Message from: sirena
About: rural city suburbs - stereotypes, stereotypes, stereotypes...a personal view

Fri, 6 Mar 98 10:07:41 EST


I really hate the term "inner-city" since a) no one EVER says
"mid-city" or "outer-city" because it just sounds stupid,
b) it seems somewhat new, this goes along with the fact that
"South Central L.A" migrates, and c) it also seems very
negative and maybe even dorogatory to those who ilve in
the middle of a city or near downtown.

Other than here at school, I have lived in 2 areas: a rural
area in Southern California where my parents now reside and
in Los Angeles, where I have quite a few relatives. Television
and word of mouth have tought me what I know about suburbs.
Well, the rural area does not match its stereotype: first
of all I have neighbors. The land there is cheap so people
there generally have a lot of land or are poor. This does
not make it a "bad area." It is all valley so it has nice
sceenery. What makes it bad is the lack of stores and public
transportation. Oh yeah, and it is mostly dirt, so rain is
horrible. The image of suburbs frightens me. Someone mentioned
not being able to walk alone at night in certain areas. That
goes for the entire United States. There are gangs everywhere.
It seems people in suburbs are a little too trusting--a little
too confident that no crime could ever happen in there town;
or that if it does, it is domestic. I believe the Los Angeles
area in which I once lived is now South Central, though I'm
not sure it used to be. When I visit my relatives who live
less than 2 blocks from where I used to live, I find peace on
their porch. I have never seen a drive-by or felt any more
fear walking the streets of L.A. than I do walking the streets
of Boston or Cambridge. If I had a choice of all the
cities in the world to live in, though I have not seen them
ALL, L.A. would be #1 on the list. You should go there some
time because it's really cool!

p.s. No offense to those who say "inner-city." :o)