3 queers need 2Bdrm for Oct. 1st...and GET a big discussion
Comments
-
indeed.
-
WhyFi wrote: I saw a person besieged for having the gall to ask the same question that I had wondered about earlier.
Aren't you just negating what you have said all along? about their being no negativity in BF's question.
Gall. By definition:
1.impudence; effrontery.
2.bile, esp. that of an animal.
3.something bitter or severe.
4.bitterness of spirit; rancor.
Your words, WhyFi. You call it gall too. So why are you surprised then when the person to whom that "gall" was directed took it as... gall -
I don't think the issue is one of slights. rather, it is one of questions and perceived slights. why is a question being asked? why, when the question is asked and firmly Not Answered, is anyone upset about it? that's the issue. may seem both abstract and simple, but that's the issue.
-
jayce wrote: [quote=WhyFi] I saw a person besieged for having the gall to ask the same question that I had wondered about earlier.
Aren't you just negating what you have said all along? about their being no negativity in BF's question.
Gall. By definition:
1.impudence; effrontery.
2.bile, esp. that of an animal.
3.something bitter or severe.
4.bitterness of spirit; rancor.
Your words, WhyFi. You call it gall too. So why are you surprised then when the person to whom that "gall" was directed took it as... gall
Facetious use of the word - I thought about putting "gall" in quotes, but I decided against it, thinking it unnecessary given the context. Sorry for the confusion. -
WhyFi wrote: [quote=jayce][quote=WhyFi] I saw a person besieged for having the gall to ask the same question that I had wondered about earlier.
Aren't you just negating what you have said all along? about their being no negativity in BF's question.
Gall. By definition:
1.impudence; effrontery.
2.bile, esp. that of an animal.
3.something bitter or severe.
4.bitterness of spirit; rancor.
Your words, WhyFi. You call it gall too. So why are you surprised then when the person to whom that "gall" was directed took it as... gall
Facetious use of the word - I thought about putting "gall" in quotes, but I decided against it, thinking it unnecessary given the context. Sorry for the confusion.
Whyfi, you were identifying with and referring to BF as the beseiged one, right?
So far I think only Mateo overtly mentioned finding the listing "offensive", but he seemed to be voicing what BF was implying by asking the question in the first place.
Sometimes when you don't understand something, you can't just charge the person you don't understand with 'splaining to you.
The parallel that came to mind for me was the people that reach out to touch the hair of nappyheaded people (yes, this happens.) The person reaching out may be looking to expand their horizons or something, but it's just creepy for the person with the nappy hair, who is being objectified. -
FWIW, I'm a straight white woman, and I too did a double take when I first saw the subject of this thread. Then I thought, "Oh, the poster must be concerned about prejudiced landlords," and, having no apartment info to give, thought no more about it. Imagine my surprise on seeing the thread hit a 2nd page...
I think the members of this board, often with the best of intentions, are hypervigilant about issues of possible prejudice. ("Why do you assume only other queers can give you apt info?" isn't so different from "Why would you assume the perp is black?" or "Please don't assume all kids can't sit still in a restaurant!" - other questions I've seen in threads here.) I think it's good that people call out questionable assumptions, but it creates different frictions ("Why do you assume that's what I meant?, etc.), and from what I've seen, this sometimes catches newbies off guard.
I'm sorry the conversation became hostile, because I'm sure that wasn't anyone's intention, but I am grateful for the many thoughtful responses. I learned a lot from this thread. -
pitu wrote: Whyfi, you were identifying with and referring to BF as the beseiged one, right?
Yup. Rather over-dramatically, though.pitu wrote: So far I think only Mateo overtly mentioned finding the listing "offensive",
Agreed.pitu wrote: ...but he seemed to be voicing what BF was implying by asking the question in the first place.
This is where we differ. Whether or not he was being antagonistic is very open to interpretation until the 'sunshine' comment.pitu wrote: Sometimes when you don't understand something, you can't just charge the person you don't understand with 'splaining to you.
Reasonable, but if you're going to make an effort to reply, why not be nice about it, 'specially if the tone of the question is... in question? If the tone is unmistakable, by all means, get both barrels blazin'... otherwise... you can be nice or be not nice, one won't hurt while the other can't do any good.
The parallel that came to mind for me was the people that reach out to touch the hair of nappyheaded people (yes, this happens.) The person reaching out may be looking to expand their horizons or something, but it's just creepy for the person with the nappy hair, who is being objectified.
Anywho, unless otherwise requested, I'm callin' it a thread... for me, that is. I've said all that I can about as well as I can. Or, to use a nice version of a sentiment that lB shared, if I haven't gotten my point across yet, I'm probably not going to. -
So I've been watching this board for a few days and just wanted to add my 2 cents:
I'm a straight male, married.
When I first saw the ad by laurenB, I thought it was so...Brooklyn.
I didn't find anything offensive about it, and I thought it was posted by a person who was comfortable with themselves and put out some "feelers" by giving personal information about themselves for the sake of gay friendly people who might be able to help them find a place to live...
It may have been a great filter/ time-saver for them and disapproving landlords.. Given their experience, I can imagine they want to make sure, right from the start, that who they are is NOT a problem for potential landlords... or them.
It seemed pretty smart, direct and to the point.
This board, as usual, goes on some pretty wild and fun tangents though.
Just my 2 cents. -
SevenOneEighty, yes, your interpretation of the OP seems to be the most rational one - and probably the one that more people had before minding their business and moving along (if they didn't have info about apartments).
Though it seems to be moot at this point (for me, at least) the post was more to put out feelers to queer or queer friendly people for any hearsay on apartments... Not necessarily to protect myself from or out myself to potential landlords, as some have suggested. In other words, I'm not some beleaguered, alienated, victim queer who has a "plight" to share. I pro-actively seek queer community, as I was doing here, because I like to (sometimes because I need to) - because of reasons Jayce very eloquently wrote about earlier.
Part of what has been offensive to some is not that I defended myself from homophobic landlords "them" but that I defended myself from the morbid curiosity and assertions of dominance (the assumptions that it's ok to question my motivations and then tell me what I can afford in very negative "well you might as well just go somewhere else cause you're not going to be able to live here!", etc are all assertions of dominance, in my opinion) of those on this board - "us."
Just because we're all on the same website - that we occupy the same space - doesn't mean that we all come from the same place: sexually, racially, class wise, experience, age, whatever else. That is a reality - a REALITY (ie outside of the internet) - and I believe many were offended because they not only wanted me to accept their dominance (politely) but they also wanted to make sure that I wasn't getting any rights, privileges, or information that they weren't privy to and responsible for. That's just wack. And I'm not going to be suzy sunshine (or whatever) under those circumstances.
So I'm glad we all got this little moment to vent our frustrations, to air our grievances and differences, and to educate each other. But there were a lot of false assumptions made - an a lot of projections about who I am, what my motivations are, what I should and shouldn't be doing, where I should be living.. that outted insecurities and ignorance. And the initial truth of the matter was that I was ..really.. just .. looking ..for ...an ...apartment.
In the future I wish people would make friends, then if the friends are queer and they have all these queer questions lingering, to fucking ask their friends, or do some reading. Gosh, start a reading group for goodness sakes! But I totally feel Pitu when she says it's like people who reach out to feel nappy hair - basically completely inappropriate and creepy to force me and sympathetic queers into this conversation and unwelcome power exchange.
And I promise you, I have no interest in hanging around this place of exchange, and more reason than ever to "exlude" and "segregate" by turning to better, more thoughful, more enlightened places for queers.
"It may have been a great filter/ time-saver for them and disapproving landlords.. Given their experience, I can imagine they want to make sure, right from the start, that who they are is NOT a problem for potential landlords... or them. " -
And, I might add, this thread has a lot of dumb-ass assumptions about straight white males. Believe it or not there really are welcoming, accepting, totally-comfortable-with-their-own-sexuality-and-everyone-else's-straight-white-males who are neither offended nor threatened by anyone else's life style.
It doesn't help intelligent dialogue to make stupid, uninformed comments about anybody for any reason.
This thread has contributed to the continuing dumbing down of civil discourse. -
Now that we've got that sorted out, this might be the opportune time to point out that homosexuals, along with their artistic and bohemian brethren, are responsible for gentrification:
There Goes the Neighborhood: How and Why Bohemians, Artists and Gays Effect Regional Housing Values
R. Florida and C. Mellander
video here
So if it wasn't for bohemians and gays driving up the bohemian-gay index, they might still be able to find a cheap 2bdr to rent
-
And, in addition, it's gays, bohemians and artists living in rent stabilized apartments who are the direct cause of no more affordable 2 bdrm places.
-
Livetotravel wrote: And, I might add, this thread has a lot of dumb-ass assumptions about straight white males.
I disagree. What are you talking about?
Livetotravel wrote: Believe it or not there really are welcoming, accepting, totally-comfortable-with-their-own-sexuality-and-everyone-else's-straight-white-males who are neither offended nor threatened by anyone else's life style.
Yeah, I know. Did you know that ALL swm were not called out here?
The only bludgeon is the part about straight men (whiteness optional on this one)
not being the center of the universe, which I think is the gateway
one has to get past to understand the rest of the info.
BigGuy and docj seem to approach with total ease for instance. daver too, I thiiink.
There's actually been a lot of subtle information put out for anyone who cares to read it. You could get a couple of college credits closer to that second master's degree, if you took it all in...
Now, to a point way waaaay back in the discussion, where WhyFi doesn't think BrookFetish was antagonistic or rude straightaway
if BF had started a thread asking about the experience of, say, biracial midwesterners . . . and some biracial midwesterners obliged him by talking about their gig, great. Everybody is happy.
But if mention of the biracial midwestness is er, naturally occurring in a thread and BF diverts that thread to ask about biracial midwestdom then that's just a drag and puts biracial midwesterner on the spot. He or she might not wish to discuss again how he got to be who he is to all comers. Although he is comfortably a biracial midwesterner, he might not wish to be randomly challenged or defined by who he is in such a shallow callow way. Maybe he wants dinner first. Or maybe he just wants to find an apartment.And, in addition, it's gays, bohemians and artists living in rent stabilized apartments who are the direct cause of no more affordable 2 bdrm places.
Yeah, since the Velvet Mafia has that all sewn up, we're coming for the 3 bdrms . . . LOCK U CLASSIC SIX! -
pitu wrote:
Thinking about it some more, there is one place I personally draw the line. Previous partners, more bi than straight. Closest female friends, more dyke or bi than straight. Letting an apartment out to lesbians has been great. G/L/transgender party scene, naturally. But shared housing: never again. If your nice housemate happens to adopt a circle of friends or partner(s) who become household fixtures, some of whom have serious manhating hangups, then all of a sudden, straight at ease male is their nearest and softest target, and life's too short to put up with that crap in your own home. Twice bitten, thrice shy. Third time, when my bi-partner moved in with girls, and only found out afterwards they were separatists after she tried to have me over, it was also not a pleasant scene for either of us.
BigGuy and docj seem to approach with total ease for instance. daver too, I thiiink.
So if I were looking for share accomodation, and the ad said 'two queer girls looking for third person to share', then that's the one circumstance in which I'd notice and appreciate 'queer' as useful upfront information, i.e. not for me. -
Livetotravel wrote: And, I might add, this thread has a lot of dumb-ass assumptions about straight white males. Believe it or not there really are welcoming, accepting, totally-comfortable-with-their-own-sexuality-and-everyone-else's-straight-white-males who are neither offended nor threatened by anyone else's life style.
This is exactly wrong-headed. Nobody in this thread was threatened or offended by anyone's lifestyle. Rather, the offense was because of an overabundance of inclusion... why should these things matter? Not, "OOooo... this is something that scares me." Or, "This is something that makes me uncomfortable." Although Lauren might actually have felt threatened by other people's lifestyle... that's very possibly true. She reacted viscerally to anyone not from her chosen set trying to help her out and very welcoming and comfortable when it did come from her chosen set (even when it was the same advice).pitu wrote: Yeah, I know. Did you know that ALL swm were not called out here?
Actually, if you read the "gateway" as why any of this demographic information matters, then you would be able to get past to understand the rest of the info... not some weird power thing that SWM's must insert themselves into the center of everything, but more along the lines of there is no need for a center.
The only bludgeon is the part about straight men (whiteness optional on this one)
not being the center of the universe, which I think is the gateway
one has to get past to understand the rest of the info.pitu wrote: Now, to a point way waaaay back in the discussion, where WhyFi doesn't think BrookFetish was antagonistic or rude straightaway
BF didn't divert the thread to ask about biracial midwestdom... he simply asked, why does it matter? I.e., who cares? Lauren then made it into an issue with her haughty reply.
if BF had started a thread asking about the experience of, say, biracial midwesterners . . . and some biracial midwesterners obliged him by talking about their gig, great. Everybody is happy.
But if mention of the biracial midwestness is er, naturally occurring in a thread and BF diverts that thread to ask about biracial midwestdom then that's just a drag and puts biracial midwesterner on the spot. He or she might not wish to discuss again how he got to be who he is to all comers. Although he is comfortably a biracial midwesterner, he might not wish to be randomly challenged or defined by who he is in such a shallow callow way. Maybe he wants dinner first. Or maybe he just wants to find an apartment.LaurenB wrote: I believe many were offended because they not only wanted me to accept their dominance (politely) but they also wanted to make sure that I wasn't getting any rights, privileges, or information that they weren't privy to and responsible for.
Accept our dominance? And you're the one talking about REALITY. Heh. Do you go into a store and ask to buy a new iPod for $50 and when told it costs more like $200, shoot off on how the salesperson is trying to make you to accept their dominance? It wasn't about accepting dominance; it was about trying to provide information that would be provided to anyone. It's your chip on the shoulder that perceives slights that don't exist. And your bull in a chinashop attitude that prevents you from the most basic understandings of what people are saying.LaurenB wrote: And I promise you, I have no interest in hanging around this place of exchange, and more reason than ever to "exlude" and "segregate" by turning to better, more thoughful, more enlightened places for queers.
Overexposure to people who aren't exactly like you is, I think, not your problem. Entirely the opposite. Maybe some day you'll grow up and realize what fundamental human decency is and that if we stop worrying about the false distinctions that divide us most people are actually pretty well-intentioned.
I really told myself I was checked out of this thread. But had to respond to some of these things. -
Oh my gawd, I have a terrible headache and simply cannot go on.
-
Mateo wrote: [quote=LaurenB]I believe many were offended because they not only wanted me to accept their dominance (politely) but they also wanted to make sure that I wasn't getting any rights, privileges, or information that they weren't privy to and responsible for.
Accept our dominance? And you're the one talking about REALITY. Heh. Do you go into a store and ask to buy a new iPod for $50 and when told it costs more like $200, shoot off on how the salesperson is trying to make you to accept their dominance? It wasn't about accepting dominance; it was about trying to provide information that would be provided to anyone. It's your chip on the shoulder that perceives slights that don't exist. And your bull in a chinashop attitude that prevents you from the most basic understandings of what people are saying.
dude, she's NOT talking about asking an LL for way cheap rent b/c she's queer. she's appealing to her cultural group for assistance in finding cheap rent in her nabe of choice. and dominance? how about your insistence that you are CORRECT? that's dominant behavior. in a thread that started with a simple "hey, anyone got an apartment" it's pretty obnoxious for you to be demanding that someone recognize your authority in your posted position in the thread. yeesh. -
alafairnadia wrote: [quote=Mateo][quote=LaurenB]I believe many were offended because they not only wanted me to accept their dominance (politely) but they also wanted to make sure that I wasn't getting any rights, privileges, or information that they weren't privy to and responsible for.
Accept our dominance? And you're the one talking about REALITY. Heh. Do you go into a store and ask to buy a new iPod for $50 and when told it costs more like $200, shoot off on how the salesperson is trying to make you to accept their dominance? It wasn't about accepting dominance; it was about trying to provide information that would be provided to anyone. It's your chip on the shoulder that perceives slights that don't exist. And your bull in a chinashop attitude that prevents you from the most basic understandings of what people are saying.
dude, she's NOT talking about asking an LL for way cheap rent b/c she's queer. she's appealing to her cultural group for assistance in finding cheap rent in her nabe of choice. and dominance? how about your insistence that you are CORRECT? that's dominant behavior. in a thread that started with a simple "hey, anyone got an apartment" it's pretty obnoxious for you to be demanding that someone recognize your authority in your posted position in the thread. yeesh.
dudette, she said she was looking for a 2br in PH for $1,400. myself and BF said, "hey, it's going to be rough to find a place in PH at that price. you could consider Lefferts or Kensington." and rather than saying, "hm. ok. maybe i will." she lashed out that she's lived in brooklyn for a few years and she knows what she's doing and who are we to tell her where to live and yadda yadda yadda and now she says that by trying to give advice on neighborhoods we were exerting "dominance"??? give me a f'ing break here.
and as far as demanding to recognize authority... how are you being any different?
the upshot is that we all have opinions. we all have perspectives. personally, i think lauren has a very warped view. and that has nothing to do with anything other than how she has acted, reacted, belittled, and lashed out in this thread. if you honestly go back and add up any vitriol in this thread, 90% of it is under her name. and probably most of the rest is under mine in these last two posts.
now done with this thing for real though. it's just a mess. -
witness, the crumbling male ego . . .
sorry the mention of queer, and this whole thread was so upsetting to you, Mateo -
pitu wrote: witness, the crumbling male ego . . .
Jumping into the fray here, because this isn't right.
sorry the mention of queer, and this whole thread was so upsetting to you, Mateo
I don't see this as having anything to do with queerness or maleness. From what I've read, and I've read the entire thing since the first post in this thread, both Mateo and WhyFi questioned the tone LaurenB has taken throughout the thread. They questioned it repeatedly in different ways. I also happen to completely agree with both of them. I do not know Mateo personally and have only met WhyFi once, but none of their posts suggested to me that they had any issue with homosexuality. They have issues with rudeness.
Both of them have been completely jumped on, and from my perspective as an outsider to this thread until now, people are bringing in baggage, because I can't find what you're all are upset about in these two pages. -
laurenB wrote: The fact is I *REALLY* just came here to find an apartment. Best case scenario, I thought I would get responses like, "Actually, my aunt edna is going to timbuktu" or "Hey, yeah, all of us queers living in this apartment are moving to LA."
this
Since it seems to need splaining, the reason I was uncomfortable and irritated with all the response is because I got completely *unsolicited* resistance. The very FACT that this response happened after I very neutrally, benignly outted myself explicitly demonstrates the problem. -
pitu wrote: [quote=laurenB]The fact is I *REALLY* just came here to find an apartment. Best case scenario, I thought I would get responses like, "Actually, my aunt edna is going to timbuktu" or "Hey, yeah, all of us queers living in this apartment are moving to LA."
this
Since it seems to need splaining, the reason I was uncomfortable and irritated with all the response is because I got completely *unsolicited* resistance. The very FACT that this response happened after I very neutrally, benignly outted myself explicitly demonstrates the problem.
BrookFetish asked why it mattered if the person was queer. The response to that question was rude. It tumbled from there.
Her rudeness to BrookFetish and others who contributed in the thread has nothing to do with her being queer or resistance to queerness.
We all ask for and expect niceness on this board, and that extends to LaurenB, even if she's feeling irritated that BrookFetish's question was unsolicited resistance.
Edited to correct grammar. -
Why would anyone want to neutrally, benignly out themselves on a public forum filled with strangers in the first place? And then expect anything more/less than this thread.
-
I think it's rude to pick at someone's classified ad.
Apparently laurenB and Mateo both picked up on what was going on too, and responded according to how they felt about it.
The other particulars have been layed out in many different ways in this thread already. -
doublediamond wrote: BrookFetish asked why it mattered if the person was queer. The response to that question was rude. It tumbled from there.
do you really think that this, laurenB's response, is rude?
Her rudeness to BrookFetish and others who contributed in the thread has nothing to do with her being queer or resistance to queerness.
We all ask for and expect niceness on this board, and that extends to LaurenB, even if she's feeling irritated that BrookFetish's question was unsolicited resistance.
Edited to correct grammar.laurenB wrote: I wouldn't let it concern you too much...
because I read it as an explanation and a statement that if that explanation is not sufficient, to please leave the issue alone. I think the repeated digging at it will make anyone pissy - which is what happened later in the thread - but yeesh.
However I know if I saw an ad that said "Queers need..." I would be more likely to help out from a sense of affinity. Of course this is all besides the point, and probably un-explainable to someone who clearly doesn't already understand. -
alafairnadia wrote:
because I read it as an explanation and a statement that if that explanation is not sufficient, to please leave the issue alone. I think the repeated digging at it will make anyone pissy - which is what happened later in the thread - but yeesh.
do you really think that this, laurenB's response, is rude?
[quote=laurenB]I wouldn't let it concern you too much...
However I know if I saw an ad that said "Queers need..." I would be more likely to help out from a sense of affinity. Of course this is all besides the point, and probably un-explainable to someone who clearly doesn't already understand.
Yeah, I did.
Immediately after it was posted. If she had left out the first and last part, I don't believe it would have created this type of thread. If she had left that first and last part out and people kept on her, then any pissy replies would have been justified in my mind and I would be on the other side of this discussion. -
doublediamond wrote: [quote=alafairnadia]
because I read it as an explanation and a statement that if that explanation is not sufficient, to please leave the issue alone. I think the repeated digging at it will make anyone pissy - which is what happened later in the thread - but yeesh.
do you really think that this, laurenB's response, is rude?
[quote=laurenB]I wouldn't let it concern you too much...
However I know if I saw an ad that said "Queers need..." I would be more likely to help out from a sense of affinity. Of course this is all besides the point, and probably un-explainable to someone who clearly doesn't already understand.
Yeah, I did. Immediately after it was posted. If she had left out the first and last part, I don't believe it would have created this type of thread. If she had left that first and last part out and people kept on her, then any pissy replies would have been justified in my mind and I would be on the other side of this discussion.
I think this demonstrates very well how subjective something like this is. I read LaurenB's response as perhaps a bit bristly, but not rude. I thought BrookFetish's original question could be read as rude as well -- I can *certainly* understand how LaurenB took offense at it and, if it had been me, I might have been less than syrupy in my response as well, honestly. -
apollonia666 wrote: [quote=doublediamond][quote=alafairnadia]
because I read it as an explanation and a statement that if that explanation is not sufficient, to please leave the issue alone. I think the repeated digging at it will make anyone pissy - which is what happened later in the thread - but yeesh.
do you really think that this, laurenB's response, is rude?
[quote=laurenB]I wouldn't let it concern you too much...
However I know if I saw an ad that said "Queers need..." I would be more likely to help out from a sense of affinity. Of course this is all besides the point, and probably un-explainable to someone who clearly doesn't already understand.
Yeah, I did. Immediately after it was posted. If she had left out the first and last part, I don't believe it would have created this type of thread. If she had left that first and last part out and people kept on her, then any pissy replies would have been justified in my mind and I would be on the other side of this discussion.
I think this demonstrates very well how subjective something like this is. I read LaurenB's response as perhaps a bit bristly, but not rude. I thought BrookFetish's original question could be read as rude as well -- I can *certainly* understand how LaurenB took offense at it and, if it had been me, I might have been less than syrupy in my response as well, honestly.
the fact is, to me, the response from laurenB answers BF's question cleanly and efficiently. she also makes it clear that she has NO INTEREST in discussing that aspect further and that her wording is clear to those in the know. the repeated off-topic questioning (as in, not about an apartment) would annoy the shit out of anyone. -
I think that alafairnadia's response to apollonia666 quote of doublediamond's analysis of alafairnadia's reprise of laurenB's words could potentially be misconstrued or misinterpreted.
-
doctorj wrote: I think that alafairnadia's response to apollonia666 quote of doublediamond's analysis of alafairnadia's reprise of laurenB's words could potentially be misconstrued or misinterpreted.
yeah, and you still don't want to live in co-housing with or without your bisexual ex.
neither do I.
(even if I had one, I wouldn't.)
thanks for helping me clarify my thoughts about that.
Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 40K All Categories
- 27.1K Neighborhoods
- 5.1K Crown Heights/Prospect Lefferts Gardens
- 7.1K Prospect Heights
- 2.3K Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy
- 8K Park Slope
- 549 Williamsburg, Greenpoint, Bushwick
- 442 Flatbush/Midwood/Ditmas Park
- 657 BoCoCa (Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, Carroll Gardens)
- 151 Red Hook
- 104 Gowanus
- 304 Bay Ridge/Bensonhurst
- 130 Coney Island, Brighton Beach, Sheepshead Bay
- 270 Brooklyn Heights, DUMBO and Downtown
- 598 Windsor Terrace / Kensington
- 673 Greenwood Heights and Sunset Park
- 749 Brooklyn and Beyond
- 6.3K Stuff
- 86 Brooklyn Back When
- 1.2K Brooklyn Pets
- 257 Brooklyn Kids
- 241 Brooklyn Eats
- 51 Brooklyn Booze
- 3.6K The Lounge / Random Stuff
- 611 Brooklyn Politics
- 122 Brooklyn Sports and Fitness
- 111 Brooklyn Photos
- 339 Site Issues
- 8 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
- 6.2K Listings
- 1.1K APARTMENTS and REAL ESTATE
- 1.3K Sales Openings Events
- 2.3K The Classifieds