From: Annie (annie@geekbabe.com)
Date: Mon May 26 2003 - 11:54:00 CDT
In this mailing:
Org List
Restroom roundtable
A few thoughts
Restroom continued
Restroom and mainstream comments
Administrivia
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Org List:
This is the DLV 2004 Organizational Mailing List (dlvorg@geekbabe.com)
Replies to this message will be forwarded to the DLVORG list and not the
DLV-Announce or DLV-Discuss list.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Restroom roundtable:
We've received a couple more very good responses to the restroom issue,
with some very valid, but diverse views.
Following this mailing, I'll be redirecting the restroom and behavior
comments to the new ad-hoc committee's list.
I'll also be taking the liberty of adding the names of those who have
recently commented on the restroom issue over to that list. If anybody
ends up on it and doesn't want to receive that list, just write and
unsubscribe. Don't be surprised if you get a brief intro message from
the list processor.
If you don't get one and want to be on the ad-hoc list for discussion
of the dress/behavior/restroom issue, write in and request it.
Over the past few days I've been doing a lot of thinking of the
incidents, and I've been looking back at the photos from earlier DLVs
and the various mailing lists, schedules, and correspondence trying to
get a handle on why we've had more restroom (and related) incidents in
2002-2003 than in all other years combined.
I don't have any answers.
I do have many questions.
I have noticed a few facts, from reviewing DLV's history:
1. From year one (1997) we've had a very consistent mix of mainstream
and alternative venues. This has not substantially changed over the
course of 7 (soon to be 8) DLV seasons.
2. We've had groups go mall-shopping, casino-hopping, eating in
mainstream restaurants and buffets, gaming in mainstream casinos,
and using casino bars since 1998.
3. The dressing issue has been with us since 1998-1999 or so. There are
admonitions not to overdress in mainstream venues in the pre-1998
mailings. Photos show that most of the people are appropriately dressed
for most activities for most years.
4. The level of "dressiness" (is that a word?) appeared to increase
between the 1998 and 1999 years, but primarily for the dress-up
activities such as the shows. It appears to have remained very
consistent since 1999.
5. The pressure to "get out of the gay bars" and go more mainstream
began right after DLV 2001.
6. Our numbers have increased consistently over the years and the rate
of increase has decreased. Approximate total counts over the years are:
1997: 5, 1998: 16, 1999: 35, 2000: 55, 2001: 65, 2002: 85, 2003: 104.
7. Restroom incidents increased dramatically in 2002. Approximate
count is as follows:
1997: None reported. Well, I guess maybe the 7-11 thing. :) :)
1998: 1, Keys, indiscreet use. No complaints. Reported by our people.
1999: None reported.
2000: None reported.
2001: 1, Sahara, indiscreet use.
2002: 2, Sahara, indiscreet use. Boardwalk, security mixup.
2003: 4, San Remo, Treasure Island, Bellagio, Desert Rose Golf.
(I wonder if any restroom incidents were not reported.)
8. 9-11 and security. There was a marked increase in security in Las
Vegas between the 2001 and 2002 events. Whether or not this had any
effect on the number of incidents is anybody's guess.
Anyway, we can continue the restroom discussion on the ad-hoc list.
The next mailing to the ORG list (the one right here) will come out
Wednesday and will include the new volunteers. It will contain some
welcome stuff and the introductory 2004 stuff. This will be followed
by the activity suggestions from the survey and a number of items
sent in separately.
Thanks to everybody who has provided input. We'll continue this
discussion in the ad-hoc list.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A few thoughts:
Aiko writes:
>In reference to the comments in mailing 3, I feel the comments were
>sincere, very pointed, accurate and demonstrates that the majority
>tries to blend, and avoids, or tries to avoid those that are attention
>seekers.
>***
>Referencing the restroom incidents at Boardwalk (2002) and TI (this
>year), I sincerely appreciate the courage it took to write about them,
>and thank the girls these unfortunate incidents happed to, for the
>input. I certainly hope they would consider being a volunteer for the
>committee
Another thing we might consider ... were there any incidents that were
not (widely) reported, either this year or over the years?
>***
>As part of the ad hoc committee, I can assure everyone that will be no
>'looking the other way', and honestly believe that we can make a
>difference in decreasing the restroom and embarrassment incidents
>this coming year by addressing the problems and seeking solutions,
>rather than ignoring them.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Restroom continued:
Leah writes:
>My restroom comments.... specifically, 'laying the groundwork' for use
>of the ladie's room..... were only intended for Diva week. Being a
>large group, it would just seem a practical way to avoid potential
>embarrassment. San Remo was not set up specifically for Diva.... Mindy
>coordinates a weeknight social group that meets there sometimes and it
>was born from that.
>I am more pro-active than most and have some things in the fire
>currently with the Mayor's office regarding Rights and such so I am
>really not a compromiser...... was just thinking of making the venues
>safer and a more enjoyable experience for the girls in all facets,
>mainly use of the restroom facilities. Especially since it seems we
>had a high number of first-timers the last two years or better.
>I 'laid the groundwork' at Carluccio's this year. Everyone seemed to
>enjoy it and mentioned how good the service was. I made it very clear
>beforehand what the group would be, I insisted on use of the ladie's
>room for everyone, and told the manager that if I heard of one instance
>of someone being called 'Sir' that it would affect the tip. All in
>nice conversation but I got my point across. I don't think there would
>have been potential problems anyway but I mostly wanted to make sure
>the staff was courteous. We are invited back next year with open arms
>BTW.
Not to change the subject, but I was very impressed with Carluccio's,
the atmosphere, the service, and of course the food.
I think this should be a "definite" for 2004!
We now return to our regular program, already in progress ... :)
>I think we are facing a lot of changes and considerations as Diva grows
>and grows. Maybe we tend to lose sight of the anxiety of the first
>timer and those who have recently discovered themselves. I wonder how
>many girls didn't go out later in the evening to other places because
>they thought they might not be able to use a restroom facility.
Related is the last mailing's first-hand report, considering skipping
mainstream activities due to potential restroom issues.
Over the years, activity turnout for things in very public places has
(in general) been somewhat lower than for those in "safe" venues and
I'm now wondering how much the uncertainty factor regarding restrooms
played a part in the decision of some to not attend.
>Frankly, I see absolutely nothing wrong with advance set-up, either as
>a group or leaving it up to the individuals. In a group we are going
>to be read, regardless. I think we should have the first timers in
>mind when thinking about going to mainstream venues. We have seen a
>couple of examples the last two years where they have deeply affected
>the girls involved, first timers or long timers. I just don't see the
>big deal if it prevents even only one girl from going thru that
>experience again. Just my opinion.
>I am certainly open for criticism..... we touch on this subject off and
>on during the year and I would really like to go into depth with it
>this year on the ORG list. I don't mean just "I agree" or "I
>disagree".... I mean discussion. I'll start it off by asking anyone to
>please counter my opinion that there is nothing wrong with advance
>setup for use of the ladie's room.
I think all points, opinions, and ideas are valid discussion points here
at this time.
Up until now, my preference, both for myself and for the group, was to
fly under the radar. To be nonobvious to the point that when one of us
does have to go, it will not attract unwanted attention, hence the
requests to not go in groups, be quiet when going, etc.
This obviously did not work this year.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Restroom and mainstream comments:
Tina writes:
>>being involved in one of these can be a real hard kick to take.
>Very hard. And it doesn't matter how much experience you have. Any
>kind of major harassment still knocks you back significantly. Even
>something minor like being redirected by management away from the public
>ladies room to a semi-private restroom at Baton at Pinkfest last fall
>was surprising.
Am I missing something? I don't remember anything like that at Pinkfest.
>>restroom incidents spoil vacations, and we need to do what we can to
>>prevent them.
>And harassing incidents in general. When Danny and I were entering
>Hamburger Mary for the Tuesday dinner (recall that I was in boymode),
>we saw two little girls with their family who were also entering. They
>were pointing and snickering at various DLV girls ahead of them in line
>to enter. Fortunately, the DLV girls didn't see this. I didn't get a
>chance to see the parents' reaction to a bar full of t*-girls.
I must be missing a lot. I do remember some families with kids at HM
this year (we were seated toward the front windows, not in the main
dining room) and I don't remember either the parents or the kids there
appearing to pay any attention to our group, which was taking up most of
the main dining room. I remember one family in a booth by the window in
front of me. They were having their meal and paying absolutely no
attention to the others.
>>IIRC, what this referred to are the unisex restrooms that have started
>>to appear in some places and are designated with both the male and
[munch]
>Maybe we can build up a list of locations of these unisex bathrooms for
>our mainstream locations for next year. It would never hurt to have
>such practical knowledge.
I'm definitely going to bring this up in front of the ad-hoc committee
as a suggestion. Thanks.
It might also be good to note these locations on the "big list" as well.
>>>>I have always held the opinion that 'laying the groundwork' is the
>>>>way
>>>I for one do disagree with this policy. Where does it start and stop.
>>>If one CD goes to a mainstream place does she call / write ahead and
>>>ask for a restroom? Is it 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100? Where does it start
>I agree 100% with Michelle (NZ) on this.
>Every time there have been these so-called "special" arrangements
>made, I never heard about them until after I got back home.
>And I don't like other people bargaining away my right to use the
>restroom of the gender that I'm dressed as. If the establishment
>wishes to bar me, then I'll leave and almost certainly never come
>back.
>But let them deal with me and my behavior/dress/presentation at that
>time and place. And I certainly don't ever remember the ORG group
>authorizing anyone to make such negotiations.
We've never authorized anybody to negotiate anything on behalf of
DLV, but we've never prohibited anybody from doing it either.
Our ORG group has always been very laid back WRT what our people can do
on behalf of DLV. Until now we've let people who have the initiative to
do about anything run with it and do it.
This is another good subject for the ad-hoc committee to address. Yes,
I agree that the word on these arrangements has not been effectively
spread.
Also, when management or security confronts somebody, it is usually
the first one identified as being with our group, using whatever visual
means they use, meaning first one read is the first one confronted.
Anyway, these are two good points for the ad-hoc committee to hash out.
. . . . .
>>>>>Yes, I know there are some callings for more mainstream venues, but if
<snip>
>>I think we should be more mainstream but I also think the mainstream
>>activities need to be sized appropriately for venue. This will be a
>>challenge for all activities in the future if DLV continues to increase
>>in size (number of attendees)
>Well, here I disagree. I like our current balance of mainstream and
>semi-protected establishments in the GLBT community.
The more I think about it, the more I think our balance is optimal. The
majority of the survey responses indicate most of the Teeming Millions
agree.
>As our numbers have gotten larger, more less-experienced people have
>attended and mainstream doesn't work as well for them, IMO.
>Two-tracking main-stream and more protected events is OK, as long as
>we don't give a false illusion of safety to newbies at the mainstream
>events and then have problems.
>It would only take one major blow-up/confrontation/fight/group
>eviction at a major show/dinner/event for 50-60 less experienced DLV
>girls to feel what only a few have so far. Personally, I'm not ready to
>recreate Stonewall in Las Vegas.
One good conclusion to that last point is that we are on vacation, and
our purpose is to have a good time, and not to test limits, or to make
social/political statements.
I know most of our people want to have a hassle-free vacation.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Administrivia:
This is the Diva Las Vegas 2004 organizational list.
One address for all items regarding this list, additions, removals,
changes, submissions, questions, etc.:
dlvorg@geekbabe.com <--- NOTE: all lower case
Please do not send binary attachments (photos, etc.) directly to the
list, as the list processor will not properly handle them. If you want
to send photos and the like, mail to: annie@annie.net
Archives of this list appear on the web at:
http://www.geekbabe.com/annie/org04arc/
To unsubscribe: Simply reply to this message with the word UNSUBSCRIBE
in either the Subject: field or the first line of an OTHERWISE BLANK
message body. The word "unsubscribe" (case is insignificant) should be
the only item in the subject field or the first line of the message,
justified to the left.
NOTE: WHEN UNSUBSCRIBING, THE FROM: LINE OF YOUR UNSUBSCRIBE MESSAGE
>>MUST<< HAVE THE SAME ADDRESS AS WHAT WE USE TO SEND TO YOU. IF IT
DOES NOT, THE UNSUBSCRIBE WILL FAIL, AND YOU MAY NOT GET A FAILURE
NOTICE. SPELLING COUNTS.
Please pay attention to the above. Many automated unsubscribe requests
fail for this reason.
To send material to this list: Send submission as regular e-mail to
the address: dlvorg@geekbabe.com
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon May 26 2003 - 12:12:31 CDT