|
Comments:
Eric * - 2004-12-03 15:42:18 That third question is justified and one I expected. Before we go any further, we have to define what's thought of as the "creative class" within the "cool cities" framework. The "creative class" is a concept from Richard Florida's book "Rise of the Creative Class." In an interview with Salon, Florida defined the cc as: "composed of two dimensions. There is the supercreative core, which are scientists, engineers, tech people, artists, entertainers, musicians -- so-called bohemians that are about 12 percent of the workforce, up from well less than 5 percent at the turn of the century. And subsequent analysis by Robert Cushing suggests that the supercreative core is really the driving force in economic growth. In addition to the supercreative core, I include creative professionals and managers, lawyers, financial people, healthcare people, technicians, who also use their ideas and knowledge and creativity in their work. I don't include people in service or manufacturing industries who use creativity in their work." Now, I'm not sure if the "cool cities" promoters have quite the same notion of the "creative class." I think the layman's understanding of this term is less sciencey/brainy and more towards the arty/brainy end of the spectrum: architects, graphic designers, computer software designers, car designers, artists of all kinds, interior designers, and jobs like that. To boil it all down, all of these jobs require high intelligence, and there is a much larger proportion of gay people in Mensa than in the overall population. So I've rather precariously cobbled these two facts together to draw the conclusion I stated on the first page. I'm just painting in broad strokes, here.* * * * * * * * * * * * raymond - 2004-12-03 16:48:30 I haven't looked at www.tippingtocool.com but it should make everything clear. Except the "gay" part I suppose. I made some digitized photographs that make that part perfectly clear.* * * * * * * * * * * * relinking - 2004-12-03 16:51:42 to the tipping to cool site. there we go.* * * * * * * * * * * * lynne - 2004-12-03 17:16:07 I think the point is that the "cool cities" thing was something that was supposed to encourage younger educated people to move to Michigan because such people tend to take more economic risks (i.e. starting businesses). Also because areas with a lot of bright, educated, younger, professional people tend to attract firms because firms *do* consider existing labor markets when they decide where to locate. Unfortunately for Michigan, most people in that young, hip, urban, educated social class tend to be very tolerant of things like homosexuality. I doubht there are MORE homosexuals in this class than in others but I suspect that they are more likely to be "out". But, the thing is that members of this group probably are the types who might choose ot to live in Michigan because of this amendment no matter what their sexual orientation is. I am not gay for instance and I am currently seriously thinking about moving someplace a bit more tolerant. * * * * * * * * * * * * raymond - 2004-12-03 17:22:29 I read somewhere that after Nov 2 inquiries about emigration to Canada were up by 30%. Maybe people inquire because they are impressed by Missus Granholm.* * * * * * * * * * * * Dan Arbor - 2004-12-03 17:31:31 It seems to me that it doesn't really matter what percentage of the creative class is gay. The real issue is that a specific group of Michigan citizens were made the victims repressive legislation designed to be impervious to the winds of rationality, should they ever blow across this land again. This was an act of pure and spiteful repression. A big finger to gay Michiganders. The cool cities initiative was kind of off-the-mark to begin with; you parents trying to be "hip" with you... In the wake of legislated repression, it's a sad joke. * * * * * * * * * * * * brett - 2004-12-03 17:54:40the excerpts i read from florida's work made it seem like it isn't that the 'cultural creatives' are gay, but rather that the population density of gays in a region can serve as a barometer of things like tolerance, acceptance, etc, as well as a healthy cultural element (which i think he claimed gays tend to expect more from the communities they move to). So if there is a thriving gay community, then the 'cultural creative' type will probably find the area to meet most of their goals and needs as well, due to an overlap of preferences. Gays, or so he says, seem to be more like reverse-coal mine canaries, denoting health as opposed to stagnation or decay.* * * * * * * * * * * * brett - 2004-12-03 18:01:02I find the MENSA comment a little strange, myself. I've always gotten the creeps about that organization, and wouldn't have thought there would be any reason making it particularly attractive to gays. I don't mean to say anything about intelligence as it applies to sexual preference, as i don't really look at mensa as a group of the smartest people in society. I look at them as a group of smart people, yes, but with a very serious insecurity about having to assert and prove to others that they are so intelligent. ....and there is the whole eugenics business, as well.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-12-03 18:36:04The kind of thoughtful and well-reasoned comments I read here make me somewhat humble that this tiny blog has attracted such intelligent and articulate people. Thank you all for your thoughts thus far--this is becoming a fascinating discussion. Brett: I agree with you on the assessment of Mensa. They have a 40-page catalog of Mensa-themed goodies--everything from signet rings to stickers for the car to clothing (including lingerie, ugh and double ugh) to personalized note paper, &c. &c. &c. Somewhat beyond belief.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-12-03 18:39:15 on preview: Lynne: that's an excellent point. The new amendment has a ripple effect among non-gay people who are simply disgusted by it & don't want to live in such a climate.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-12-03 18:42:01 on preview: Dan, "pure and spiteful repression" is a good term for it. Especially now that we see moves to strip "domestic partners" of vital health and other benefits. Remember when the exponents of Prop 2 said it was just about marriage & that they had no intention of touching domestic-partner benefits? They lied.* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-12-03 18:46:06 on preview: Brett, the "reverse coal-mine canary" idea sounds valid and is a good refinement of my original comment; thank you.* * * * * * * * * * * * raymond - 2004-12-03 19:44:39 tweet? tweet? warblewarblewarble. uhhhh... gack... coffff... ugh...* * * * * * * * * * * * Laura - 2004-12-03 22:07:02 Well, the whole situation is in fact not funny in reality, but as usual Raymond puts it in a way that makes me laugh in spite of myself.* * * * * * * * * * * * Leighton - 2004-12-03 23:52:53 There are pockets of "cool" even in the reddest of states, it's "chicken or egg" why those pockets are more gay than others. But they are. * * * * * * * * * * * * brett - 2004-12-04 10:34:59 if we can find a good Granholm impersonator, I think we should put Raymond in a cage, and then film a new version of the monty python 'dead parrot' sketch in which the governor keeps claiming that he hasn't really died, but is just "Playing it 'cool'- like the cities!". * * * * * * * * * * * * raymond - 2004-12-04 18:46:09well, yes, my resume could use a little more depth* * * * * * * * * * * * add your comment: |