Great article on the evolution of thinking in the snow-sports industry. Unfortunately, the players show a great amount of local prejudice, and as a result have either overlooked or omitted some of the most important history. "Pre-Internet" tribal knowledge is priceless and hard to come by — but with diligent research, historians can find kernels of truth leading to a wealth of significant and important information worthy of museum inclusion.
Posted at westword.com
When I started skiing in 1975, I could have never imagined the idea of snowboarding. But technology never ceases to amaze me. Have you noticed that over the past few years, skis are starting to look more and more like snowboards? They are wider and more balanced, like a board. I'm a boarder and a skier, so I welcome the innovations. I have to give kudos to the riders who broke out with the new technology years ago, because it has made ski technology all the better.
I remember riding Breckenridge in 1984 on my Burton Performer 140 Elite — sick board with the swallow tail and three skaggs on the bottom. That was fun back in the '80s; the halfpipes were about six feet tall.
I find the money thrown at just doing research on this topic utterly reprehensible. As a former teenage male prostitute in New York City, I can tell you that there is nothing in your article that is new to me. I was selling myself on the streets of New York in the early '70s, so I could have told you that male prostitution is just as prevalent as female prostitution. No need for million-dollar grants and studies to unearth a bunch of statistics; the need is for shelters and treatment options for these kids.
I did not have a pimp. I voluntarily sold myself to pay for a drug habit. Maybe if someone had offered me real help instead of coupons, I might have taken advantage of it. Just sayin'.
If you like this story, consider signing up for our email newsletters.
SHOW ME HOW
You have successfully signed up for your selected newsletter(s) - please keep an eye on your mailbox, we're movin' in!
After reading the article by Alan Prendergast about victims'-rights organizations, I can't help feeling that the reporting was considerably one-sided. For instance, there was no mention of the fact that the while COVA was urging its supporters to contact Representative Crisanta Duran and ask her to vote against HB 1287, the Pendulum Foundation was making the exact same plea to its supporters. In her mass e-mail to supporters, Mary Ellen Johnson said, "Remember to contact Crisanta Duran and tell her to change her vote, and we will live to fight another day. And we will anyway, as we'll introduce another bill in the Senate."
Also, the article points out COVA's lobbying efforts several times, but there was no mention of the fact that the Pendulum Foundation is a client of J. William Artist & Associates, one of the most powerful lobbying groups in Colorado. Nor was there any mention that Pendulum Juvenile Justice contributed to the campaigns for both of HB 1287's sponsors.
I freely admit my bias: A family member was killed by one of the men whose sentence would have been retroactively reduced under HB 1287 — but if you're going to claim objectivity in your reporting, you should at least make an effort to not let your bias color the story.