Monday, April 27, 2009

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom Moving On

SELLER: Gavin Newsom
LOCATION: Green Street, San Francisco, CA
PRICE : $2,995,000
SIZE: 1,693 square feet, 1 bedroom and 1.5 bathrooms
DESCRIPTION: This 1-of-a-kind Russian Hill Penthouse is located in a prestigious full service doorman building, Bellaire Tower, an amazing Art Deco style building designed by noted architect BAUMANN, H.C. This residence was completely remodeled & stripped to the studs & designed by Michael Agins & Assoc. Interior Design firm in SF. This spectacular residence offers the best landmark Vus SF has to offer including 3 Bridges & water VUS from all rms. In unit lry, wired for surround sound, strge, pkg & rf dk.

YOUR MAMAS NOTES: All morning long we've been receiving email after email after email from real estate obsessed San Franciscans directing Your Mama to a myriad of reports that reveal the fetching and slick haired mayor of San Francisco Gavin Newsom recently plunked his Russian Hill penthouse on the market with an asking price of $2,995,000.

The smooth talking and socially progressive Mister Newsom became a political super star in 2004 when he took the controversial step of allowing marriage licenses to be issued for gay guys and lesbian ladees. We all know what's become of that. Can the children say Proposition 8? However, he of the glittering and perfect chompers recently tossed his hot potato carrying hat into the ring to become the next governor of California. Lefty liberal Mister Newsom sitting up in the governer's chair in Sacramento is a scenario that no doubt scares the beejeezis out of homophobes all up and down the great Golden State who imagine that if homos and lezzies are allowed to get married the institution of marriage would somehow be compromised. Pleeze. That is just stoopid. Married heterosexual people seem to do a fine job of screwing up their marriages without any help from the gays and lesbians. None the less, we are not here to get all frothed up on our soap box so let's just move on to the real estate. (And p.s., homosexual bashing comments will be removed so spare yourself the effort.)

A peep into the records on Property Shark shows the entrepreneurial Mister Newsom snatched up his 1,693 square foot unit in February of 2006 when he paid family friend Peter Getty–brother of Mister Newsom's former bizness benefactor and boozum buddy Billy Getty–$2,350,000 for the 1 bedroom and 1.5 bathroom Green Street aerie.

The Newsom nest is located on the 20th floor of the beautiful Bellaire Tower, an Art Deco extravaganza built in 1930 and has wrap around views that stretch from the gorgeous Golden Gate Bridge, across to Marin County, over downtown and the TransAmerica Pyramid and all the way down to the hard working Bay Bridge.

An ride up the elegant elevator leads to the front door which opens to an entrance hall and an adjacent powder pooper for guests. The apartment pivots around a sizable central living room which has a wood burning fireplace, arched windows that frame the views and a brown and beige day-core done by a nice gay and local decorator named Michael Algin that is part Jonathan Adler and part Rose Tarlow. Okay, truth be told, we don't actually know if he's gay so lay off.

Anyhoo, to the left of the living room is a media room with more brown and white day-core, a dee-voonly cozy looking chocolate brown velvet sofa, and a giant flat screen tee-vee for catching up on all the reality programs Your Mama would bet our long bodied bitches Linda and Beverly are one of Mister Newsom's many guilty pleasures. Behind the media room is a slightly too narrow dining room with Palladian windows, dark chocolate brown walls and a huge abstract painting that is, quite frankly, to much of the same brown and white color as the rest of the room (and apartment). Like in the living room, where an orange color field painting has been hung above the fireplace, it is our humble and meaningless opinion that something more colorful would really help the dining room from looking, well, a little bit dead. Plus we don't like the lack of a chandelier in here. We assume a pendant fixture was nixed in order to keep sight lines of the big views clutter free, but we really like a chandelier in the dining room.

The gore-may kitchen is bathed in Calcutta marble counter tops atop white cabinets, brown paint, and includes an expensive suite of stainless steel appliances including Viking brand range and microwave, SubZero refrigerator/freezer and a Marvel wine cooler and beverage refrigerator. The trio of arched niches for displaying stemware and booze are far too decoratively gimmicky for our personal taste. According to the floor plan, a door leads to the service hallway and a large pantry and laundry room is tucked away off the kitchen.

On the right side of the living room is a beige library/den with both arched and Palladian style windows, another velvet sofa and a collection of books that all appear to have similar bindings which makes them really more about impressing guests than about reading. Beyond the library is the brown and beige bedroom which offers a giant walk in closet with marble counters, custom built-in, drawers, wall mirror and laundry hamper. The bathroom is painted a pewtery sort of beige with grey veined marble on the floor, half way up the walls, on the counter top and in the steam shower where we can imagine Mister Newsom sweats out the toxins from City Hall.

By any estimation, nearly three million clams for a 1 bedroom apartment in San Francisco is a screaming amount of money. However, listings in the very desirable 65-unit Bellaire Tower are exceedingly rare which, of course, tends to keep prices through the roof even in a lackluster economy. The people at Property Shark show that between February of 2006 and June of 2008 not a single apartment transferred ownership and since 2000 and in fact only 10 units have changed hands since July of 2000. Monthly maintenance charges are $1,414.73 and all that moolah pays for the water and garbage services, the 24-hour doorman, building insurance, earthquake insurance, steam heating, storage, care of the common areas including the roof garden and valet parking, because who wants to park their own damn car if they don't have to?

Given that Mister Newsom and his ack-turuss wifey Jennifer Siebel Newsom are with baby, we imagine their next residence will be a bit more family friendly, no less impressive and, we hope, less brown and beige than their soon to be ex-penthouse.


Anonymous said...

Man, that's a whole lotta brown/taupe! Pretty, but I need some cool colors in there somewhere.

I've always thought him very handsome, but there is something about him that also seems a bit shady. Of course, I do not know the man and this is all just perception.

Anonymous said...

The views! My god, the views!

Getty and Newsom are long-time friends and business partners. I'd bet my long-bodied bitches, if I had them, that when Getty sold it to Newsom, some kind of financial shenanigans went down. Most of the money and connections Newsom brought to office comes from working with his very wealthy friend.

don't mind the brown so much, as this was a bachelor pad and seems to suit a single-guy vibe.

killer location, too. Interesting to see how the listing fares.

Anonymous said...

Meant to add to my post that the full listing and LOTS of photos, including a floorplan, can be seen here:

Anonymous said...


StPaulSnowman said...

Someone has an arched window fetish. I really like arched windows but looking at these photos is like a desensitizing exercise. A mixture of window shapes would have added interest.

Anonymous said...

You gays love to claim free speech unless it goes against your belief. If you want to editorialize about the benefits of gay marriage, why not allow opposing opinions. What are you afraid of?

Anonymous said...

Ill stray a bit from the opinions so far and confess that I love the place. While I agree the arched windows get to be a bit redundant, and Mama is quite right that a few pieces of art ought to be swapped out to breathe some life into the place....its exactly the sort of boutique-y pied-a-terre I would lurv to have in San Fran (or Chicago)

Renaissance Man said...

I actually like the way the arched niches in the kitchen echo the arched windows of the den, living room and library. I find the decor soothing yet elegant. I could live here.

Anonymous said...

Just drive down S. Monica Blvd. if you want to understand the benefits of straight marriage.

Should children have to be forced to grow up seeing this lifestyle?

Straight marriage prevents society from turning into Sodom or ancient Greece.

Anonymous said...

mama said "(And p.s., fag bashing comments will be removed so spare yourself the effort.)"

Does this mean it is okay now to refer to gays as fags? Or is it only okay for gays to use the word fag?

Your Mama said...

Sorry hunny, we meant to edit out that "fag" word but we forgot. We're not bothered by the word when it's used in a non-hateful sort of way, but we understand that some folks are.

P.S. We are not editorializing about the benefits of gay marriage. We just don't care to have OUR blog turn into a clearing house for Fred Phelps types who want to spew a lot of silly nonsense about Gavin Newsom being the anti-christ or some shit. You're free to believe and say whatever you want, but those spewing hate can save it for someone else's blog.

Anonymous said...

sweet but no terrace..........

Anonymous said...

Mama, just because the majority of people are against Gay marriage does not make them haters. They just want to preserve a sane society that does not decay.

It is not a cogent argument that since some straight marriages do not work out, it justifies Gay marriage as an alternative.

You just have to look at the past to know the future. Societies that practiced decadent sexual behaviors were destroyed by the internal moral decay. This is not some "Bible" story, but rather history.

And this is not hate speech, just the facts.

Anonymous said...

What about the societies that no longer exist and disappeared due to reasons having nothing to do with "internal moral decay?" Like the Incans? The Aztecs? Or the Pharoahs in Egypt? The Nubians? Or the Vikings? All taken down by decadent sexual behaviors?

Anonymous said...

nobody wants to talk about the terrace?

Anonymous said...

If you would like a quick response without my further research of the Nubians or Vikings sexual behavior, I would say that societies which have embraced traditional values have preserved such as Judaic-Christian.

But this is changing and if you look at modern America, Europe or even Israel, the secular value system is causing tremendous spiritual strife with the high divorce rate, lack of children, disease and a general social malaise which can be felt by any thinking human. Be honest, the correlation must not be overlooked.

Princess Shotsavodka said...

where is the real estate blog? i must be thoughter than I drunk

Anonymous said...

Mama never do SF again. Look at what you started

Anonymous said...

Sorry to spoil everybody's fun as I also love real estate even though I am straight with children.

But if Mama wants to start with morality it goes 2 ways.

Anonymous said...

$3 million for a 1 bedroom, 1 bathroom place????
What kind of colossal moron would pay that for that place?
That is retarded.

Anonymous said...

"sweet but no terrace.........."

I have a terrace and have enjoyed it about once in 30 years. It can be very cold, foggy and miserable in San Francisco and really, on average, doesn't get higher than 80even in the summer time.

Even the evergreen plants I have are sad little things and are only there as decorative at best.

As to the apartment's heavy on the brown look: Think Nate Berkus circa pre-tsunami.

luke220 said...

I love the symmetry of the plan but hate the brown. Also, I think there should be a door past the powder room into the kitchen.

Geneva B. said...

Sorry to burst the bubbles of all you family values types but you're just pissing in the wind because whether you like it or not gay marriage is on it's way. Why? Because in the end it really isn't a moral issue, it's a civil rights issue and in this country, we protect the rights of minority populations even if it does sometimes take a while for the general population to get their minds around it. Remember, once upon a time it was immoral and a pox on society for races to mingle and even worse for them to marry. But look at us now? We got Heidi Klum and Seal on the cover of US magazine grinning like Cheshire cats and talking about their bi-racial babies.

As for the apartment, it's a chocolate brown hot mess. lots of good ideas but some seriously bad and over wrought those cabinets in the kitchen which are just plain awful in my book.

Anonymous said...

Can you imagine the nighttime views? A bit pricey though.

BTW, str8 guy here. It is a civil rights issue. Gays and Lesbian Americans pay taxes and are citizens who should enjoy all the rights as anyone else.

Gay unions don't affect my marriage one wit. I can make my lovely wife mad at me all on my own.

Anonymous said...

it is nice, to the extent that it appears to have good bones (which the mayor evidently has "one"), and that any buyer would likely inject their own personality into it rather than keep the staged effect this pad exudes. with that said, it doesn't look like he ever lived there so the juicier news would have been to see what his real lifestyle was like. the sanitized, ready-to-sell unit can easily be modified with a minimum of effort...provided one can afford the asking price, property taxes, and the monthly hoa's!

Anonymous said...

i need the terrace so i can smoke my medical refeerwanna

Anonymous said...

sorry to be harsh children, but this is not a civil rights issue. Blacks overwhelmingly oppose Gay Marriage and they should know.

Tell me, what rights do you not have?

Could you vote, drink water from any fountain, sit in front of the bus, go to every school, live in any neighborhood?

You're acting like spoiled children who didn't get dessert. Stop complaining and grow up. The majority of the World does not want Gay Marriage. The very definition of marriage is between a man and a woman.

Just admit that the only reason that you want Gay marriage is for acceptance of being Gay from your Mommy and Daddy. You don't want this for the piece of paper.

But you will never be able to convince anybody to accept what is not right or Moral.

Grow up and do what is right for the world, not just yourself.

Euphemia Gladstone, Phd said...

until the 60's a man and a woman who were of different races could not legally get married. And every penthouse should have a terrace, regardless of weather.

Anonymous said...

str8 guy here again. Curious 9:45, can Gay and Lesbian Americans claim survivor Social Security Benefits?

Yet I can because I can marry. Gay and Lesbian Americans cannot.

Why does this private matter scare you so? Gay marriage has no effect on me or my healthy family. Life is so short and so hard sometimes. When 2 people find love, don't you think we should support that? I do.

Peace and Justice.

Oh, and the apartment is still too expensive!!!!

Placenta Robinson said...

9;45 obviously has homo issues, probably another brutha on the damn down low.....

Viva! said...

I like the symmetry of the place, but it's clearly a bachelor pad or a place for empty nesters.

The colour scheme doesn't bother me, a few gallons of paint fix that mess up nicely.

Finally, gay marriage is a civil rights issue. If a gay patient is in a life threatening medical situation, his or her partner can't make decisions on their behalf because they aren't married. There's a right that only marriage provides.

Gay marriage has nothing to do with me and my family (though who knows who my kids will marry, love is love) so why should it bother me?

Anonymous said...

In my Western European Country there is gay marriage and there are no social problems.

But living in Alabama as a gay couple is a bit more interesting then in San Francisco.

Anonymous said...


You say, "Finally, gay marriage is a civil rights issue. If a gay patient is in a life threatening medical situation, his or her partner can't make decisions on their behalf because they aren't married. There's a right that only marriage provides."

Actually, a Medical Power of Attorney can provide just what you say cannot be provided - it allows anyone to make medical decisions on behalf of someone who can't. You don't have to be married. The argument that partners cannot make medical decisions for someone unless married is not true.

NewYorkQueer said...

Dearest Mama
A simple covering of a penthouse in San Francisco causing such verbal tumult. The floor plan is delicious and San Francisco needs as many luxe one bedroom apartments as it can get. I assume the widow shapes, interesting though too many, are demanded by the exterior design of the building. Little can be done about that other than perhaps a future use of cleaver window coverings, the colors, lack of, are just dated and ready for another gay decor-ate-or to change up to 2009. Inclusion of a few pictures of the views would have been nice and i do agree that an out door space, even the smallest of terraces would be a delight here.

Now about this marriage issue, straights marriages last about a year for 2 out of 3 so who needs it. But bride after bride does get to wear one of those ugly assed dresses again and again or her perfect day after perfect day after perfect day... Straight people are so stoop-id Mama, or just willfully blind to their reality. Wake up straight people we have never wanted to be you, we just want all the laws protecting you to protect us as well. 'Nough said

Now Mama about that appalling lack of a proper light fixture over the dining room table. I dont accept television viewing sight lines as an excuse, whatever happened to conversation over a meal afterall?

Anonymous said...

The only appealing thing about this place is the entrance. What a drab mess; I would have expected something more colorful from such a vivid personality.

I have no issues with gay folks, gay adoptions, gay marriage. That being said, if Newsom becomes governor, he'll probably raise taxes and make it even more difficult and costly to do business in California, a state that is already teetering on BK. It's a very scary thought.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, a bit too heavy on the brown, and a few too many arches, but I like it.

Straight guy here, and I have always looked at this marriage thing in a very logical way. There are MANY rights afforded to married couples that an unmarried couple don't get. Perfect example - perhaps the buyers of this very apartment. Obviously, one must be quite well off to afford this place. Assume it's a straight married couple and one dies - no federal estate tax is paid until the survivor dies. Now assume it's an unmarried gay couple, who can't marry - one dies (assume he/she has the money), and his estate will pay a big estate tax upon the death, and the survivor only gets the net...which may not be enough for him/her to keep their home.

Sure, this will only apply to the
"very" rich, but it's a right nonetheless denied to gay couples because they can't marry.

Anonymous said...

The dark paint offsets the arched windows too much. A paler wall color would allow the windows to be less graphic and more integrated. It's way too "done" and in your face. This building has magnificent views though.

On Newsom: most San Franciscans can't stand him. He's a total climber, social, financial and every other way. Empty suit except for gay marriage issue, which is commendable.

Anonymous said...

Anon 6:51--Views and more photos can be seen at the link posted in one of the first posts here. Also, I thought Mama meant that the lighting fixture would obscure the views out the windows. I could be wrong there. Thanks for pointing out that the owner most likely has no control over the window shapes as this a well loved 1930s building and I doubt the bldg owners would allow any condo owner to just put in any size or shape windows they desire. That would be a bigger mess from the outside of the building.

Anonymous said...

Chocolate mess - too dark, overpriced, and the decor is too predictable. Marble kitchen counters? Unless the whole purpose of this kitchen is decoration, these counters need to be ripped out and replaced with something that will not be ruined by a drop of orange juice.

I knows what's so shifty about Newsom - he looks like Mitt Romney! Don't like either...

Regarding gay rights - anyone has a foreign spouse? Try to bring the love of your life into this country without being married (and you will understand why so many people come illegally). Just another example of rights that nothing but marriage can provide, and this is not small change. Even my [obviously straight] mildly homophobic husband does not care if gays marry, what's wrong with you people? You can't have it both ways - you can't say that you oppose gay marriage on moral grounds and say you have nothing against gays - because that's exactly what it means - you do. Call yourseves bigots and be done with it.

Anonymous said...

It's so upsetting that real estate types, even the gay ones, mis-identify any arched window as Palladian. A Palladian window contains three parts: an arched center section flanked by smaller straight-topped, er...non-gay topped, er...flat-topped side sections. Palladio was a classical Italian architect (gay?) who prominently used this design in his magnificant buildings.

Anonymous said...

Gavin Newsom's penthouse looks like a brown bag of crap. The building is stellar, the views are unbearably stunning and some of the finishes are excellent. But the self-conscious interior is a parody of itself.

As for the other matter on the table...

With a lot of legal wrangling and considerable expense gay couples can secure MOST but not all of the "rights" granted automatically to married couples.

One exception is the ability to file taxes jointly, which can be of great financial benefit to married couples.

But why should gay couples have to bear the trouble and tremendous expense of creating parenting agreements and health care proxies and all that legal mumbo jumbo when straight people are not required to go through the same measures to secure their rights of survivorship and etc?

I personally don't care if "the church" sanctions gay marriage or not. That's a religious matter than I choose not to engage. However, in this country we have a separation of church and state and therefore I do care how the state acts in regards to minority populations (be they of race, creed or gender).

It's simply unfair, morally and otherwise, to deny certain civil rights to some but grant them to others. Isn't that kind of the definition of discrimination? Whether a person approves of "Adam and Steve" or not, is not relevant to the larger issue of "fairness" and equality under the law.

Gay people do not crave the approval of homophobes or religious fundamentalists. I can assure those that oppose gay marriage and gay people that most gay people such as myself could care less if all straight people approve of our homosexuality. But I do get angry when straight people try to relegate me to the proverbial back of the bus.

Once upon a time the same sorts of people who oppose gay marriage criminalized sex and relationships between people of different races and we all know how that ugliness was finally put down. Or do we have to hear now about how marriages between blacks and whites have torn decent society asunder?

All that said, it really doesn't matter if the anti-gay types don't want gay's absolutely going to become legal in this country. It's already legal in Mass, Conn. Iowa and soon to be in Vermont. You can count on that trend spreading. And when it does, all us gays and lesbians (and sympathetic straights) are going to be laughing and laughing and laughing all the way down the aisle while homophobes stomp their feet in frustration and defeat and religious dogmatists start screaming about the apocalypse.

Mike Cook said...

Anon 7:08 - Thank you for the laugh!

He does look a bit shady, doesn't he?

The layout is a bit wonky, but those views...

Anonymous said...

I wonder where I could get rugs like those? Ive looked hither and yon for a simple graphic rug to anchor my living room, and damned if I can find a decent one.

Professor Erich Von Spiegeldorfer said...

marriage = 1 robot, 1 octopus

Anonymous said...

from Presidio Heights Princess

I live in SF and have many stories about Gavin... that said, for a "recovering alcoholic" (his excuse for the affair with his best friends wife), there is alotta liquor on the shelves.

What he has done to our city is horrible, and I truly hope he doesn't succeed in his run for guv as I don't believe the state could survive it.

pch said...

That goofball Jesus. Spent all his time talking about loving thy neighbor, even the self-righteous hypocrite, and the dude totally forgot to mention how we had to be sure not to treat the gays like equals or, you know, society would implode.

And here, all this time, I thought societal collapse had more to do with things like Visigoths, economic mismanagement and political corruption. My bad!

Call me crazy but I consider it a sign of moral decay that some people see nothing wrong with blithely depriving fellow citizens of basic civil rights.

so_chic_darling said...

So Chic Darling has not been commenting so much here on my beloved Realestalker because singning in is a real PAIN.
The apartment, paint it white give me the keys and let me start my dream life in San Francisco, I love it!
Gay marriage? I don't want that as I am against religion BUT I want my equal rights as n American citizen.
I lived with my partner here in New York for 4 years and he could not get a green card as he is not from here. How come straight people can marry anyone from any country and get them an instant green card?
He gave up because he had an MBA from a top American university but couldn't use it, he did not want to pick strawberries or be a dishwasher.
Now I go home at night to the dog I got him for his 30th birthday, is that fair?

so_chic_darling said...

Dear Vinyl Village the rug is on Pottery Barn's website

Alessandra said...

I didn't realize that real estate had anything to do with legalizing gay marriage.

Besides, if those wall could talk, they'd say, "Bring it, honey..."

lil' gay boy said...

Neither did I, Alessandra.

Why is it so hard for people to distinguish between a civil ceremony & a religious sacrament?

I certainly DON'T want my Catholic Church's (or any others') blessing; I just want the protections under law, without having to second guess, pre-plan for every contingency, and spend thousands in legal fees just so I'll be prepared for most, but certainly not all, that life can throw at me & BGD.

Keep your damn beliefs in your own home, in your own church, in your own schools. But don't even DREAM of shoving them down my throat in MY home, MY church, or MY schools.

You don't get to play the pious defender of the faith when you're a practicing bigot; "some of my best friends are gay" doesn't cut it when in your heart of hearts you feel they're wrong, misguided, inferior, or undeserving of the same rights you enjoy and would, supposedly extend to those you truly respect & love.

"Love one another as you love yourselves," or words to that effect.

Oh and, the views are indeed stunning, but the baby shit brown decor has got to go...

Neely O'Hara said...

i don't like san francisco

Anonymous said...

The straight gut who started this mess is back.

So the common theme that I see from all the recent comments are that the issue is not Marriage itself, but the monetary and contractual rights that traditional marriages have and Gay civil unions do not. So, most straight people will go along with Gays having the same rights as straights, but through a contractual union, not a Marriage.

This should solve the issue by allowing gays to have their contractual rights while keeping Marriage traditional.

Anonymous said...

2:59, you're right. You can call it "Marriage" or "Scrimbot" or whatever - it's just semantics. I don't think anyone who argues for civil marriage really cares what it's called. They want the same rights afforded to all other citizens of this country. If you want to call the ceremony recognized by various religous groups "marriage", I don't think anyone will care, and gays can choose to, or not to, duke it out with the religious group of their choice if they do care.

Anonymous said...

Here! Here! If religious people want the word marriage then they can have it. Frankly I don't care whether a church validates my relationship or not. I just want to be able to visit my spouse in the hospital if he has surgery without having to call my fucking lawyer.

Anonymous said...

3:24, civil unions need to be strengthened so that gays will not have the need to be accepted as a traditional marriage. There needs to be a an institution called marriage which is seperate from a gay union in order to satisfy traditionalists.

pch said...

As a civil libertarian, I don't consider separate-but-equal to be an even slightly acceptable policy. It's not any different than saying this drinking fountain is for the straights and this drinking fountain is for the gays. It's the same water, what's your problem? The problem is opponents of same-sex marriage would scream bloody murder if the roles were reversed. So it's not really the same, and they know it. This isn't just semantics -- there is meaning in the words. By using the same word for any formal union, we esteem every such relationship with the same level of dignity and respect. And that's what the opponents of same-sex marriage are loath to do. By keeping the argument on semantics, they sound sort of reasonable to openminded people. But, let's be honest, their motivation is to prevent the validation of something they regard as a deviant lifestyle. We shouldn't play their game.

lil' gay boy said...

Thanks, PCH! Concise & eloquent as always...

While many may believe their arguments have merit, they miss the point; separate but equal is NOT equal.

There's a whole world of nuance & subtlety that goes along with the terminology, from "family" to "spouse" to "wedding" to "home", and on and on. Would they be happy referring to their marriage as a "civil union?" The way they cling to exclusive ownership of the term, I think not.

Not tolerance, not accommodation, not equivalence; equal.

Anything less leaves the door open for legal semantics & machinations we have yet to conceive.

angeleyes said...

2:59 among a couple others, your arguments, while cognizant on the surface, neglect the fact that the whole notion of marriage has already morphed into something far from 'traditional'. Christ said to let no man put asunder what God has joined together, and yet divorce and remarriage have become a commonplace as hamburgers and hot dogs. By your traditionalist standards, neither should those who 'marry' a 2nd time before the death of their 1st spouse be called 'married'.

It's so hypocritical imo, to treat this subject as if those of similiar persuasions pose a challenge to something that those of opposite persuasions routinely ignore the 'Rules' about for the sake of mere personal convenience. Remove the plank from your own eye, and then worry about the sliver you perceive to be in your brother's. Better yet, just make up your mind to live and let live.

Anonymous said...

The "definition" of marriage has changed and changed and changed over time.

Marriage used to be and arranged thing this was more of a contract between two families than two people falling in love. Often the bride and groom had never met before the wedding.

Women were expected to be subservient to men and their primary duties were to carry and raise babies and take care of the "husband" and sometimes the husband's family too.

Once upon a time it was customary for marriages to be between men in their 30s and women in their teens. Teenage women were less likely to get uppity with their husbands and more likely to have lots of children.

In the bible, marriage was for procreating and carrying on a man's name. A man could have more than one wife (Solomon had 700). A man could divorce his wife but a wife could not divorce a husband. A man used to be required to marry his brother's widow.

Is this what traditional marriage defenders really want?

focused said...

Will someone please wake me when we get back to celebrity real estate? While this discussion is important, it is misplaced. And let's not start talking about swine flu either.

Anonymous said...

focused, the comments have reached into the 60s in number. How much can you say about one apartment. I personally enjoy it when the conversation wanders and discussion ensues so we also learn about and from each other. The focus of the more successful and popular blogs is to build community which dosen't happen any other way. Ignore what dosen't interest you.

Anonymous said...

"Money Laundry"

Julio Muao said...

You said:
Mama, just because the majority of people are against Gay marriage does not make them haters. They just want to preserve a sane society that does not decay.

Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't the majority of California voters Heterosexuals? Yet, you think it is fair to have that same majority to decide whether they should give Gays(who are a minority which means that can never out vote Heterosexuals)the right to marry? You have to be an idiot not to see the flaw in your logic for respecting the will of the majority in this case.
Other than that, Mama, the house,you and Mayor Newsom are Fabulous!

str8 said...

You can't force complete acceptance from the People who do not want gay marriage. That can only happen through voting and voting is not what the gays want. Prop 8 was passed and even Obama does not want gay marriage. They want to stifle any free speech that is against your agenda.

Your only chance of victory is through the liberal S. Francisco courts which is controlled by a few. Is it a real victory when the People do not want and will never accept your "Gay Marriage"?

Anonymous said...

I don't want to stifle your speech, but you seem to want to stifle my ability to inherit wealthy from my partner of 20 years without having to jump through hoops you don't have to.

And P.S., the liberal S. Francisco courts didn't have anything to do with making gay marriage legal in Mass, Conn, Iowa and Vermont.

Anonymous said...

7:03, Yes marriage has been defined from the founding of our nation and even in the beginning of time for Bible believers.
So what makes you think that you could change the entire definition of marriage and the people should just have to go along with it?

Julio Muao said...

Str8 said:
You can't force complete acceptance from the People who do not want gay marriage. That can only happen through voting and voting is not what the gays want.

They said you couldn't force complete acceptance from the people who did not want to end segregation. They did vote on the issue and the issue to maintain segregation passed by the majority. It took the courts intervention to over ride the will of the majority to end segregation. It's apparent you wished the majority's will should have been respected on that decision as well.

Focused said...

So much for community...................

Anonymous said...

Julio, you start with the false notion that gays are a minority. Sexual preference does not make someone a minority like a black who's appearance is immediately identified. Besides trying to redefine marriage, gays are not discriminated against in every day life.

Julio Muao said...

You said:
Yes marriage has been defined from the founding of our nation and even in the beginning of time for Bible believers.
So what makes you think that you could change the entire definition of marriage and the people should just have to go along with it?

Please cite the U.S. document where the founding fathers of this country defined marriage as only between a man and woman.
Your "bible believers" are the only fools that spew such ignorance. However, they are entitled to those beliefs...what they are not entitled to is their desire to impose those beliefs on other tax paying Americans. Learn the difference

Julio Muao said...

Please tell me, if the majority of this country is made up of Heterosexual citizens, what percentage or make up of the population would that make Gays? Are you that ignorant to believe that the term "minority" only applies to skin color? If so, then a civil discussion with you on this issue is a moot point.

c'est moi said...

I'm also trying to find a rug like the one in the Mayor's living room. Nothing to be found on the Pottery Barn website. Anyone else have some ideas?
I found some interesting modern/graphic Thomas Paul rugs on the Burke Decor site. I particularly like the Flock style.

PS Proud to be a resident of Connecticut!

Anonymous said...

Julio, I guess that the 90% of Americans who believe in G-d from the latest polls are fools and you 1% of gays are the geniuses.

Anonymous said...

Julio, a gay black would only be noticed by his skin, this is just one example.

Anonymous said...

Julio, there are many opinions from intellectual doctors and scholers that believe gay is a behavior, not something that one is born with. So, in my opinion this would not make gays minorities since gays do have free choice.

pch said...

Well, you tried, Julio.

Anon, you're setting a dangerous precedent when you advocate for legal discrimination against a minority group. (And whatever you say, we're talking about a group that is not in the majority and is, therefore, a minority -- not sure where you got one percent, but that's definitely smaller than 99 percent.) By protecting the rights of everyone, we protect our own rights. It's really simple.

The day is coming when people who think like you do will be in the minority. If you can't be generous of spirit in the present, perhaps you can be pragmatic about the future.

Anonymous said...

PCH, should we not "discriminate" against people who have sex with farm animals? They are also minorities.

It sounds silly, but where does it end?

We must have standards.

Anonymous said...

9:26 - If you must have standards, and have such a strong opinion on protecting the institution of marriage, what efforts are you personally making towards outlawing divorce?

pch said...

Well, Anon, it seems you've got the usual sophisms memorized. Here's the thing. They only really work on people who don't use critical analysis to reach conclusions.

Someone who thinks it through will ask what relevance bestiality has to a conversation about whether gays should be accorded the same rights as straights. And they'll answer, none. It's a diversionary tactic designed to distract and inflame less savvy people with a tasteless and offensive non sequitur.

Best to save that one for when you're preaching to the choir.

Anonymous said...

Sorry if I'm repeating sentiment - some of the comments were pretty long winded.

1) love this place
2) yes, it should have a terrace
3) agree, it's too much brown
4) If a chandelier isn't feasible, then I could find a few awesome sconces to light the dining area more elegantly than canned light.
5) All citizens should have the same rights & benefits
6) the US government should treat all individuals the same - and allow anyone a 'representative'.
7) Aside from above, our government shouldn't acknowledge ANY marriage - you're just a citizen. If you want to marry in the eyes of a particular church, then do so and spare the rest of us.
8) Of course then DIVORCE becomes the church's problem too.

Love you mama!!

Alessandra said...

Anon 12:30, well said.

And PCH, keep fighting the good fight. If I weren't already married, I'd propose.

Anonymous said...

7:47 - And there are as many or more opinions from intellectual doctors and scholars that sexual orientation is not a behavior.

Can you choose to be gay? Not suppress or not act on your (presumed) straight sexual orientation.

I mean can you actually make yourself become aroused and engage in a same sex act?

lil' gay boy said...

Alessandra, I believe I called dibs on PCH a while back (now, if gay marriage were legal, I'd be in a big pickle with BGD.)

Anon 9:26 said: "It sounds silly, but where does it end?

We must have standards."

To which I must ask, why? If you applied that same statement to anyone of a differing race, creed or color, would you really be surprised if you were labeled a bigot?

And why must these so-called standards be yours? Who in a democracy gets to make such an arbitrary decision ––– you?

You've already demonstrated the requisite lack of logical thinking & basic humanity to be such a self-elected advocacy group of one. Just where is the critical thinking PCH mentioned?

Using weasel words or arguments to that effect are more transparent than you realize.

I've yet to see a single cogent argument that doesn't retreat behind the bible (an admirable religious document of some historical value, but NOT an historical document), employ weasel words or phrases ("most people...", "many doctors...", etc. ––– how many? One more than half? All but one? unquantifiable & misleading statements), or the ever popular "belief"; based on a value set that may or may not be religiously-based, but is likely to be egocentric and not encompass the value systems & will of any majority.

Anonymous said...

Bless the poor dumb hearts of those who have no better argument than the old "farm animals" canard. LOL!

When Bessy the Sheep has legal standing to enter into a contract, and can communicate her complicity, then she and the rest of the barnyard beasties can fight for their right to marry the inbred pentacostal republican of their choosing--until then, I really wish the anti gay marriage set would come up with at least ONE cogent argument as to why we shouldnt afford the same civil rights of marriage to gay couples.

And dammit, I totally missed that Newsom's flat was terrace-less. It goes down three notches in my opinion now.

Anonymous said...

barnyard animals? really? that's all you got?

but i'll bite. barnyard animals can not consent to relationships with humans so I think ability to consent is a good place to draw the standard line for relationships.

That pretty much eliminates marrying animals, children, inanimate objects and let's just toss in family members for good measure even though the might be able to consent.

lil' gay boy said...

Oh Vinyl dear, you know what they say about great minds and all...

"...and let's just toss in family members for good measure even though they might be able to consent."

Or not, depending upon their practiced faith.

kurt7 said...

If anyone cares....the setback is on the 18th floor....those apartments each have a terrace...most of which have been enclosed due to the wind and fog.

Quite a trek from the kitchen to the front door...and NO coat closet.

Also...last year there was a HUGE
special assesment for deferred maintenance like replacing ALL the metal casement windows etc...but at $3M...who cases

Anonymous said...

Let's hear more about the BGD pickle you would be in.

Starck Mad said...

Lord love the mayor of SF. He's cool. These photos?
Looks like a Hampton Inn on acid. Yikes!

c'est moi said...

Regarding the rug: according to a posting on CasaSugar: "The rug is from a collection Oscar de la Renta designed for Elson & Company, back in 2006. Here is a link to the current collection. rug, patterned after an ancient Islamic design, was the inspiration for the more affordable PB and West Elm versions. A third color was added to highlight the overlayed pattern."

Anonymous said...

odd...there's no coat closet.

Anonymous said...

WAKE-UP PEOPLE! This guy Gavin Newsom will say and do anything to get elected. He is a liar and is believed to be the Anti-Christ. Please look closely, please! You have been warned!

Accommodation San Francisco said...

Nice thing! I adore Art Deco!