Letters

Send your letters to the editor to:
letters@atencionsanmiguel.org  Atención will not publish offensive, defamatory or anonymous material.

Editor,

I concur with others that John Barham's articles have been good reading. I have no idea what his source of information for [the May 26] article on Chavez was, but in talking with people who have recently been in the barrios of Caracas and met with the people living there, his statement regarding "the overall living standard of the Venezulan people has not appreciably improved" differs from BBC reports and a few residents of San Miguel who have recently been there. He makes no mention of hundreds of teachers from Cuba who have "eradicated illiteracy" and Cuban doctors and dentists who live in clinics and for the first time have made health care widely available to the poor-a good trade for oil. Free Universities have made higher education possible. Land reform law has been passed-but according to other reports has been met with armed resistance when attempts to enforce them were made.

A Latin master's degree student put it nicely: "The voice of the poor people will finally be heard … the awareness of what fuels unfair American policies: hypocrisy, social inequality and an arrogant materialism ... is widely known."

This is the driving force behind "the voice of the poor"-they believe they are being "heard"-and even that is an improvement over the past.

Rick Welland



Editor,

In your Friday, April 28, 2006, edition a letter was written to the editor regarding a fire that broke out at the Permaculture Community. A request was made for donations to help clean the area and repair and replace some of the damaged items. 

We thank those who signed the letter for their concern and willingness to help, but we wish to inform the San Miguel community that the Permaculture Community had no knowledge of this letter until it appeared in Atención, the members of the community who were mentioned in the letter did not know anything about the letter, and the Permaculture Community never solicited any donations. We also have no knowledge of what, if any, funds were collected, and if collected, how they were dispersed. 



Marcia Z. Dunetz, Mari Patkelly, Colin and Isobel Harnett, Jan Meiners, Joyce Morrell, Jim and Therese Hethrington, Ann Williams, Barbara Wishingrad, 

Linda Wolcott Moore,Kathy and Eddie Palmer, Jorge Catalanand, Pierre and Ginette Brun as Members of the Permaculture Community



Editor,

This is in reference to the Readers' Forum article written by Jock Ferguson, alias Rex Rover, in the Friday, June 2, 2006, edition of Atención.

I cannot tell you how many phone calls and emails I have gotten from people that are totally appalled and insulted.

In his trying to be cute with a play on words, he says, "For months now I've sniffed around town trying to get a read on why this daily doggedness exists and why these doggone gringas are clueless about the anything-goes dog's breakfast they've created." Since he seems to be a jerk that obviously hates "gringas," could the word "sniffed" be interpreted as "stalking"?

In addition, we always keep our dogs on tight leashes and are not just "pretty good," but "good," about cleaning up after them. Therefore, we do NOT add to the street garbage that litters town, as he stated.

Also, since he obviously was making reference to my taking Bebé all dolled up into a church for a Mexican wedding, if he had done his homework "sniffed" properly-he would have known that Bebé's name was on the invitation as a welcome guest. I do take this personally and am totally hurt and offended!

It seems that there are many important issues in this small community of San Miguel that need to be addressed in our local weekly newspaper instead of taking up space with one miserable person's personal derogatory views.

Joe A. Collerain



Editor,

I couldn't help but take note of Mr. Ferguson's sarcastic and somewhat comical bray about dogs in our town. This town has always been dog friendly. Despite the clever writing, it sounds as if Mr. Ferguson is a new kid on the block. He seems to suffer from what is becoming a common malady that too often stems from newcomers: trying to conform our town to what has been forced on people elsewhere.

Many of Ferguson's facts are dead wrong. Restaurants did not instigate the ordinance, somewhat enforced, about dogs in restaurants. Each establishment in the past has had the right to tolerate what they desire within their boundaries. Also, I personally know of many Mexicans who are constantly accompanied by their dogs in public places. 

I have no problems with dogs as long as they are well behaved. There HAVE NOT BEEN, to the best of my knowledge, any serious incidents in Harry's or Hecho in Mexico in regards to dogs, as Mr. Ferguson describes. As for his singling out those who accessorize their dogs and doing so viciously in a public forum, it has a ring that sounds both trite and mean-spirited. Many of us have chosen to live in this society because of the old adage "live and let live."

I don't own a dog, but let's not forget they've been deemed as man's best friend. Sure, it might be silly, and it might even be somewhat gauche focusing such attention on Fido, but so what? Those who dress their dogs or pamper them are exercising a personal choice, and I see no reason to ostracize them in front of the reading community. Yet, like everybody else, even Ferguson is entitled to his opinion. There are lots of dogs I'd rather share my meal with than some humans I've encountered around here. Ruff-ruff.


Lou Christine



Editor,

In response to Mr. Jock Ferguson's article in Readers' Forum, "Dogging It," I would ask: Was this article supposed to be amusing, or just an attempt to be noticed, in one way or another? What exactly is his problem? Obviously, he doesn't much care for women-especially those who have the nerve to walk around with little dogs (would it be O.K. with him if these ladies sported very large dogs-Rottweilers, perhaps?).

As regards the outrageous and totally unfounded comments about a very popular restaurant, Hecho en Mexico, it might interest Mr. Ferguson to know that the owner of said establishment is a great lover of dogs and was very upset to have to put up the sign saying No Dogs, which the local authorities obliged him to do because of some complaining foreigners.

Having just returned from a visit to France, it was as always heartening to see notices displayed in hotels and restaurants of all categories stating that dogs are welcome. But, then again, I would hazard a guess that Mr. Ferguson is not too familiar with how life is lived beyond his native shores.

Surely we who socialize with our beloved animals will survive this latest onslaught from a disgruntled outsider.

Anne C. Rusling



Editor,

I was shocked and dismayed to read in last week's Atención article on dogs a personal attack on a local resident who, though not named, is immediately recognizable to all who know her. The photo of her dog was equally recognizable.

This woman is known, respected, and loved by those who know her, gringos as well as Mexicans. She has personally run fundraisers that have benefited our animal shelter. She is active in many charity affairs. She is always kind, courteous, helpful, loving and supportive of all whom she meets.

The gist of the anti-dog article was that American women should not take their small dogs out in public because doing so is annoying to other Americans, and especially to Mexicans, who never take their dogs out in public. 

(He doesn't seem to have a problem with large dogs.) Perhaps the author has vision problems. I've seen many Mexicans in stores and restaurants with their dogs, also usually small. Just last week I was enormously entertained by the antics of a small poodle with a Mexican family at a local restaurant.

This article upset me for several reasons. First, as I stated above, it appeared to be a personal vendetta against this specific lady. Secondly, it showed great disrespect and scorn for all women who own small dogs. Thirdly, it goes against the grain of how I perceive San Miguelians: We are reputed to be broadminded, accepting, and nonjudgmental. As an art community we are reputed to be tolerant of bohemian or eccentric behaviors as long as they do not infringe on the rights of others. The author of this article reflects none of these qualities. Fourthly, the author seems to be saying that bringing one's dog out in public is rude and offensive. Maybe so to him. But I find his attempt to publicly scorn and humiliate a fellow San Miguelian to be much more offensive, rude and deliberately cruel than the act of carrying one's pet around.

I would hope that in the future the editors will be more protective of our citizens and not gratuitously print stories whose primary aim seems to be to cause pain to others.

Paula Moran



Editor,

I am writing to you in order to complain in the strongest possible terms to the obvious misogynistic article in the Readers' Forum under the title of "Dogging It."

The misogyny was even obvious to me-a red-blooded male!-and as a male I found it extremely offensive, directed as it was specifically to foreign females with pets around town-and it would seem to one lady in particular who happened to take her dog to a Mexican family wedding because the dog was specifically invited by name and by the family concerned.

As for dogs in restaurants, several restaurant owners have been forced to close their premises to customers with dogs because they have been fined or threatened with fines by the local government for so-called sanitary reasons. I cannot for the life of me understand why dogs sitting on the ground and behaving themselves are a threat to health. It would be far more sensible to pay proper attention to the cleanliness of restrooms and making sure that staff wash their hands properly before serving food. This in a town where typhoid and other intestinal diseases are not uncommon. Banning dogs certainly does not get to the root of this problem. Some foreigners come to this town and want to change it to their own liking and to conform to their own prejudices as soon as they get here. Banning dogs in restaurants has nothing to do with Mexican customs, but everything to do with what happens in the US.

There are other so-called developed countries where the law is quite different. In France, for example, dogs are more than welcome in most eating places. And then there are the English country pubs where well-behaved dogs are welcomed with their owners on leashes. So far as I am aware, typhoid is not a problem in either of these two countries!

Certainly it is up to dog owners to ensure that their pets are properly behaved in public places, but other than that, what's the problem? And more particularly, what is Mr. Jock Ferguson's problem?

Tony Forster



Editor's Note: The Readers' Forum section is reserved for community opinion pieces, as is this Letters section. As we go to press (Tuesday, June 6), Atención has learned of a public meeting/dog parade to be held on June 8 in response to the article "Dogging It." This event will be covered by Atención in the June 16 issue.