I honestly don't even detect any element of the writer feeling like an "evil gentrifier".. did we even read the same article?
but you don't think that Nostrand Ave/Crown Heights was a major factor? A potential groper wouldn't try to pull that type of thing in lots of neighborhoods in the city and would be much less likely to try in other areas.
Whynot, that response article is fantastic.
I HATED this article. What the hell does sexual assault have to do with gentrification? NOTHING.
Full disclosure: I didn't particularly like the original article either, but it pertained to Crown Heights and I thought it might make for some interesting fodder for debate. I was also curious whether others had the same response I did, or if my own status as a "gentrifier" (as if one moves to a neighborhood with the intent of gentrifying), albeit one who's lived here for over a decade now, was behind my initial dislike of the article (I kept thinking "we're really not all like that.").
]That said, what's so troubling -- as both the response article and whynot point out -- is the implication that a sexual assault that happened to happen here is a consequence of, or to be expected from, living here and the assumption that the neighborhood tolerates it. I don't think location had much to do with it; in my experience verbal street harassment and the tolerance of it are more common in certain neighborhoods, yes, but the gropers, flashers, masturbaters, etc. haven't been confined to any particular 'hood and nothing in the culture of the Crown Heights I know excuses sexual assault no matter who the victim is.