Taking a more mystical approach, a 35ish man says he’d call off the search for love in the name of “spiritual enlightenment.”

Another cited “demographic reality.”

There were more emotional reasons to consider the single life, too. The knowledge she’s “better off” without a relationship would motivate one midlife woman. “Relationships tend to bring out the neediness in me. I am not a woman ‘who loves life.’ I am more of an existentialistI get the feeling that men are looking for a woman who is constantly stable with her emotions (I’m not sure that one really exists).”

Yet, though they are messy and leave our hearts open to breaking, most people would seem to prefer a lifelong relationship, even an abstinent one, over a lifetime of sex. We said most people. There is the guy who just wants “hot monkey sex” now and forever. And another guy who just can’t be bothered with “all that talking.”

But mostly the heart wants what it wants. Or, in the immortal words of a gender-unidentified survey respondent: “I’d choose a lifelong relationship because my vibrator or hand may be at my deathbed, but it just wouldn’t mean as much.”—Cathy Harding

Categories
Uncategorized

Bio Pics

First and foremost our goal is to bring the best overlooked films that we can to Charlottesville, films that aren’t going to show here, films that for the most part don’t deserve to show here—by that I mean that it’s just not a market that’s pushed that heavily by the film world.

“But I think it’s a market where there’s tremendous appreciation for film, despite the fact that it’s small.”

So says Wesley Hottot, the artistic director for Offscreen, a student-run film society which is preparing for its tenth season showcasing independent, foreign and classic film at Newcomb Hall Theatre on UVA Grounds. The season kicked off late last month with a showing of Akira Kurosawa’s Seven Samurai, and continues through the end of April.

The schedule for this spring features a number of eclectic, imposing titles—plenty to make the eyes of curious filmgoers water with gladness. The controversial documentary The Trials of Henry Kissinger is on the agenda, as is Derrida, a film about the legendary French philosopher, and In the Mirror of Maya Deren, an Austrian import about the experimental filmmaker.

If you’re sensing a theme, you should be, Hottot says. “All at once, distributors just started dumping biography films on exhibitors, and they’re all over the place,” he says. “There’s a lot out there right now; there’s about 10 or 12 that I just kept seeing in the catalogs and on the websites and in The New York Times.

“And so it just makes sense when that is happening in the distribution world to pick up on that and say to people, ‘This is what’s going on in the world outside of Charlottesville,’ which is what we try and do.”

It’s not all biography. Offscreen is also showing two David Lynch films, Blue Velvet and Wild at Heart, part of a regular collaboration with UVA professor Walter Korte in which a couple of more well-known titles are shown in 35 millimeter.

“We try to do something that people have probably seen, but haven’t seen in its full glory,” Hottot explains.

There’s also a screening of Decasia, a film composed entirely of nitrate-based archival footage from old Hollywood films, and a presentation by the filmmaker, Bill Morrisson.

“Over the history of American film, studios have been really bad about preserving things,” Hottot says. “They just throw it in a rubbish heap. Morrison went back and has been collecting that for years and years and years. So the film itself is sort of about cinema’s memories, and then it has its own themes of bodily decay and emotional decay.”

So how do the films get chosen? Hottot has the final say-so, as artistic director, which to a movie lover sounds like a pretty great job.

“Yeah, it is, but it’s a lot of responsibility too,” he says. “Just in my tenure I’ve been trying to make the process slightly more democratic by bringing in screeners and distributors well before the season starts and showing them to the whole group and seeing what people think, and nixing some stuff and really getting behind other things.

“Over time you start to put a series together.”—Paul Henderson

 

The voice for choice

Planned Parenthood faces hostility in the Assembly

Virginia’s General Assembly is wrestling with a massive budget deficit this year, yet many legislators will spend an unprecedented amount of time debating what still remains a woman’s legal right to abortion. In 2001, the General Assembly considered eight anti-abortion bills; last year, there were 12 such bills. In 2003, legislators are scheduled to consider about 25 bills aimed at restricting abortions and limiting reproductive choice.

Planned Parenthood is the only group sending lobbyists to Richmond to advocate for continued abortion rights. David Nova is president of Planned Parenthood of the Blue Ridge, which operates five sites in Central Virginia, including one in Charlottesville. Planned Parenthood offers medical care, birth control, free pregnancy tests, counseling, prenatal care, adoption services and abortions to all women for a nominal fee. Nova is also chair of Planned Parenthood’s statewide lobby organization. This week, he talks with C-VILLE about the hostile climate he faces in Richmond.

John Borgmeyer: What’s behind this increase in abortion bills?

David Nova: Election politics is driving some of this. Another thing is that redistricting brought a lot of new social conservatives into the Virginia legislature, so some of the newest members have the most pernicious anti-abortion or anti-family planning bills.

Over the past 15 years, a number of Supreme Court decisions have weakened the original Roe v. Wade decision. There are far more possibilities and far more creativity involved now in anti-abortion legislation.

How do these bills limit abortion or family planning?

There are three different categories. First, there are measures to make it harder for women to access abortion. A good example is parental consent with a notarized signature. A parental notification law exists already, and I can’t think of any medical procedure that requires a notarized signature. It seems bizarre, but it’s designed to make it harder for women to keep their privacy, especially in small communities, and increase the hassle factor.

The second category of measures, known as TRAP bills, are designed to impose burdensome regulations on abortion providers. Among other things, they require all clinics that provide abortions to have hospital-wide corridors, wide enough to have two gurnies wheeled past each other unencumbered. In our clinics, we have one gurney, and we’ve never used it. The effect isn’t to boost a woman’s health, but to force clinics to close, move or undertake expensive renovation. Again, the lawmakers are trying to make it harder for women to receive a legal medical procedure.

In the last category are laws designed to change the status of a fetus. For example, there’s one that makes the fetus the patient in pre-natal care, instead of the mother. Another bill would recognize a fertilized egg as a child before it’s implanted in the uterus––in essence, childhood comes before pregnancy. What’s really going on is an attempt to define childhood at conception. They’re preparing for a post-Roe v. Wade world.

It’s not an ineffective strategy.

What is Planned Parenthood doing?

Our strategy right now is just trying not to be overwhelmed. It’s a matter of rallying our supporters to keep the floodgates from opening any wider. The bills most likely to pass are the parental consents with notarized signature and the so-called “partial birth” abortions.

We’ve introduced the Family Planning Protection Act, which says laws applying to abortion won’t apply to contraception. I’m cautiously optimistic it will pass in the Senate. The question is whether it can pass in the House, which is more socially conservative.

There are a number of anti-abortion bills that may not survive because they cost money, and right now there’s no money. Also, the budget deficit makes legislators wary of passing bills that may provoke an expensive legal challenge from Planned Parenthood or other groups. That’s what happened last year with the so-called “partial birth” abortion ban. It cost American taxpayers over $100,000 before it was found to be unconstitutional. Last year, Governor Warner vetoed a ban passed by the General Assembly; the House voted to override the veto, but it was sustained in the Senate.

This year, Virginia’s “partial birth” bills are trying to be more constitutional, but we don’t think they go far enough. Actually, no one’s ever heard of a “partial birth” procedure happening in Virginia. The procedure exists, but in reality it happens very rarely.

There’s currently a bill that would allow people to get the slogan “Choose Life” on their license plates. This is political speech. In all likelihood, we wouldn’t be able to get “Let A Woman Decide” on a license plate. There’s some question as to whether this is constitutional.

Can the government permit one side of the debate but not the other on what is, arguably, government property?––John Borgmeyer

Categories
News

Girlchild in the promised land

As long as I think about it, I can see a brighter future for myself.”

Those words are spoken by Sahar Adish, a 16-year-old student at Charlottesville High School, in the final cut of the still-untitled film she and three other students created through Light House, Charlottesville’s nonprofit media education program for teens. It is the story of her life, a story uncommon for most American youth.

In the first shot, Adish climbs the steps of UVA’s Rotunda while Dave Matthews’ “Stay or Leave” plays over the soundtrack. In close-ups, interspersed with photos of she and her family from her childhood in Afghanistan, she talks about what brought her to Charlottesville. She talks about the fear of living under the Taliban and the relative security of coming to a new country full of possibilities. And she talks about the fear of letting down the parents who sacrificed so much for her. Education, she says, is key to making sure that disappointment never happens.

Toward the end of the film, as Adish’s narration turns to her college preparation, there are shots of her walking down a hall, opening an S.A.T. review book.

The short film was produced for Listen Up!, a national youth media network funded by various high-profile foundations, including the MetLife Foundation and the W.K. Kellogg Foundation. Listen Up! selected Light House and 14 other youth media centers from around the world to be involved in a project called “Beyond Borders.” Each group was given $6,000 to make a film that in some way tackles the themes of fear and security, which, according to the Listen Up! website, www.listenup.org, “may be the most important questions of our time.” While the distribution plans for the films are not yet set, Listen Up! hopes ultimately to feature them in an online film festival and nationally on PBS.

The Light House piece, completed at the end of December, is about Adish and her desire to fulfill her parents’ dreams for her by going to college, specifically UVA—and her fear that she might fail. Nothing particularly dramatic about that, you might say. But it is Adish’s background that sets her story apart, and gives her goals a dimension missing from the hopes of most ambitious high school seniors.

Fear, violence, flight and hope

Adish was born in Kabul, Afghanistan. Her mother, Kamela, was a teacher, and her father, Muhammad Naeem, the head of the department of mining and resources. In 1996, the world of her family—and for most people in Kabul—was radically altered when the city fell to the Islamic Taliban militia, then at war with the Mujahedeen warriors who had fought the Soviet occupation.

The Taliban, which posited itself as a reformist force, are fiercely Islamist and imposed a fundamentalist regime based on their interpretation of the Koran. Amputations and executions were ordered for petty criminals, television was banned, and severe restrictions were passed on the activities of women, who were not allowed to leave home without being accompanied by a male relative. And schooling was completely forbidden.

Adish’s family had always placed a huge premium on education, and the new restrictions were anathema to them. In a quiet way, her mother, a teacher for 25 years, rebelled.

“My mom started to home-school me, and that’s how the neighbors sent their own kids to my house—because my mom was a teacher,” Adish recalls. “And so she started to teach all of us, and after awhile it was a small school.”

Eventually, however, the Taliban discovered the Adishes’ activities. They forced entry into the home, beat some of the students and took her father away to a makeshift jail, where he was imprisoned for several evenings.

“When they entered the house, the kids started shouting and I escaped from the room,” Adish remembers. “So they could not do anything.”

Adish is slight and almost impossibly cheerful, always with a huge smile. Kamela has a similar demeanor. With her daughter acting as a translator—both her parents are working hard to improve their English—Kamela sat perched on the edge of her couch in her small living room in their Downtown neighborhood on a recent winter morning with an attentive, encouraging look on her face as she explained why she continued to teach after the Taliban took power.

“She couldn’t tolerate seeing others not going to school and not having educational opportunities,” Adish says, after an exchange with her mother. “She always hoped her children would be educated, in order to help the community.”

As far as the Taliban’s violent entrance, “she expected it at some point,” Adish says on her mother’s behalf. Explaining further, she says, “When she stayed home, she felt dead, not being in the community and helping otherswhen she couldn’t teach, she felt isolated.”

Immediately following the imprisonment of their father, the Adish family realized it was time to leave. “It was very easy for them to do any kind of tortureto make an example for others,” Adish says, with a polite smile. And, taking only clothes and a few things, Adish, her brothers and her parents fled to the Pakistan city of Peshawar. She was 11 years old.

The family left Kabul at dawn, walking to the bus station. The bus itself was stopped at three or four checkpoints, with the Taliban coming on board to search the belongings of the passengers. The women were asked if they had a ‘Mahram’—the man who was to accompany them everywhere—and the men were checked for beards, which were also required.

“And those who did not have long beards were taken out of the bus andthe bus left with the rest of the passengers,” Adish says. “Sometimes it took us even two hours in some checkpoints depending upon the doubts that the Taliban had on some passengers.”

In Pakistan, Kamela found a job teaching at an Afghani school where Adish was enrolled, but the family’s pilgrimage was far from complete. The streets of Peshawar were filled with Taliban, and after staying in the city for a year, the family moved again, this time to Islamabad, where they lived for three years.

In 2002, after a process spanning two-and-a half years and several interviews, the Adish family was notified—just 15 days before its flight—that the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees had selected it to go to the United States.

Reunion in a new society

The family was not told why they were selected, nor did they know the state they would be traveling to until the morning of the flight. Nevertheless, according to Adish, their happiness at the news cannot easily be described.

“It was very exciting, it was very exciting because that’s what we wanted,” she says now. “We didn’t know the future in Afghanistan, we didn’t know when we were going to go back there, and the only thing we wanted was a better education. It was good news.”

If the transition to a new society, new customs and a relatively unfamiliar language was difficult, neither Adish nor her mother lets on. And as Adish points out, a life in flux was by then old hat to the family.

“It was very happywe made lots of friends in Afghanistan, in Pakistan, so our life was kind of in change, always in change. We had already adjusted to a changing life,” she says.

While coming to the United States was a dream realized, the family’s good luck was not over. Sahar’s older brother, Baktash, now 25, had left Kabul in 1993 on a scholarship to study English in India, and in the course of the unsettlement caused by the war in Afghanistan, and the family’s flight from the country, they had lost track of his whereabouts. But through an amazing coincidence, last year a friend of the family ran into him at a party in Canada, where he was working as an immigration resettlement counselor. Since the time Baktash, who still lives in Canada, had last seen his family, he had gotten married.

There have been adjustments to make—Adish’s father, for instance, a highly successful engineer in Afghanistan, now works at the Courtyard By Marriott Hotel while he perfects his English. But his daughter, well schooled in English, took to Charlottesville High School easily.

“That was the huge problem for other students who came to Charlottesville, and my father, struggling for English,” she says. “But the rest was better, the rest was fine for me. I took advanced classes and honor classes right away, and I didn’t have difficulties with English.”

Now Adish, who ultimately wants to be a doctor, hopes to matriculate to UVA. “[That] is somewhere I can see my future,” she says. “I think because it is a very good school and it has lots of international students and good teachers and educational systems. And I want to go to medical school, and that’s where I want to study. I don’t want to go out of the city because my family is here, I want to be close to them.”

Her other brothers are also thriving: Honishka, 19, is a student at Piedmont Virginia Community College, while Ali, 12, attends Buford Middle School. Together, they are making their parents’ hopes for them a reality.

“When I see my mom, she taught me at home in a very bad situation where she knew her life was in danger, and now I can see how much they tried hard for our future,” Adish says. “So we should do something better for them. And yeah, that is kind of hard for us to think about it. But as long as we go through and improve our lives, it’s a good victory for them also.”

Story to the screen

In the movie, Adish narrates her powerful story without embellishment. And the production, skillful and conservative, respects that and draws little unnecessary attention to itself. Difficult as it might seem to believe while watching it, however, it wasn’t always clear that the Listen Up! film should center on Adish.

When Shannon Worrell, creative director and co-founder of Light House, first received information about the project last August, she scheduled a brainstorming session with some hand-picked Light House veterans.

“I kind of picked a group of kids that I thought would be interested in the subject and that I thought had the skill and commitment to do it,” she says. Adish and 17-year-old Sanja Jovanovic, who is from the former Yugoslavia, for instance, had previously worked on films through a collaboration between Light House and the International Rescue Committee.

As outlined by Listen Up!, the students were to submit a proposal about a film that would feature the themes of fear and security. Sixteen-year-old Joe Babarsky, another member of the group, took the early lead. According to Worrell, he put the proposal together virtually unaided, outlining a film that would involve the stories of all four students.

As initially conceived, the film was to tackle their individual struggles to meet their parents’ high expectations and their fears that they would fall short in some way. But after Light House submitted some test footage, the group was informed that it needed to limit its focus to either Babarsky or Adish.

“When we sat them side by side, Sahar’s story of loss and aspirations clicked so well with all of us that there was really only one choice,” Babarsky says.

As Adish puts it, “my story was a little more dramatic.”

Yet her colleagues did not realize the full picture right away. Jovanovic says that Adish kept much of her background to herself until well after they settled on her story.

“We were doing shooting in front of the Rotunda, and all of a sudden Sahar started speaking this story that we’d never heard, and she said they had to leave Afghanistan for Pakistan after they took her father away,” Jovanovic says. “And we were like, ‘Why didn’t you tell us this before?’ and she said, ‘I thought it was political, I didn’t want to get into politics.’ And all of a sudden the story got another arc, and it was very interesting.”

As shooting continued throughout October and November, the footage began to mount up. At about the same time, Listen Up!, with ambitious hopes for the Beyond Borders project, began bearing down on the group about production values, Worrell says.

“Basically, they wanted it to be broadcast nationally on PBS, so they were showing the footage they were getting from the different media organizations” to PBS and their financial backers, she explains. “The production values weren’t high enough. They wanted perfect, very conventional, very conservative broadcast television production values, like you would see on ‘60 Minutes.’”

To that end Listen Up! sent PBS producer Donald Devet to help the students film the comprehensive interview seen in the final cut. Devet provided aid on a range of technical details, from the type of light reflectors to use to which colored background gels worked best.

All well and good—but the professional help ran contrary to the mission of Light House, Worrell says, which is to “provide enough production help to make the production passable” but not “focus as much on the technology as we do on the stories.”

By telling the students that the project was their story and their idea, Listen Up! was sending a bit of a “mixed message” by insisting upon—and enforcing—production values that were clearly beyond the reach of amateurs working on their own, Worrell says.

It was a contradiction the students also recognized—they even began referring to Listen Up! as “the studio.” Says Luke Tilghman, 17, the fourth member of the Light House group that worked on the picture: “The idea of what they wanted it to be and what we wanted it to be were two very different ideas.”

“You can’t make a film-school kid in one school semester or one three-week workshop,” Worrell says. “You can’t create a great cinematographer or a great film director, technically, in that amount of time. But what you can do is sort of impress upon them the power of telling their own story, and give them the tools and the encouragement to tell their own story.”

She adds, “In my opinion, the hand of the so-called mentor, or the so-called grown-up [in the Beyond Borders project] is greater than I am philosophically comfortable with.”

Listen Up! Network Coordinator Tina Wieboldt says she understood the conflict, but that the organization she represents has its own mission.

“It’s hard for us, because we are raising the bar. Listen Up! is an organization that wants to help youth producers raise the bar in production, so that they are getting the skills they need and they understand what it takes to make broadcast-quality work,” she says. “All our organizations are at different levels in that respect. Some are more experienced and don’t need as much guidance, but at the same time, all our organizations do need a lot of guidance.”

While Devet’s help may not have been totally welcome, all parties agree that the benefits of the collaboration with Listen Up! yielded far more positives than negatives. In addition to the technical support, the group was able to hear from and provide feedback to other teenagers involved in the Beyond Borders project through international conference calls.

“The ability to learn about the intensely varied issues of the other teams in our working group was amazing,” Babarsky says. “Looking side by side at the issues of teen transgendered [people] in New York to Ukrainians living near Chernobyl and kids in the U.K. affected by foot and mouth disease was an incomparable experience.”

However, the students feel above all it’s the friendships formed through the collaboration, and the chance to tell a powerful story, that makes the experience most worthwhile.

“We all thought that the experience was much more important than the product,” Tilghman says. “So we all felt really blessed to be able to work on it.”

“The four kidsare all totally different from each other,” Worrell says. “And they all have said at different times, ‘I never would have done anything with any of these people,’ and they were all friends in the end.

“In that way, it was to me like a utopian experience at Light House, because you always imagine a group of kids each having one different, unique, amazing thing to give. I think it was just a magical combination of kids.”

Roll credits

A film is a moment in time, but a life goes on. For Adish, one of her more immediate concerns is calculus, the only class in which she doesn’t get As. She has pulled her grade up to a B from a C, however.

Adish is incorporating her film work with her studies—she has submitted the Beyond Borders film as part of her application to UVA. She feels very strongly about the finished film, as it conveys a message that is one of her central beliefs. She says she would like for teenagers all over the world to see the film, and take from it the idea that education is important—not something to be taken for granted.

“I would tell them that I didn’t actually value education when I was a young kid,” she says. “But when I stayed at home, I felt the value of it. You don’t value something else unless you lose it. [Education] is the way they could actually help the world and improve the community.”

Categories
News

Out of the park

Q: Hey Ace, I hear that the free parking lot next to C&O was recently bought and will soon be turned into some big construction project? True?—Lots of luck

A: True, Lots. The parking lot on the corner of Water and Fifth streets has been purchased and is slated for development, meaning that the final free parking lot in the City is about to go bye-bye. You can start circling for those ever-more-precious parking spaces now.

The 40-odd-space car lot was snapped up about nine months ago by Bill Nitchmann, a developer whose other properties include the Albemarle Bank building just off the Downtown Mall and the Technology Center complex on Forest Street. He took over the property from Water Street LLC (which he now runs), which bought the land from the City a few years ago in the hopes of creating something more lucrative than the parking lot it has been since 1961, Nitchmann says.

Nitchmann is poised to succeed in that endeavor, as plans have already been drawn up for what will be Water Street Plaza, a five-storey complex packed with that multi-use goodness the City is so eager to bring into its borders (consider the controversial, quasi-stalled Preston Plaza project that Mayor Maurice Cox swears will happen). Nitchmann tells Ace that plans call for retail space on the bottom floor topped by a second floor parking garage that will have nearly as many spaces as the current lot it’s taking over. But sorry, motorists—these spaces will be reserved for the folks who will be living in the upper three floors.

Nitchmann says that the residential area will be divided into 800- to 900-square-foot one-bedroom apartments, 900- to 1,500-square-foot condominiums and four penthouse suites ranging from 2,000- to 3,000-square feet. The roof will also feature a gymnasium and landscaped garden area.

It all sounds very chi chi to Ace. But then, as Nitchmann points out, that’s what a lot of the Downtown Mall has become in the past 10 years. I mean, Ace can’t even count how many upscale loft apartments have popped up recently marketed to up-and-coming single executives. (Cough, cough—Yuppies—cough.) Nitchmann’s counting on courting that market with Water Street Plaza, plus another segment of the population.

“With the amenities that the Downtown Mall now offers—movie theaters, fine restaurants, the new art building—we think it’s perfect timing for people that are retiring and moving Downtown to be close to where all the action is,” he says. “We’re really targeting individuals that are tired of driving.”

And to do it, a free parking lot is going the way of the dodo. Oh, the irony.

Nitchmann says that he’s still very much in the preliminary stages of development (zoning variances are still needed from the City) and a start date—much less an end one—has yet to be set. So for now, enjoy the free spaces while you can.

Categories
Uncategorized

Local News

No payoff on Lobby Day
The Assembly’s Christian Right doesn’t let science get in the way of its anti-abortion agenda

On the corner of his desk in the offices of the Virginia Legislature in Richmond, Senator Mark Obenshain (R-Harrisonburg) keeps a copy of Why One Way: Defending an Exclusive Claim in an Inclusive World by John MacArthur, an evangelical pastor whose brand of angry Christianity has made him a popular author and radio personality.

MacArthur sells books by claiming God wants us to hate everyone who’s not a fundamentalist Christian (forget that wishy-washy “love thy neighbor” stuff). As a politician, Obenshain exudes a similar God-is-on-my-side vibe, so the group of James Madison University students who filed into the Senator’s office on Pro-Choice Lobby Day weren’t expecting a compromise.

“We don’t expect to change his mind. He’s a hard-liner,” says Erin Coughlin, a JMU senior.

On Wednesday, January 28, about 200 abortion-rights advocates descended on Richmond for the annual pro-choice event. At 9:30am, 79 people from Charlottesville, Harrisonburg and southwest Virginia arrived in Richmond on a pair of chartered buses, just minutes before the JMU students were scheduled to meet Obenshain. It was bound to be an interesting session.

Last spring, Obenshain was an aspiring senator sitting on JMU’s Board of Visitors. With encouragement from Del. Bob Marshall (R-Manassas), Obenshain pushed the board in April to prohibit the school’s student health center from distributing “emergency contraception” pills without a doctor’s prescription (last month, the JMU Board of Visitors responded to student outrage by reversing the ban). In November, Obenshain won the 26th District Senate seat, and in his first session he seems poised to support Marshall’s HB 1414, which would prohibit any Virginia public university from distributing EC pills—with or without a prescription.

There are currently more than 20 bills before the General Assembly that would restrict access to abortion and birth control—such as the so-called “TRAP” legislation that would effectively close all but one abortion clinic in the Commonwealth and other bills that would require any doctor prescribing EC to students to seek parental consent. The young women who would mostly be affected by these measures don’t know what’s afoot in the legislature, contends Mandy Woodfield, a JMU senior.

“I don’t think the majority of women my age are aware their rights could be taken away,” she says.

Woodfield and her fellow student lobbyists wanted Obenshain to know that most young people support the right to choose. But no sooner did they take a seat on Obenshain’s sofa than the Senator let them know they were wasting their time.

“You and I have a fundamental difference of opinion,” Obenshain told the students. “With respect to you, I think you’re wrong.”

Obenshain sat on the edge of his desk, crossed his arms and spoke to the students in the soft voice of a shepherd coaxing wandering sheep back to the fold. During the polite but occasionally tense exchange, Obenshain told the visibly nervous students that he believed emergency contraception pills constitute abortion—and murder—because they flush a fertilized egg from the woman’s body before it attaches to the woman’s uterus. “It’s a definitional issue,” said Obenshain.

“Not according to science,” replied JMU senior Tim Howley. Pregnancy, as defined by scientists and Virginia’s Attorney General, begins with implantation, not fertilization. Emergency contraception is nothing more than a high dose of conventional birth control pills, and an advisory committee to the Federal Food and Drug Administration recommended that EC was safe enough to be sold over the counter.

Obenshain countered with his version of Pascal’s Wager. “Look at it this way,” he said. “If I’m wrong, then we’re imposing hardships on some families. If you’re wrong, then we’re taking literally millions of lives.”

Obenshain, who supports the death penalty, told the students that “people want leaders with a moral compass,” apparently referring to the 29 percent of registered voters in the 26th District who put him into office. The message was clear—college kids may know their science, but they don’t vote.

After 40 minutes, the two sides agreed to disagree. Nevertheless, the JMU students were lucky. The hallways pulsed with lobbyists, all wearing issues on their sleeves—Planned Parenthood’s army of co-eds, trial lawyers waving little red flags, health care advocates with helium balloons and fortune cookies. Most spent their time simply waiting for legislators who were stuck in meetings.

Planned Parenthood missed Albemarle Republican Delegate Rob Bell, for example. The 36-year-old Bell comes from the old school of Virginia Republicanism—cut taxes and cut the budget—and he keeps his religion private. David Nova, president of Planned Parenthood of the Blue Ridge, sees Bell as a Republican who can be reasoned with.

“He’s very smart,” says Nova. “But he’s under intense political pressure to vote with the party line on these issues.”

Last year, Bell joined Planned Parenthood in supporting a bill that would add language to the Code of Virginia stating that “contraception does not constitute abortion” and that abortion restrictions like parental consent and notification would not apply to birth control. A similar bill, SB 456, is on the table this year.

However, Bell has also introduced HB 671, a bill specifically punishing “feticide” and “fetal injury.” There are currently nine bills referencing “feticide” or “fetal injury,” which critics say are steps toward equating abortion, which is Constitutionally protected, with murder, which is not. These bills teem with Virginia’s far-Right lawmakers’ fetish-like preoccupation with the unborn fetus.

After the meetings, Planned Parenthood’s lobbyists retreated to a nearby pub for lunch. Holly Hatcher, a Charlottesvillian and director of statewide organizing for Planned Parenthood, arrived with some bad news—Marshall’s TRAP bill passed the 100-member House with 69 votes, four more than last year. The TRAP bill will likely die in the Senate again this year, but that wasn’t much consolation.

“We’re going in the wrong direction,” said Nova. “If we’re ever going to have a good vote, you’d think it would happen right after the legislators see 200 of us walking around their office. It’s scary.”—John Borgmeyer

 

Water into whine
Hollymead developer finds his wetlands mistake costly

The undeveloped land north of Charlottesville ain’t cheap—about $12 to $18 per square foot. But perhaps the most expensive piece of real estate of all along 29N is 17 feet of an unnamed tributary of Powell Creek, which runs through the Hollymead Town Center site.

In the fall, bulldozers cleared trees, bushes and grass alongside 2,517 feet abutting five creeks that run east to west through the Hollymead site. The problem? The State’s Department of Environmental Quality approved razing only 2,500 feet along the creeks. D’oh!

Project developer Wendell Wood says DEQ inspectors visit the site weekly, and on October 21 the State caught the mistake.

“We admitted it,” says Wood. “In situations like this we could go to court, but in this case we agreed we made a mistake. It wasn’t worth fighting over.”

Before construction companies can alter creeks or other bodies of water, they must first get permission from the DEQ. Usually, the State allows developers to destroy wetlands in one place if they promise to clean up and protect equivalent wetlands somewhere else, a process called “mitigation.” Developers may mitigate land anywhere in the State, as long as the plan meets DEQ approval.

The DEQ gave Wood permission to raze land along five streams that currently divert the site’s runoff into a holding pond. When the project is finished, those streams will live in pipes beneath the parking lot of the 165-acre site. To mitigate this damage, Wood agreed to plant trees and bushes along 2,500 feet of Powell Creek on land he owns just south of Hollymead. Wood says the plantings will extend between 70 and 100 feet on both sides of the creek. The DEQ tells developers what kinds of flora to plant and where. Furthermore, Wood must pay to put the mitigated land in permanent easement, so that any future development there will not disturb the creek.

With the violation, Wood’s company, United Land Corporation, was fined $2,000. But the real cost was paperwork and lost time, says Wood.

To make up for the extra 17 feet of damage, Wood must mitigate another 17 feet of Powell Creek. This change means his company needed to submit a completely new application to the DEQ, which meant Wood’s workers had to stay away from the Hollymead stream sites for 30 to 40 days while the new permit worked its way through the State bureaucracy, says Wood.

Wood declined to estimate how much the delay cost his company. “That 17 feet was pretty expensive, in terms of time and paperwork,” he says. “I wish we had never disturbed it, I can assure you.”

On January 14, the DEQ published a legal notice of the violation in The Daily Progress. According to the notice, the State Water Control Board will accept public comment about the DEQ’s action against United Land up to 30 days after publication of the notice.

Edward Liggett, an enforcement specialist with the DEQ in Harrisonburg, says people usually use the comment period to opine that the penalty is too harsh, or not harsh enough. But the penalty, he says, isn’t so much punitive as it is a “pathway to compliance.” So far, no one has used the public comment period to sound off about the controversial super shopping center project itself.—John Borgmeyer

 

There’s always next year
No charter for UVA this time around

Head honchos at the Commonwealth’s three top colleges have decided to put on hold their measures to gain autonomy from the State. On the advice of legislators who say this year’s General Assembly session will be crammed with tax and budget issues, the presidents of Virginia Polytechnic Institute, the College of William and Mary and UVA said last week they will wait until next year to try for “charter” status.

“This doesn’t change anything significantly. The University is just slowing down a little,” says UVA representative Carol Wood.

This fall, presidents of the three schools said they were fed up with the State’s dwindling financial support—especially as nearby rivals like University of North Carolina have been beefing up their college budgets. Faced with the nightmarish vision of top students turning (gasp!) Tarheel, the three Virginia colleges sought to decide their own tuition and out-of-state student enrollment levels, and control their own investments. In exchange, they would take less money from the State.

Each school would have to draft its own unique charter for General Assembly consideration, says Senator Creigh Deeds (D-Charlottesville). “It’s a big bite for legislators to consider in one year,” says Deeds. The General Assembly will consider more than 3,000 bills during the current 60-day session, and legislators are already expecting clashes over tax reform and budget cuts.

A draft of the charter bill has been introduced into both the House and Senate, where the Education and Finance committees of both bodies will study it. When this year’s session ends, Wood says UVA’s administration will work with the State to draft the particulars of UVA’s charter.

Wood doubts the Assembly will come through with any last-minute money that would make autonomy unnecessary. “If you look at how much we’ve been cut and the difficulty the State has had, it’s unlikely,” says Wood.

Don’t cry too hard for UVA, though. Between 2002 and 2003 its endowment grew nearly 7 percent to $1.8 billion from $1.69 billion, more than twice the national average increase of 3 percent, according to the National Association of College and University Business Officers.—John Borgmeyer

 

Schooling the City Council
Everybody’s sick of the MCP. Won’t someone think about the children?

The acrimonious debate over the proposed Meadowcreek Parkway, which continues to roil City politics, has made the upcoming May elections for City Council look like a referendum over the controversial road that would go through McIntire Park. Candidates will likely pepper their election bids with words like “easement” and “VDOT.” But what if the jargon of City politics revolved around accreditation and SOLs—the buzzwords of education?

“I would welcome that more than anything,” says Linda Bowen, the chairperson of the Charlottesville School Board, of an alternate reality where public education ruled City politics. “I think it’s wise for [residents] to scrutinize what’s going on with the school system.”

Public schools should be of interest even to City residents who don’t have kids in the system, as about 31 percent of all of the City’s expenditures go to the schools.

Bowen and several other well-positioned observers of City schools agree that the hottest issue for any education debate would be school funding. According to Superintendent Ron Hutchinson, Charlottesville’s school system is facing a “worst case scenario” of being up to $2 million short for next year’s budget. The crunch is largely due to changes at the State level, including shifts in the retirement system and in the way Charlottesville’s comparative wealth is tabulated by the State. In order to make ends meet for a proposed $46 million budget that suggests increasing teacher salaries by 6 percent, Hutchinson has recommended several possible job cuts.

The City currently contributes two thirds of the schools’ funding, and Hutchinson says the Council “continues to be very generous to us.” But with the State not pulling its share of the load, several observers say schools need more help from local government when it comes to working with Richmond.

Bekah Saxon, a teacher at Buford Middle School and president of the Charlottesville Education Association, says her strongest plea for City Council is for them to push the State to send more money to schools. In the current school year, Virginia only kicks in $16 million of the school system’s total revenue.

After budget worries, other likely local education flashpoints cited by insiders include Virginia’s Standards of Learning (SOL) tests, achievement gaps, potential increases in enrollment and the ongoing search for a new superintendent for City schools.

In order for a Virginia school to be fully accredited by the State, 70 percent of its students must pass the SOL tests in all four core subject areas. Currently, four of Charlottesville’s nine public schools, including Charlottesville High School, fall short of full accreditation. Though the failing rating won’t officially kick in for schools until 2007, this year’s seniors will be the first to be denied diplomas if they fail to pass the SOL tests. Del. Mitchell Van Yahres (D- Charlottesville) recently introduced a bill to delay the diploma sanctions, but the bill was voted down on January 26.

The Federal government also has a hand in school achievement testing with the No Child Left Behind Act. The complicated Federal program targets school performance in several areas, with a range of dates for compliance.

“[School] divisions are not going to escape those mandates,” Hutchinson says of the Federal performance goals, adding that if Charlottesville schools did pull out of the Federal program, “it would have a potentially significant financial impact.”

The implications of the performance tests include an achievement gap between students from lower- and higher-income families, and the possibility of parents being able to remove their kids from failing schools. This issue could also intensify debates over the districting of elementary schools.

“I would love to see a discussion of allowing parents to choose elementary schools,” says Aileen Bartels, the co-president of the parent-teacher organization at Burnley-Moran Elementary.—Paul Fain

 

Scratchy record
A violent past becomes present for UVA student accused of murder

Witnesses on both sides of the verbal sparring that occurred in the minutes before volunteer firefighter Walker Sisk was stabbed to death on November 8 have testified that UVA student Andrew Alston, the accused murderer, did not appear likely to up the ante with any violence.

“I wasn’t concerned about Andrew getting in a fight,” said Jeffrey Cabrera, a member of the group of four young men that included Alston the night of the murder, at the January 15 murder hearing. “Andrew seemed cool.”

Cabrera might have been more concerned about Alston’s violent tendencies if he had been with him on Halloween night in 1998. That evening, Alston assaulted another juvenile in his suburban Philadelphia hometown. He was later charged with criminal conspiracy and aggravated assault, according to Frank Snow, deputy chief juvenile probation officer for Montgomery County, Pennsylvania.

Though officials with the Montgomery County Juvenile Probation Department are now withholding many of the details of the 1998 Alston assault case, Snow told Beth Cohen of The Reporter, a local newspaper, that the assault, “was a Halloween incident and [Alston] stole the kid’s candy, broke the kid’s nose and the kid ended up with a skull fracture.”

Snow confirms that on January 5, 1999, Alston was committed to a six-month stint at a farm-based juvenile detention program in the Philly area where participants are taught conflict management. Though the residential program is designed to last three months, Alston apparently did a double stint.

At Alston’s January 15 hearing in Charlottesville General District Court, his lawyer, Scott Goodman, introduced clarifying evidence that Alston did not, as had been said in a previous hearing, kick the youth on the ground in the 1999 assault.

Alston’s father, Robert A. Alston, attended the January hearing. The senior Alston is an accomplished corporate lawyer and an elected township supervisor in Andrew’s hometown of Lower Gwynedd. The legal team the Alston family has assembled for the alleged murderer’s defense, which will continue with grand jury proceedings beginning on February 17, includes Goodman, a local lawyer, and Barry Boss, a prominent Washington defense attorney. Among Boss’ most noteworthy defenses was when, in 1998, he and another lawyer persuaded the U.S. Attorney’s Office and Department of Justice to drop the Federal death penalty for a notorious D.C. drug kingpin who had been charged with six murders.

During Alston’s January 15 hearing Boss’ persistent examination of witnesses visibly perturbed Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Jon R. Zug, who will handle the case as it moves to the grand jury in February.—Paul Fain

Categories
The Editor's Desk

Mailbag

Praise the Lord

In spotting Andrea Lewis’ article “Return of the same old thing” [Comment, January 13], I was instantly disappointed. I’m sick of reading articles about The Lord of the Rings trilogy by people who either haven’t seen or didn’t understand the movies. And yet I have once again read more of “the same old thing.” Lewis says in the article that “the men save the world while the women of Middle Earth cower in fear,” and I have but one question for her: Did you fall asleep in The Return of the King? Because that would be the only way you would have missed the shouting of every woman in the theater standing up and applauding Eowyn when she slew the Witch King, the most obvious female-empowering scene in the movie. She throws off her helmet, raises her sword, says “I am no man!” and scatters his corrupted, undead spirit to the wind.

Maybe I’m the one who’s missing the point, but that didn’t seem like cowering to me.

Again and again the term “patriarchy” was used in association with The Lord of the Rings and again I believe that is mistaken. The women of The Lord of the Rings don’t wear skin-tight leather and 6" heels to show off their femininity, but they still get the job done. Arwen denies all of her father’s plans for her, she escapes the fate that he has made and would have her accept to follow her dreams, to pursue her own wants and desires. Eowyn comes from a long line of respected women, shield maidens who kick ass with the sword, and rather than staying at home and looking after the keep like her uncle told her to, she goes to war, helps a male along the way, and kills the biggest enemy that they would face in the trilogy. How does she do it? Simply because she was a woman. She will gain more renown and honor than nearly all of the men who fought in the battle.

To me, even though The Lord of the Rings doesn’t try its hardest to represent every minority, the people fighting for what they believe in aren’t exactly “steroid-laden Schwarzenegger-types” either. The two people who save the world, Frodo and Sam, are hobbits, generally thought to be weak and lesser beings. But it is through their struggles and their enduring love for each other (that would make many a homophobe uncomfortable) that they finally make it to Mount Doom and destroy the ring. “Even the smallest person can change the course of the future,” isn’t exactly the motto of the patriarchy.

Perhaps you left all of these qualities of the films out of your article to develop a believable point, but you’re not fooling anyone who watched the films carefully.

 

Allison Jarrett

Nimbrethil9@aol.com