I haven’t been back to Evanston much in the last 10 years, but I went to college there and spent a good bit of time there afterwards. I really liked the way they controlled development. Bagging your own food at BK was kind of silly but it gave the town some character - I’d much rather see downtown filled with independent coffee shops, cafes and bookstores than chain pubs. NU students (at least in my day) didn’t need to leave campus to drink or see scantily clad women. In fact it was much easier to drink on campus if you were underaged than it was to do so at a place that checked ID.
If that’s what the voters, town council and mayor of Evanston want, more power to them.
I never said nobody but Evanston residents had the right to hold or express an opinion. I just think that ultimately, a) they are wasting their time, and b) the opinions of the people who actually live in the community are far more important.
True story on this subject: rumor has it that there are something like 70 churches in Evanston (I’ve never counted, but it wouldn’t surprise me), which is roughly one church per 1,000 residents, some of whom are Jewish, Muslim, atheist, etc.
I was on the planning committee for the 20th reunion of Evanston Township High School (the only local public high school), Class of ’86. One other person on the committee, who shall remain nameless, frequently asked us to schedule planning meetings around her church schedule (we usually met on Sunday afternoons), which would have been fine with most of us if she’d actually shown up most of the time or, you know, done any work. As the date approached, some of us were generally getting pretty annoyed with her. So you can imagine the reaction when, at our last meeting, she showed up late, and as we were about to break up, mentioned that she thought we really ought to post a list of church services by the door at the reunion, you know, in case anyone wanted to go to church the morning after (the main event was planned for Saturday night).
The main planner and I (her especially) just about went ballistic, pointing out that a) everyone in attendance had grown up in Evanston and knew damn well where to find a church service if they so chose; b) there are literally half a dozen churches within a couple of blocks of the reunion site in downtown Evanston; c) we didn’t think a reunion of a public high school was an appropriate place to be promoting religious activity, period; and d) we were both raised at least nominally Jewish anyway and found the idea offensive.
Oh, and at 2:30 Sunday morning, as the reunion was breaking up, she asked me to approach the owners of the restaurant where we held it (who were actually our classmates) and essentially strong-arm them to donate a chunk of the proceeds to charity (of her choosing). I told her no way, the ticket price had been kept low on purpose to make it easier for more people to attend, and the guy was entitled to make a profit given that he’d taken the risk of shutting down his restaurant on Saturday night with no profit guarantee at all, and if she wanted to discuss charitable contributions from the class, the time to do that was before the ticket price was set. And people wonder why I’m not on the committee for the 25th reunion…
Last year, another Hooters clone called Show-Me’s applied for a license to operate here in Naperville. Of course there were howls of protest. Some compared the place to a strip club, and terms like “pornographic” and “obscene” were tossed around. It was pretty ridiculous.
The mayor (who is also the liquor commissioner) granted the license on some sort of probationary terms; I don’t know all the details. They opened in January and as far as I know there has been no trouble there. I’ve been by a couple times and it’s a pretty cool place with decent food. The waitresses basically wear shorts and T-shirts; it’s not that big a deal.
The implication is taxpaying and voting residents. Sure they live there, but most vote, if they vote, “back home” absentee, and don’t pay too much in local taxes.
I am hardly a prude but I can understand their decision. No it is not a strip club, but they have an interest in keeping that particular section of their downtown looking more upscale than a lower class version of Hooter’s. American Apparel does not have as much potential to appear like “broken windows” to other potential tenants. Downtown development is always a tricky balance between selling a certain ambiance with the right mix of stores and the risk of having empty storefronts. They think they can do better for their overall development by aiming higher and in that section of town they likely can.
(Personally I’m guessing that the name trades more on the fact that Tilted kilT gives the visual impression of the word “tit” more than implying an erection … Hooters like but just a bit more vulgar.)
I know I’m going to honk some people off here, but It seems to me that the actual majority of residents don’t care and the vocal minority that do spurred the campaign to prevent the Kilt from opening.
What it boils down to IMO is that there’s a restaurant with waitresses whose presence makes the mayor feel fat. Everywhere you see an adult-themed restaurant or club begin to examine the business climate, the bitter old biddies, the too-right, holier than thou church goers and the hairy-armed feminists come roaring out of the closet blathering on about values and how women are being objectified and taken advantage of. It’s all crap.
This stupidity recently happened in Naperville too with the “Show-Me’s” franchise.
Which judging from the comments of this young lady, whose mother needs to be talked to by DCFS…
“I’ve been living here for 14 years, my whole life,” said protester Emma Sliwinski. “I don’t want to see this godforsaken place loaded with drunks, drug addicts and strippers.”
Naperville is similarly chock-a-block with tight-assed puritans, but not so that it didn’t open for business. Bottom line; cash in the coffers beats none. I used to have reason to go to Evanston (not the least of which being Edzo’s Burgers, the single best burger I have ever had). Shame about that.
I’m sure you’re riight, because this is often the case in politics, especially local politics. If you can get a committed core of people together to fight for a cause, that’s often all you need at the municipal level.
You should have quit while you were ahead. This is simply retarded.
It’s OK, **BJ, **you didn’t honk me off. Because whether you’re right or wrong, your side still lost and we won. Holla at your tight-assed puritans, WOOT!!
Don’t you mean mentally challenged? Of course it’s not as simplistic as I made it sound, but I’ve been witness to the same nonsense at least a half dozen times. I’ve bounced at several gentlemen’s clubs, did security for dancers at private parties, and at more than one place there were local protests and each and every time, when they were complaining to or amongst themselves in a place they assumed they were out of earshot, the conversation always went back to the way the girls were dressed, how ‘tarted up’ they were and how ‘slutty’ they looked. Each of the complainers were tired, worn-out mommy types who’d given up all attachment to outward romantic femininity if there was ever any there in the first place. The talk was always privately tinged with jealousy, anger and bitterness when it wasn’t blatant.
Frankly, it’s deeper than that though, at least to me. Americans as a group are frightened of sexuality. We don’t embrace it, we hide it. It’s a pervasive sickness, the human body is as natural as it gets. If those girls were being hacked to death in a movie, well, that would be fine, but serve a hamburger and they’re the enemy. It’s pathetic.
You know, the point may be true but this is a poor example of it. There is big difference between accepting the human body as natural and pandering to frat boy sensibilities. This is not trying to prevent breast feeding in public or putting a leaf over Michelangelo’s David’s penis. This is about having a place that sells ogling ample tittes pushed up and over as the face of a very particular community’s downtown district. A community that has houses like this in the surrounding blocks, that they’d really like to be able to sell.
Evanston doesn’t have any problem with art that contains nudes in public view and I’ve seen mothers breast feed in public there commonly without anyone batting an eye. Having their downtown district be identifiably sexually exploitive though, treating the body not as something natural but as something to be ogled at, that is something different. Not wanting your downtown to have an appearance of selling sexploitation ≠ puritanical.
The Naperville “Show Me” issue is a different circumstance. It is not in the downtown section; it is on a major exurban arterial across from the Discount Tire store, a Budget Rent a Car and an H&R Block. The highest end business nearby are an Einstein’s Bagel, a Quizno’s, and a Mexican restaurant.
Our op’s Des Plaines? That 'burb doesn’t even really have a downtown but they have been trying to revitalize what they have with “The Metropolitan Square” project, anchored by a Shop 'N Save. Would they be thrilled to have the other major tenant be a low end Hooter’s rip-off? Somehow, even with their recession hit community, I think not. And why not? Because it would be harder to rent the office space units to any higher end businesses with that as the face of the development.
Honestly, your mind reading about what romance tired mommy types may have later that day because they aren’t dolled up to come out to protest, and how much you know what their comments were really tinged with, and how much they objected to having girls presented in a “slutty” way, informs little on how a particular community chooses to develop.
THANK YOU. The Evanston I know is full of hippie women with distinctly left-ish political sensibility (present company mostly included). This isn’t about having issues with the female form; it’s about the commercialization of sexuality in a place where it is visible to everyone all the time. And I am really disgusted by the implication that the women who oppose the Tilted Kilt are doing so because they ain’t gettin’ any action.
Why? An opinion that is narrowminded, provincial, poorly reasoned, or fundamentally dishonest does not become less so through physical proximity to the subject of the opinion.
“Waste of time” is another rather threadbare gambit, that bespeaks an inability to come up with an actual argument. We’re all here because we’ve got some spare time, and we want to waste it. Outside of the occasional charity drive in MPSIMS, there are almost no posts on this board against which one could not level that accusation. But I suspect you do not make a habit of doing so when the subject of a thread does not strike so (if you’ll pardon the pun) close to home.
Certainly, the actions of the inhabitants of Evanston are not going to be influenced by what happens on this board. The same can be said for the European Union, Saudi Arabia, the Fox Network, or the David Letterman show. We still discuss these subjects, because this is a discussion board.
The be honest, I’m fine with Evanston’s decision on this. Maybe I’m just turning into a crotchety old man, but I would hate for Evanston to turn into yet another generic strip-mall suburb. It’s already balancing the thin line between “suburb with identity” and “just another place close to Chicago.” If the council and the residents feel they don’t need that type of business in the middle of the community, that’s fine with me. If I were to choose to be a resident of Evanston, I wouldn’t want that crap uglifying my downtown, either.
Completely agree with this. While i think that it’s good to have an open-minded attitude about sex and sexuality, too often calls for greater “open-mindedness” are little more than an excuse to look at someone’s tits.
I’m still not sure that the decision to reject this application was a good one, especially in an economic environment where cities could use any business that creates jobs and brings in revenue. And i still can’t get too worked up about these sorts of places (even if i would never set foot inside one), because they’re really not that hard to avoid, and in my experience they don’t cause any more problems for a neighborhood or a community than most other restaurant/bar type establishments.
Seriously, if the argument is that it’s a neighborhood that would be harmed by the type of customers and fringe types that would be drawn – drunken, loud fratboys, etc., I can buy it.
But if the issue is just “tits on display,” then, really, the whole reason that tits on display draw a seedy element is that society at large doesn’t put enough tits on display. Stop restricting it and people won’t go crazy when they see them.
Of course it’s not as simplistic as I made it sound, but I’ve been witness to the same nonsense at least a half dozen times. I’ve bounced at several gentlemen’s clubs, did security for dancers at private parties, and at more than one place there were local protests and each and every time, when they were complaining to or amongst themselves in a place they assumed they were out of earshot, the conversation always went back to the way the girls were dressed, how ‘tarted up’ they were and how ‘slutty’ they looked. Each of the complainers were tired, worn-out mommy types who’d given up all attachment to outward romantic femininity if there was ever any there in the first place. The talk was always privately tinged with jealousy, anger and bitterness when it wasn’t blatant.