Outlook 2007: Longs and Shorts

I would be interested to see what the actual price increases were over the last 12 months for brooklyn neighborhoods. I'm not sure if any real analysis is done on this level other than what corcoran publishes which is really limited to the areas that they sell in.

I think the areas that have done very well but have been under the radar are sunset park and crown heights north. These areas have not yet gotten a lot of the buzz but prices have been marching up quickly.

Sunset Park had a number of brownstones sell in the mid to upper $900s, setting new records. I believe similar properties were selling in the $700s or maybe low $800s 12 months ago which represents a pretty large increase from a price perspective. As far as neighborhood development in terms of amenities that brownstone buyers are looking for I don't think that much progress was made and this will take time. I believe Sunset Park will continue to do very well over the next few years as more and more people discover it and these amenities come.

Crown Heights North has seen a similar increase in prices with top brownstones now selling in the upper $800s and $900s. As with Sunset Park this represents a significant increase over the prior year's prices that were in the $600s and $700s. This area has gained more exposure with the recent Landmarks proposal and will continue to be discovered by those seeking great architecture. While the area is definitely in transition from a safety and amenities perspective it is moving very quickly and the residents have become very active in the community. I predict that this area will continue to do very well, especially once the phase I of the landmarking is finalized.

As for Prospect Heights, I think the greatest development and increase in prices will come in the area on the border of crown heights. Franklin Ave has gotten a number of new businesses and a few more are planned. Saje is a great coffee shop, indigo is planning to reopen on franklin and there is now a sushi restaurant. This strip will develop very quickly now that a few places have opened. Washington Ave is continuing to develop as well and a number of the condo projects are very close to being occupied which will inject a large number of new people seeking more amenities into the neighborhood. I expect the area between underhill and bedford to do very well in the coming 12 months.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 9:34 AM

I agree that AY will be a positive effect on Prospect Heights. I think that Washington Avenue will continue to improve, especially the upper portion near Gen. The lower portion still has to contend with St. Johns and Lincoln Places. I think that Franklin's ascent will be slow and long. While it's nice to see a few new businesses in the area, it still has quite a ways to go.

I think that Crown Heights around Brooklyn and New York Avenues will see an increase, as well. It's a beautiful area, with many gorgeous properties and tree-lined streets.

I'm a bit doubtful about the area of Bed-Stuy around Classon and Franklin. Deeper into the neighborhood is where the more beautiful homes are, around Lewis and Stuyvesant Avenues.

Overall, I see Brooklyn going nowhere but up.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 9:46 AM

I thhink there will be no AY impact in 2007 since construction is always delayed and likely won't start till late in 2007/early 2008. While it's going to change the surrounding areas in ways I don't like (Manhattanization) AY will ultimately drive up real estate values in adjacent neighborhoods, particularly in landmark neighborhoods which wil have proximity to any amentities offered by AY while having a differentiated housing stock (brownstones vs. cookie cutter condos).

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 9:54 AM

Interesting article in NY Sun today about effect of new 421 tax abatement on land prices. Areas that were added to non-421 eligible will have negative price pressure. So maybe less new condo development in much of Brownstone Brooklyn.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 10:08 AM

I see Sunset Park and Greenwood Heights as the next hot nabes for 2007 and beyond. The commute to Manhattan is short, the area has good public elementary schools, prices aren't wacked, close proximity to Red Hook, Park Slope, Prospect Park.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 10:18 AM

J.D. 10:08 AM

I'm interested to know why AY is not comparable to MSG. When complete, I see AY as sort of a second rate verison (multi-use arena near a transit hub). Some established residential areas near by (Murray Hill in Manhattan vs. Fort Green, Boreum Hill and Park Slope in Brooklyn). Higher expected auto traffic in AY is different and damaging as I think more people take mass transit to MSG than AY.

Certainly commercial rents and commercial property near AY will increase in value as the Dunkin Donuts, Starbucks, Subways and Mcdonalds of the world will displace the mom and pop businesses that we all love. Those types of stores are willing to pay rents that don't make sense for mom & pops. Residential property value prospects are less clear to me. My personal opinion of Brooklyn will be diminished since I've always liked the low rise, low density style. The history of the City however has been that higher population density = higher real estate values. AY will certainly bring population density.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 10:26 AM

I agree with the other posters that Ditmas / Victorian Flatbush will continue to flourish next year.

No opinion to offer on AY.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 10:51 AM

Outlook 2007: middle class getting smaller and smaller

$900K for a house in Sunset Park? Goodbye average joe. Hello Starbucks target market.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 10:51 AM

If the new housing resulting from AY is actually decent, then the nearby brownstone alternatives won't have as much appeal.

If the new housing resulting from AY sucks (and it probably will), then no one will want to live near it.

Of course there's the differentiated housing stock argument. I guess we can always seek consolation in that when we see the Fedders sign appear next door.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 11:18 AM

Should never short in housing(not even sure how one does that)....and it all (NYC)goes up together, goes down together or stays same together.
Maybe with some good press and buzz one neighborhood may be all the talk and generate more than its share of interest - and as last years buzz fades about another will weaken to norm.
And if a slew of new buildings open in one area - it can make it appear from misused stats that sale prices are 'up 25%'. But existing stock will follow citywide trends with slight variances.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 11:34 AM

When in the history of New York has a big residential development made surrounding property values go down? I don't mean that faceitously; I'm just curious if anyone has historical examples. It seems to me that, regardless whether you like or hate the AY plans, it's hard to believe that surrounding property values will actually go down, especially given that the development is, for the most part, being built over the rail yards, which are a crappy area now.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 11:40 AM

When thinking about long-term growth, and the Fedders & AY factors, it might be good to think about which neighborhoods will attract more and more of those developments. Like pertaining to that, look at South Slope. In 2007 and beyond, I think South Slope prices will continue going up because amentities are creeping further south down 5th avenue all the time. BUT South Slope houses are teeny and many of them completely lacking in detail. (Though they can be cute with extensive renos) Even Sunset Park offers houses that are bigger and better. The South Slope houses take a lot of money to be renovated, having served as low income apartments for many many years. Unlike other neighborhoods where a greater number of houses remained one-family homes (BS, Bay Ridge, PLG, CH).

Yet despite this, in South Slope there aren't any houses to be had for under a million. Even if you buy one for that, it's going to be so rundown you put $200-400K into it. But it can seem to some these houses should still be under-a-million including the cost of renos, because the blocks are spotted with hideous buildings and blight in between the updated houses. It doesn't "feel" much improved there. And yet the proximity to Park Slope is a huge plus and 5th Ave amenities are getting better all the time. Anyway after all my babbling here's my long long range prediction: sadly, I keep thinking South Slope blocks will be comprised of nearly all new condo buildings 10 years from now. Like whatever doesn't sell to someone wealthy enough to improve the house greatly, will get sold to developers. And it would stink to be a cute little South Slope house (or row of houses) sandwiched between big condo buildings.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 11:58 AM

11:40: That's easy...housing projects. Projects are notorious for driving down property values.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 11:59 AM

I think we might as well all believe that Atlantic Yards will be a good thing becuase it's going to be rammed down our throats regardless.

The battle to stop AY is lost. It's now time to deceive ourselves about its consequences.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 12:06 PM

11:59: Which housing projects. Yes, there are projects in crappy areas where prices are cheap. But there are also projects in areas where the surrounding areas are very pricy (Peter Cooper, UWS, Bleeker/Mercer, etc.). I have never heard of any examples where a project has been put up in a desirable neighborhood (e.g., PH, FG) that has resulted in the property values actually going down.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 12:13 PM

Projects located in a desireable neighborhood do not make the values of surrounding houses/buildings go down. I've never seen that.

However projects in a blighted neighborhood that's isolated or more distant from an upscale area (I'm thinking of an area of Minneapolis I saw) will keep that neighborhood down for a while. It makes it slow to improve a neighborhood. Not impossible, but slow.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 12:31 PM

"rojects located in a desireable neighborhood do not make the values of surrounding houses/buildings go down. I've never seen that."
I lived on CPW and 100'th street. The Public housing projects north of 100'th street were a drag on the neighborhood and prevented the gentrification of Manhattan Avenue and hurt the value of Park West Village to the south of the projects. And there is a police precinct on 100'th st.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 12:42 PM

Didn't that whole area of Manhattan experience general decline in the 1970's to 1990's, though 12:42? I think what was being said was when a neighborhood was already very desireable and fashionable and on an upswing, bringing in projects didn't drag it down. And why is anyone talking about "projects" with regard to AY anyway? From everything I've read and heard, the "affordable" units at AY will be for middle-class not low-income people. They'll cost too much for low-income families.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 12:47 PM

Re 9:46 a.m.: I'm a bit doubtful about the area of Bed-Stuy around Classon and Franklin. Deeper into the neighborhood is where the more beautiful homes are, around Lewis and Stuyvesant Avenues.
---------------------------------------------

PAY ATTENTION: Bed-Stuy! Bed-Stuy! Bed-Stuy! From Classon to Saratoga, DeKalb to Fulton. There are beautiful homes all over. Always have been. The amenities have been slower in coming, but they are. I've not been wrong yet.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 1:38 PM

Looks like DDDB supporters are trying to hijack another board. Just ignore them and stay on topic. Picks for 2007!

Long - "brownstone Bed-Stuy" (great housing stock in brownstone belt next to Fulton Street between CH and SH, and excellent transportation), Crown Heights North (great housing stock, activist community, good transportation and future landmark designation), Prospect Heights (AY hysteria will produce great deals), Sunset Park (relative ease in gentrifying non-black minority community, good food and increasing amenities) and Stuyvesant Heights (great housing stock, stable middle class nabe with long time residents, clean/well kept blocks and transportation - A express).

Short - "fringe Bed-Stuy" (area far north and close to Williamsburg and far east and close to Brownsville - pocket of crime and poverty too entrenched to see any meaningful improvements this decade), Bushwick (all broker hype, dark and dreary), Greenpoint (poor transportation, lacking amenities and condo overdevelopment), South Park Slope (becoming Fedders Town), Williamsburg (too many crappy/cheesy condo developments on one end and an ever expanding Warsaw ghetto on the other - yuck).

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 2:30 PM

To 12:50 PM re the subways overcrowding. This is the kind of thing that opponents of AY were trying to emphasize - thousands of new residents and sports fans with no additional transit infrastructure - Ratner was/is going to give free metrocards to people going to events at AY - that will really help - it is sad that the community didn't react quicker so that this could have been prevented or scaled back. I live in PH and am really depressed about the whole thing.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 2:44 PM

I'm someone who was defending the neighborhoods around AY, saying their values would not go down due to AY. But I don't work for Ratner; I'm against AY in general, I think it was a sham and a shame the way that development has been shoved down our throats. I certainly think transportation in Brooklyn will be a joke after AY is built. But I don't believe Fort Greene or PH values will go down because nothing in Brooklyn is going to be going down. The NYC population is growing and growing. Plain simple fact that means prices will always go up, just more slowly in some periods perhaps.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 2:48 PM

Man, when people start talking about how we CAN'T lose money and property values CAN'T go down, that's when you know the sh*t's about to hit the fan.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 3:05 PM

First, AY is not a housing project so the comparison is stupid. To the contrary, AY will be primarily luxury housing and produce instant gentrification for most of Brownstone Brooklyn east of Flatbush Avenue. If anything it will produce black and lower income displacement which is sad and unfortunate. On the flip side, it will attract a slew of high income families, new shops and businesses to the area, all of which will further drive up propery values.

Second, the day that they start to build NEW brownstones, limestones and federal brick townshouses full of details is the day I start worrying about property values in Brownstone Brooklyn. These homes will always be in high demand. Further, since most new developments are aparment building condos, as the city becomes more overpopulated and apartments become smaller, the truly urban rich will be primarily concerned with square footage and the ultimate trophy prize - owning a single family townhouse in the heart of Manhattan or Brownstone Brooklyn. Remember, Wall Street is just minutes away and Brooklyn is no longer the anathema it used to be but rather HOT HOT HOT!!!

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 3:20 PM

The southern part of park slope and "south slope" (from 9th street south to 15/16th street and above 5th ave.) will become increasignly more attractive when AY gears up. There are brownstones and nice frames, train access, good school zone, the park and the commercial offerings are much more mom and pop. The builidng of AY and inevitable "Manhattanization" of downtown Brooklyn and the areas surrounding AY will make this area really appealing.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 3:23 PM

shhhhhh..... BAY RIDGE

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 3:29 PM

Re 3:20 Post - You, sir, are a sage beyond measure.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 3:29 PM

Sir? I'm a woman. Thank you very much! ;-)

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 3:34 PM

Brownstoner owners, you have nothing to fear.

Suppose a large meteorite crashes into Brooklyn tomorrow, destroying everything. Not to worry. You'd have merely to sit back and watch as your brownstones rebuild themselves.

Suppose that 90% of the population of the earth is wiped out tomorrow by a plague. Don't sweat it! The remaining ten percent will be willing to spend 100% more to live in brownstone Brooklyn.

There is absolutely nothing under the sun that can negatively impact brownstone values. Absolutely nothing. Ever.

All the talk you hear about "gentrification" in Brooklyn...don't buy a word of it; for it suggests that there was a time when brownstone Brooklyn was not gentrified. There was no such time. It is merely an urban myth. Property values have always soared in Brooklyn. They cannot do anything else. They are not affected by the local, state or national economies. Their value will always be on the rise and this cannot be changed by anything.

It's a good day to live in Brooklyn!

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 3:42 PM

Anon 3:42pm,

Hell has no fury like a renter scorned....

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 3:46 PM

I can't understand why Downtown Brooklyn isn't more popular (in + around fulton St.). It reminds me of Soho + Tribeca in the 1970s. At night it's just dead. There are a lot of large buildings that look like they'd be great loft conversions. It's centrally located and is surrouned by neighborhoods (Brooklyn Heights, Carroll Gardens Boerum Hill, Dumbo) which have appreciated incredibly over the past 20 years.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 3:47 PM

Long: carpet baggers

Short: middle class

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 3:53 PM

To anon 3:20 PM and AY as luxury housing. Given the environment - endless traffic jams, riff raff types heading to sporting events, fast food and chain restaurants and bars cater to them, poor people in the 'afforable units' - when you put it all together is this the kind of place one would seek luxury housing. Are traffic and noise selling points in units where you always have to have your windows closed. Are chucky cheese and wing joints what draws the well heeled? What are they thinking? Have never understood who was going to live in the apts other than the affordable ones.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 3:54 PM

3:54: probably same types who've bought in One Hanson and the Smith St. condos across Atlantic. It's the same area and likely the same price range, right?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 3:58 PM

To 3:51:

I think the idea is that those who rent will not be able to profit from the inevitable and unalterable rise in property values hilariously described by 3:42. Consequently, the author of 3:42 and the rest of us who own property in Brooklyn can expect to be resented by renters. Guess that makes them both renters and resenters...lol

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 3:59 PM

I can only speak for myself and other house-hunters I know, but I don't think ANY "new" areas will be hot. In these uncertain times, when the market is still very much in flux, I'd only put money into a sure thing. The people I know looking for places have all ruled out any "fringe" areas, including those near the park. Betting on gentrification is way too risky right now. So I'd bet that the hot areas of '06 will continue to be hot, and all the others will slump.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 4:00 PM

You're right anonymous 3:54.

If there's is one thing that has been proved over the years, it's that New Yorkers don't like to live in high rise buildings in heavily trafficked, commercial area. PS, given the developer's plan for AY, the same people who will be living in the "affordable" apartments would be considered wealthy by IRS.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 4:04 PM

When AY opponents had a glimmer of hope they argued that AY had too much luxury units, not enough affordable housing and thus should be stopped. Now that AY appears to be a foregone conclusion, they are now arguing that the affordable housing component will be a drag on the development and a negative to surrounding communities. You people are unbelievable!!! Do you want affordable housing or not?!?! This is why DDDB and their supporters lost the AY fight; they could never get their story straight.

The above comment by 3:54pm just goes to show you that it's always been about the arena and the luxury housing angle was but a ruse. Why not just attack the arena? Can't because Ratner outfoxed DDDB and as it turns out Brooklynites want the Nets!!

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 4:16 PM

I don't understand all of the ballyhoo with respect to the arena. It's tucked away on the periphery of brownstone Brooklyn, on a commercial strip (which was upzoned for high density development) and at the corner of two major thruways. The hysteria of AY, the arena and falling real estate prices was put forth by DDDB for the sole purpose of scaring nearby residents into opposing the project. Now that this tactic has failed can we please move on and focus on Brooklyn's very bright future?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 4:42 PM

And PH rez at 2:44pm, you sound unstable and on the brink of an emotional meltdown. If AY has you so depressed before construction, it's going to kill you later. My solution would be to sell and allow someone else who wants to live in post-AY downtown Brooklyn enjoy your PH home. I'm sure you have enough equity that you can afford someone place really nice in a less densely populated area. The buyer of your property? Well he or she will make out like a bandit in five to ten years. You, on the other hand, will have peace of mind. You can't put a dollar value on that.....

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 4:44 PM

Anon 3:58 -- I heard that Hanson Place and the Smith St. condos (particularly Hanson) are struggling. Rumor is that prices at Hanson will come down after the new year due to that fact.

Target, Chuck e cheese, all those retailers don't appeal to ppl who can afford Hanson place prices. Think about the train/bus station in anytown USA --generally where the homeless and crazy hang out and the flatbush LIRR/subway station right outside Hanson place's front door is no different.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 5:03 PM

Don't worry. Most of the homeless crazies will get run over by the ridiculous traffic. How many posters have ever tried crossing Atlantic at 4th Avenue?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 5:11 PM

I agree that "the sky is falling" rhetoric is DDDB propaganda intended to scare people into opposing AY. Clearly, it has failed. The AY will put the area on the map and have a resoundingly positive effect on property values.

Let me save the unhinged DDDB cult members the trouble: "It's nice to see Ratner's paid PR flacks posting on this site."

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 5:13 PM

Dear 4:44 - I am honored that out of 67 posts you chose mine to respond to. Having lived here through blackouts, car theft, muggings, the murder of Amy Watkins, the Rodney King and Yusef Hawkins unrest, the Crown Heights riots, and various other bad things I will probably survive this, but it is very sad to see our unique neighborhood destroyed for the sake of a money grubbing developer.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 5:27 PM

1:28 - Is PS 139 aka The Caton School?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 5:54 PM

3:05 and 3:42, dude, get real. You can't be back here once again trying to drive the property values down in Brooklyn single-handedly. Those discussions of this past Fall are over. Why? Everyone finally saw the big crash isn't coming. Economists announced it wasn't coming. On top of that, experts predict a huge increase in NYC residents over the next couple decades. Huge. So where do those new residents live? Also consider one of the biggest real estate firms in the city is getting ready to announce their profits in 2006 - and despite the market softening starting this past Spring, their profits were double in 2006 than what they were in 2005 which was the height of the bubble. Also, realtors have noticed there was no slowdown over the holidays in buyers looking at properties, this year. It stayed active. So give it a rest.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 5:59 PM

I think prices have gone up pretty high in Clinton Hill/Better Bed Stuy and schools and services need to improve for further growth.

Meanwhile, places like Brooklyn Heights has lagged Cobble Hill and the North Slope in growth but that will change with the improved PS8 there.

Carroll Gardens still hot for brownstones (not condos) and Carroll Gardens West still hot (again bcs of the school zones)

It's all about schools now.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 8:00 PM

Bay Ridge Has the schools .

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 9:10 PM

5:23

I'll be there. i'll talk to you real good.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 10:30 PM

"1:28 - Is PS 139 aka The Caton School?

The Caton School is PS 249 which is located in Prospect Park South. It looks like a good school, but not very diverse.

http://www.insideschools.org/fs/school_profile.php?id=490

Posted by: Anonymous at December 28, 2006 11:02 PM

Clinton Hill and Fort Greene public schools are actually getting better due to parent involvement. I say Clinton Hill will continue to go up in price in the long term, and the Prospect Heights/Crown Heights border due to conversion and development.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 29, 2006 12:26 AM

There is nothing wrong with downtown Brooklyn that the market won't take care of itself. Obviously it is doing quite well, store rents are among the highest in the city, and when a store can't cut it, it goes out of business, just like anywhere else. The stores may not be your cup of tea, but they obviously work for many. The only thing rotten I see is your elitist attitude, not to mention your identity poaching.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 29, 2006 11:02 AM

I think Stuy Heights still has a ways to go. Great housing stock, good community. If we were looking I would focus there.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 29, 2006 11:04 AM

I agree with the folks who have pointed out the aggregate demographic trends in NYC. The population of NYC is supposed to be 9 million in a couple of decades and those folks has to live somewhere. As some have previously mentioned, housing stock quality, space and transit access will remain key factors in determining a neighborhood's short and/or long term future.

For 2007, short any neighborhood with an overabundance of condos going up. I think the market's going to lag for a year or two and apartments will fare worse that houses in a slower market. It’s just a hunch..

Posted by: Anonymous at December 29, 2006 12:40 PM

Anon at 12:54, do you own or rent?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 29, 2006 1:16 PM

Just remember people considered 5th Avenue in Park Slope a blighted dump not too many years ago. 'Nuff said!

Posted by: Anonymous at December 29, 2006 2:00 PM

G train doesn't go to Manhattan. That's a big negative for certain areas of Clinton Hill and Bed Stuy.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 29, 2006 2:33 PM

It doesn't Matter that the G doesn't go to Manhattan. From Some points in Bed-Stuy, the quick change at Court St. in queens from the G to the E/V gets you to midtown manhattan in 20 minutes.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 29, 2006 2:37 PM

man, all this talk of park slope melding into gowanus kind of makes me sick. All the 'hoods of brooklyn are just smashing together, pushing out the residents so some more rich white people can come in and take ove.r btw, i'm white. just noticing that there is NOWHERE affordable to live - in terms of neighborhoods already gentrified. i am too old to pioneer and don't want to. i don't want to push out anyone else. is this just a brooklyn problem? feels like it.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 29, 2006 2:56 PM

"the quick change at Court St. in queens from the G to the E/V gets you to midtown manhattan in 20 minute"

You call that a quick change? Are you being serious?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 29, 2006 4:19 PM

If it makes you feel better, 2:56pm, yes it's happening in other cities. In Minneapolis when I was back there a couple years ago I could not BELIEVE the prices for downtown lofts, and for older houses in the metro area. Downtown prices there approach NYC prices believe it or not. Also Seattle got really high for the cool, historic areas. So did Atlanta. I think the general trend of people migrating back inside cities from the suburbs, due to insanely congested freeways, is driving up prices everywhere for in-town properties.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 29, 2006 4:20 PM

The other thing to contemplate with the Atlantic Yards is the need for the developer to sell units there. That will mean a big marketing campaign, his need in a falling market to underprice all competition to make his units move (FCR will effectively control the market's prices when they dump so many thousands of units on the market), and also their need to market themselves as different housing stock than what you or I might be selling with a resale. Also if he thinks that the market is going to get rough Ratner will have to throw in other ammenities to get his units moving. Sure the older housing stock is better looking than most new stuff. But Ratner is going to have to do whatever it takes to move units and he will price accordingly and market accordingly and if that means using his PR BS to make our neighborhoods less good, less safe, less prestigious, whatever that evil little man will do it. So it's all well and fine to sit back and look at the equity you've built up and think you are safe from market forces. That is only true if you don't have to see in a market that is controlled by somebody who is sitting on a goldmine that he bought for much, much less than market rate and is totally subsidized by NYS taxpayers in the form of bonds and other incentives for him. You just cannot compete against that. Sorry.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 29, 2006 7:38 PM

7:51, you're either joking or your out of your mind. The value of my brownstone dropped by about 10% in the last year. Yes, it is still almost 50% higher than it was 5 years ago, and yes I imagine it will increase sometime in the future. But it sure as hell has and can depreciate.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 29, 2006 8:23 PM

sorry , bad math. at 8:23 I meant to say that it my brownstone is worth almost double what it was 5 years ago. But I was right that is has depreciated by about 10% in the last year.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 29, 2006 8:28 PM

So DON'T buy a brownstone then, 7:51. Give it a rest.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 30, 2006 2:42 AM

10:04, I'm a 40 something native Brooklynite who never understood why Williamsburg took off the way it did. I thought it was ugly (still do) much the same as 6:46am. But interestly enough, I find myself more comfortable in Williamsburg these days than Park Slope, where I lived and owned for many years. My guess is that people on this board are middle aged (like me) and prefer quiet, tree lined streets (like me). The reason I'm drawn to Williamsburg now is because I associate more with the bohemian artist lifestyle than that of a yuppy breeder. (No offense to yuppy breeders) Parts of brownstone Brooklyn (Park Slope) were once cool, but the more Brooklyn becomes like the suburbs, the more appeal Williamsburg will have to people like me. Disclosure: I'm in Bed Stuy now. Pretty AND urban.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 30, 2006 9:16 AM

I think Brooklyn, is the next Manhattan. Say bye bye to the middle class..
NYC is becoming a city for the Rich..

Posted by: Anonymous at December 30, 2006 10:53 AM

Double wide baby carriages? I believe the correct term for those is "bugaboos"...

Posted by: Anonymous at December 30, 2006 11:47 AM

Same here with me, "Stroller City" makes me ill. What a huge turnoff those women are. We're trying to have a child ourselves, and I'm like "slap me if I become like that." The thing that baffles me is I know plenty of very good mothers whose children turned out marvelously, who were not uptight, obsessive mommies like that. It's not like there are no options for mothering styles. There are plenty. I'm very curious to see how the children of these women turn out. Not sure I want my child going to school with them though! I'd rather be in a hardworking, grounded, middle and working class area, where kids grow up with a grasp on reality.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 30, 2006 12:57 PM

The only thing I associate with Park Slope anymore is the stench of soiled diapers.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 30, 2006 2:10 PM

there's no question that the best neighborhood in Brooklyn and nyc is Ft. Greene with its mix of peoples, culture, unchanging historic architecture.
its values will continue to rise.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 30, 2006 2:44 PM

time for wannabe hispters to quit whining and mother's and their children children.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 30, 2006 4:33 PM

Enough with the bs woman hating on this board. I'm sick of it. Of course your mothers were all madonnas and today's moms are just in your way while you are picking up your lattes. Fathers btw, don't factor in to these posts, funny that. Guess your dads weren't all that and you don't see any dads slowing you down over at Starbucks folks.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 30, 2006 11:08 PM

"What you see in Park Slope is an aberration, a weird, bourgeois, neurotic version of motherhood."

What you see in Park Slope is a bunch of whiny singles in a crowded neighborhood who hate the suburbs and yet resent parents for not moving to the suburbs the instant they had kids.

Someone care to offer a theory WHY women push double-wide baby carriages? You think it's a status symbol? That they're so roomy and capacious that one simply MUST have one even if they inconvenience others? Newsflash: the things are a pain in the ass to push, and you would only have one if you had two very young children, and then with great regrets. Maybe you have more twins in a neighborhood with more older parents (and thus more fertility treatments), but seriously, they're not actually like SUVs: people don't just get them because they think they look cool and make life convenient for themselves.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 30, 2006 11:26 PM

No one has argued that people buy "bugaboos" because they're status symbols. Did you even read the preceding posts? I'm sure people buy their "bugaboos" because they need them to transport multiple children, and that's fine; but it is NO excuse to treat other people (e.g., pedestrians) like garbage. Other people have the right to walk down the sidewalk without being treated like human refuse. The fact that one half of my DNA doesn't come from you does not make me a second class citizen. Sorry.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 31, 2006 12:43 AM

Bugaboos cost $900. Of course it's a status symbol, nobody say otherwise. As for the giant strollers, 99% of the time I see ONE child in them, not two, in Park Slope. Give us a break.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 31, 2006 3:50 AM

And 12:43 is right. The point people are making is it's the attitude not the stroller. That said, the big expensive strollers are status symbols. I have to hold to that.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 31, 2006 3:54 AM

1. There are just as many inconsiderate pedestrians without kids as inconsiderate pedestrians with kids. I'm constantly detouring into the street around groups of friends whose conversation is too important to interrupt by stepping aside to let me pass.

Single jerks become jerks with kids and there are plenty of both. But single jerks are not resented as a symbol of a culture that gives EVERYTHING to people with kids and treats childless like SECOND CLASS CITIZENS and its NOT FAIR NOT FAIR NOT FAIR and when will my mom stop ASKING ME FOR GRANDCHILDREN and go away breeders I'm SICK OF YOU!

2. Bugaboo, like many stroller manufacturers, makes single and double strollers. I suspect the people using "bugaboo" as a synonym for "double stroller" derive their whole knowledge of child-rearing from reading Gawker and New York magazine trend articles.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 31, 2006 9:59 AM

I just copped some spinnin 22's for my bug... you know you be hatin'

Posted by: Anonymous at December 31, 2006 10:03 AM

Victorian Flatbush, including Brooklyn College Area (South Midwood)- long.

New Target/Barnes and Noble scheduled to open at Flatbush Junction this year. Although some may shake their heads, this is a great economic boost for the area, and the many families (all demographics) who live here will shop there. No more shlepping to the Atlantic Center, avoiding the whole AY traffic congestion to follow.

It should be noted,however, that Victorian Flatbush does not offer many buldings with multiple units. You have to be able to afford and maintain a single family home to buy here. You can't buy a brownstone and rent out a unit to defray your mortgage. This limits the pool of potential buyers somewhat.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 31, 2006 10:59 AM

You can get a Graco double stroller for a fraction of the price of a Bugaboo (double or single)...

Posted by: Anonymous at December 31, 2006 11:00 AM

The bugaboo stroller is the easiest to push/turn/go over curbs, etc... and, therefore, works best on city streets. It is very expensive but, not having a car and having to get around with a young child, worth the investment for many who live in an urban environment and walk everywhere instead of driving. The $700-$900 they cost is less than most suburban parents pay for the gas they use in their mini vans and SUVs in one month. I don't understand the strange resentment. I do agree that a lot of park slope parents are self involved and don't pay attention to those around them - but I agree with the earlier poster that these people were probably equally obnoxious and self absorbed before they had children. For some reason park slope seems to attract this type now. Sad. That is great deal of the reason I moved out of park slope. I didn't want my children raised like I see a lot of the parents there raising their kids - to feel entitled and all important, etc... This has little to do with the stroller they are pushing, however.

Anyway - back on topic - long any part of Victorian Flatbush. There is nothing like it for sheer beauty, commutability, diversity, etc... Short - the suburbs and over-inflated apartment stock in Park Slope toward 4th Ave, etc...

Posted by: Anonymous at December 31, 2006 12:41 PM

I agree that PLG and Prospect Park South will definitely be hot in '07. Prospect Park is a huge asset and most of the destinations are located "across the park" such as the Botanic Gardens, Zoo, ice skating, tennis courts, horse stables, drum circle etc. They are also on the express Q/B lines.
I really like the area around Cortelyou in Victorian Flatbush / Kensington/ Ditmas (what are the borders?), which has some good restaurants and shops....Farm on Adderley, Flatbush Food Co-op, Vox Pop, Belle and Maxie, T.B. Ackerson.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 31, 2006 2:05 PM

short - Park Slope apartments, and perhaps also townhouses, as huge inventory comes online on 4th Avenue and in the South Slope

Posted by: Anonymous at December 31, 2006 2:59 PM

Right back at ya Brownnoser. A happy new year to you and yours...

Posted by: Anonymous at December 31, 2006 5:13 PM

ft. greene

Posted by: Anonymous at December 31, 2006 5:19 PM

Ditmas Park and Victorian Flatbush have some upside left per square foot, that's for sure. Some of the best homes in the city. But just watch which block you choose, and make sure your neighbor did not convert his Victorian into a multi-family like the house on the corner of E19th and Dorchester Road. I've lived in the nabe for over 30 years and it has steadily improved but there are still some saftey issues.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 31, 2006 8:40 PM

Still some saftey issues? We are living in a post 9/11 world. I'll take my chances with the neighborhood thug ( whether in Victorian Flatbush, Park Slope, Bed-Sty, SoHo, etc.) over some terrorist (eco or otherwise) anyday! We live in New York for crying out loud. Everywhere has a safety issue.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 31, 2006 9:09 PM

I think the multicultural melting pot of racies, classes, and different mixing of peoples from around the world will suffer as the city become more gentrified.I think in a few years New York City will become something like Boston, except that it will be populated by only the rich.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 31, 2006 10:20 PM

I will go ahead and jump on the Victorian Flatbush bandwagon. I do think it will be THE hot area in 2007, though it's plenty hot right now.

I also agree with Mr. B that parts of Crown Heights will take off.

I'm going to say I'm short on the areas around AY, even though I'm open to changing my mind about it. Some of you make interesting arguments to the effect that AY will be good (or at any rate, not bad) for property values. I agree that population density ordinarily correlates with increased property values. However, dense populations usually have the benefit of an infrastructure capable of handling such density. Such an infrastructure is largely lacking in the case of AY, and lacking to quite an unprecedented degree. I think the consequences of this could be very serious.

But again, I'm open to being persuaded otherwise and I'm not an AY basher.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 1, 2007 10:35 AM

So funny that FG is now considered a "safe bet". Only a year ago it was considered to have major quality of life problems by many on this board. Good for FG- love the neighborhood. Don't really think it changed that much -crime rate, etc..., people just got used to it being considered OK to live there. Perceptions change and things turn into safe bets.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 1, 2007 12:33 PM

I agree that PLG, Sunset Park, etc are not going to see any increases this year. Any area that did not "take off" in the 5 years of Boom certainly won't do so now that the market is shakier and people are more conservative in their investments. The people I know who are looking are all super-cautious about where and what they buy.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 1, 2007 2:40 PM

Re: Anon 9:09

In my part of Ditmas Park every New Year is celebrated with gun shots in the air - last night included. I don't think "everywhere" in NY has this kind of saftey issue. In addition, there was a crime wave in the area earlier in the year. There are now groups of cops around Newkirk and sometimes Cortelyou. You don't see this type of police presence every where in NY.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 1, 2007 4:09 PM

The whole bugaboo thing is really about some neighborhoods (Park Slope in particular) getting really crowded as local people have more expendible income (the rich pushing out the middle class), which attracts more shops in general, and as shopping and restaurant options become more plentiful and the crowds come out there is quite simply a limited amount of real estate (sidewalk space.) Maybe before people were moving up in to Westchester, LI and NJ, but now they are staying put. And so Ratner and Bloomberg and Doctoroff are betting big that what we all need is more dense living. So you single folks had better grow up and get used to families working hard to share the sidewalks. And now that I'm a parent I gotta say that as a single person I never really appreciated the hardships that older people or people struggling with the demands of taking care of children have to go through. Previously all my concerns about others was mainly expressed through charitable giving, concerns raised in the NY Times, etc. I think perhaps the fact that as adults we choose to just party or work so hard for so many years that it's hard to understand that people out there that you are sharing your sidewalks with in this city are sometimes really struggling. And I don't mean struggling to get to work in time to grab a cup of coffee and a bagel. Some of us are struggling to feed our families, some of us are struggling to get a job, some of us are struggling to make our medication last longer than it should. It's a tough city. Stop being so selfish and realize that part of the reason you live here is because it's a vibrant place and there are opportunities. Open your eyes and realize that not everybody is in your very fortunate position.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 1, 2007 4:37 PM

Increased Police presence was requested by many of the neighborhood associations in Victorian Flatbush. Spent New Years Eve in Great Neck with family. I heard gun shots. I was told by my brother that they were fire crackers. Sounded like gun shots to me though. Either of the two were not smart. All par for the course in NYC unfortunately but I wouldn't trade lving here for anywhere else at this satge in my life.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 1, 2007 6:53 PM

According to neighbors, there were numeros gunshots in my area (PLG) last night. I was visiting friends in semi-rural westchester and we heard fireworks and then the roar of the nearby stream. Woke up to total quiet and went outside to chat with the deer. Very nice way to start the year I must say. As for price prognosis, I have no idea. But I certainly hope they go back up at least to 2005 levels since I for one am ready to leave.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 1, 2007 7:36 PM

I think that there are lots of rude and/or nutty people in this city. Some of them are different than you are. Some of them have different color skin, have made different family planning decisions and are interested in different genders than you are. Why should you think that it is okay to stereotype all of one type of people just because you have experienced some rudeness on the part of people different than yourself. I would never call all Orthodox Jews rude just because one guy cut me off on Vanderbilt Ave. today. I would never call all young African Americans slobs just because I saw a guy peeing on a tree near my house the other day. This is offense behavior, sure. But that doesn't mean I should lower myself to slander and stereotype any one type of person. I think that it is because people here think it is okay to openly hate women that they do so frequently on this board. Get in touch with your own bias before you make hateful, stereotype driven remarks on the internet. Jerks come in all shapes and sizes. And I don't think that a woman who was on her cell phone pushing a stroller qualifies as anything other than that -- even if she happend to be in the middle of a drug deal. Sorry. Many people happen to be on cell phones at all sorts of inappropriate times. Does that mean that all moms with bugaboos are a certain type of person? One time I saw an Asian person talking on a cell phone in a restaurant and people were annoyed. OMG, I guess all Asian-Americans are rude like that by your reasoning??

Posted by: Anonymous at January 1, 2007 8:08 PM

Does anyone know how to tell the difference between gunshots and firecrackers?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 1, 2007 11:38 PM

Yo 9:10 post...I'm trying to find a way to put this kindly. So I will talk only about my own experiences...when I am in a bad mood sometimes I smile at people on the street and then they usually smile back at me. Makes for a nicer sort of social exchange. I think there was some sort of '70's program that encouraged this sort of thing, part of the "I'm Okay, You're Okay" book's era. Much easier to pass on the warm fuzzies than assume that the evil Park Slope moms are out to getcha.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 12:02 AM

11:38,

Yeah, you can tell they are gunshots if you feel pain and start bleeding right after the sound of the "pop."

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 1:33 AM

KENSINGTON...Ocean Parkway Baby Love it!

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 9:21 AM

I work in Park Slope and I have no idea what you people are talking about. There are rude people everywhere. I've never been insulted by a Park Slope mom. I think you are just tripping.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 9:47 AM

Anyone else hear New Years gun shots or semi-automatic fire after the ball dropped?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 10:45 AM

10:08, that really stinks. To be rude to people is bad enough, but to risk hurting a small animal is really going over the line. I hope you enjoyed New Year's Eve in spite of this mutha.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 10:57 AM

The newbie gentrifciation of Brooklyn is complete when our the greatest fear is of being rundown by a yuppie mother and her bugaboo stroller.

I remember when I used to sprint home from the subway at night to avoid getting mugged and when when my car was broken into seemingly every night.

In the relative scheme of things, the bugaboo wileding moms seem very tolerable.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 11:54 AM

Hmmm. I'm confused now. I thought people were simply complaining that PS mothers are often rude. I didn't realize that someone said they were intolerable. Where was this said?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 12:08 PM

10:08 a.m.: I agree that the mom's behavior was rude, but, I'm sorry, if you were walking your dog in such a way that you left no room to pass, you were being rude too. People constantly complain about the room strollers take up on the sidewalks--well, that goes for doggies too.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 12:40 PM

People, people, people.

This is crazy. We are lucky to live in one of the greatest cities of the world, and many of us live in perhaps one of the most beautiful neighborhoods of a pretty amazing borough. (park slope)

Please - get a grip. Why are we fighting and arguing about such unimportant stuff - strollers and "self-centered moms" and such?

Take a step back and realize how lucky most of us are to be living here, and affording the means and time to be on this blog.

The goal in life is to be happy and to be thankful for what we have. Maybe we need to step back and wake up to what that means!

Here's wishing tolerance, success, and prosperity for you and yours in 2007!

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 2:29 PM

jbjb, I agree with you that life is great and we need to take stock of the really important things.

I also agree with some of the other posters that a lot of Park Slope mothers are rude and obnoxious.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 3:15 PM

2:54, please spare us the pro-mom claptrap and accompanying milf fantasies. You're not going to get laid here.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 3:36 PM

3:36...

i'm gay, asshole.

and a new neighbor to your incredibly vibrant and beautiful neighborhood. maybe make a new years resolution to start appreciating it.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 3:58 PM

To all of the above,

Thanks for reminding me why I moved out of Brooklyn. Sometimes I forget that it was all the idiotic a-holes who made the place such a nightmare to live in.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 4:02 PM

This is so ironic to read these posts. They relate to my recent experience. I went to PLG on New Years Day, around noon. To visit the house we just bought, and meet with a kitchen installer guy. It was totally utterly quiet and peaceful, regardless of whatever shenanigans happened the night before. I passed about 5 different people walking back to the Q subway after my meeting, and all of them smiled and said "hello". One young black woman standing outside her house on her cell phone, even put down her phone for a moment to smile and say "Happy New Year" to me as I passed by. Which made about fall over in shock. My friends don't even get off their cell phones for me, much less a perfect stranger. As soon as I arrived back in Park Slope, I get off the subway and encounter a PS Mom and her stroller coming towards me. Filled with goodwill, I smile at her, intending to say "Happy New Year". But before I could, she gives me a cold look in response to my smile, passing in her stressed-out self-important hurry, that chills me into silence. So I'll say it here to all of you instead, Happy New Year!

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 4:08 PM

Man, this is the best Brownstoner thread ever!

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 4:23 PM

Me again who posted at 4:08, I should add I don't think the Park Slope attitude is about being a Mom. I'm not Mom-bashing. I think it's about people not behaving like members of a community. It seems like this all feels temporary to these people. Like they think they might trade up to a place in Connecticut at some point. New residents and "gentrification" can be a great benefit to a community. But people who move to neighborhoods in Brooklyn should strive to be a good neighbor and a part of the community in how they conduct their daily lives. I totally understand why old residents hate gentrification. It can be like an invasion by aliens. My hairdresser, who is a Brooklyn native, talks about it sometimes with her older clients.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 4:24 PM

Park Slope and many other brownstone neighborhoods are filled with elitists liberals. Know it all's who think they are smarter and better then everyone else.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 4:46 PM

Agreed, Bob, we love Park Slope and its amenities! I was just relaying some of my observations of SOME people certainly not all, in PS. Since these topics were being discussed already, here.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 4:49 PM

So, nasty moms are a major quality of life issue, but gunshots are just "shenanigans." Interesting perspective. But it's true, I'd hate to live somewhere where I was constantly worried about my kids being hit by stray strollers.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 4:50 PM

It just had to happen - an attempt at a fresh new conversation about how to be neighborly somehow becomes the old, done again a million times over, debate about crime. SO predictable for Brownstoner dot com. Boring. I'm outta here.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 4:54 PM

I, the author of the 4:50 comment, really did not intend to encourage a stupid PLG=death rant. But I just couldn't ignore the idiocy of calling gunshots "shenanagins" and then going on to complain about rude behavior.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 5:27 PM

Well, 5:27, you're adept enough at ignoring your own idiocy. Why the double standard?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 5:29 PM

Why don't you just express your concerns to the people that are bugging you instead of on an anonymous board. There are misunderstandings and honest mistakes made every day on the sidewalks of NYC. You might even make a new friend if you tried to get to know your neighbors in Park Slope or anywhere by saying hello instead of just grumbling and assuming the worst of your neighbors. I still think it's insane that moms are being singled out here. I wonder if its because people feel that woman should have better communication skills, or be more in tune with all the concerns and/or nuances of you lot as you move through life. But get real. Not every woman out there is going to be a saint. And I think you all are pathetic for calling people out on a blog instead of trying to either suck it up and be flexible and realize that you are really not the center of the universe no matter where you live and that people might just have a) not have noticed your dog. b) might have made a bad decision that they regret. or anything really. I'm a mother and the hardest thing I'm trying to do is to teach my children flexibility and to understand that other people might just be having bad days when they take your toys away on the playground...that to think of those people as, "mean," or whatever label you choose to use would mean you wouldn't ever get to be friends with that person and probably my kids would be so inflexible with their demands on the playground that they wouldn't make many friends either. So I'm sorry if this doesn't come naturally to you either. It doesn't totally come naturally to me. But if you work hard at chilling out I guarantee you will enjoy life and make more friends.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 5:35 PM

I disagree. Why are they choosing this forum to bash moms in Park Slope who are struggling with strollers on busy sidewalks?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 6:22 PM

6:22, all of the posts I've read have focused on rude behavior by PS mothers on sidewalks. No one has said that all PS mothers are guilty of such rudeness. Many PS mothers are no doubt delightful people, and no one has claimed otherwise. So, I don't know what your beef is.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 6:32 PM

5:35, you are right and the latter are wrong.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 6:42 PM

Stereotyping is pathetic. Look at the posts. They weren't talking about one incident, or some incidents. A couple of posts indicated that nice/not hostile Park Slope mothers were the exception. I don't live in Park Slope. I think it's really shallow to fall in to this type of stereotyping. It wouldn't be defended on here if we were talking about other races, genders or classes of people. What next, Asian-American drivers? African American shop clerks? Come on recognize this for what it is. Classist, sexist and childish.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 6:46 PM

Who is throwing the tantrum? Who is defending the stereotype? Why don't you explain to us what your gender is, what your race is, what type of relationship you are in, if any, where you live and what kind of job you have and I am sure any number of people on this board would be happy to provide you with an obnoxious stereotype of one of the groups you could be identified with. Stereotyping isn't a science. It's an insult.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 7:54 PM

Damn! The way you all sound...

Long: Osh Kosh & Peoria (No bugaboos, PS Moms, gunshots or fire crackers!)
No diversity, B'way plays, Off B'way plays, great eats etc..

Short: Brooklyn (Bugaboos, PS Moms, gunshots, firecrackers, diversity, great eats, etc..

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 8:40 PM

Huh? What are you talking about??

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 8:42 PM

all of those posts are clearly from one very very bored and lonely person

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 10:06 PM

Nobody should believe only those who are not mothers have had these observations about PS Moms by the way. I've heard this same complaint by women who are mothers, and even read an essay about it in New York Magazine written by a mother who lives in Park Slope. About how competitive she found fellow PS Moms to be, when interacting with them at the playground. Did anyone remember seeing that? Maybe a year or so ago? Nobody is just making this stuff up just now. It's been a pretty much accepted characteristic of the PS neighborhood for a while now, all over NYC. I didn't even know there was any question or debate about it.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 2, 2007 11:41 PM

The author of one of those NY Observer articles was none other than Lizzie Ratner, daughter of Bruce Ratner. It's become acceptable to bash Park Slope moms perhaps, but the real question should be why? Bad behavior is endemic to many people in many places. It used to be acceptable to use the N word, make "colored" people use different water fountains, schools, stores and sit in the back of the bus too.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 9:54 AM

"It's become acceptable to bash Park Slope moms perhaps, but the real question should be why?"

Umm....because they behave very badly?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 10:18 AM

Amen.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 2:03 PM

"... but to generalize a neighborhood as you do just shows how ignorant and short-sighted you are about the remainder of this huge metropolis"

You just talked about moms on the Upper East Side, West Village and Carroll Gardens, but we're not allowed to make exactly the same observations about moms in Park Slope? Interesting. Why is that?

"..next time a mom in park slope is rude to you, say something to her so that perhaps in her quest to do her best to raise another human being.."

You know, I think I will, because if that really is her best, then she should be informed of the locations of some abortion clinics.

"...and no..i'm not a mom. nor am i looking for sex with ps moms."

Oh, it doesn't really matter. With your attitude I don't think there's much chance of your getting laid with anyone...in any neighborhood.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 2:10 PM

Well said, 2:10PM.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 2:16 PM

2:10,

I think you're projecting your own insecurities ;)

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 2:22 PM

Give us a break people. This whole romanticization of motherhood is so overworked. The idea that someone is immune to criticism simply because they have one or more kids is ridiculous.

What about fathers? Are they also incapable of rudeness, or is this only true of mothers?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 2:25 PM

2:45, the only women who've been discussed here, at least thus far, are moms in PS. I don't see how criticizing them specifically translates into a hatred or disrespect for all women. I might be tempted to think that misogyny was at work here if people were criticizing PS moms for no reason, but the reason for the criticism seems to be rude behavior, and rude behavior is a legitimate basis for criticism, is it not?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 2:50 PM

May I ask you a question, 2:45PM?

Under what circumstances do you think it is legitimate to criticize someone?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 2:53 PM

How do you know what kind of criticism is warranted by the examples of rudeness described in this thread? Were you present when the woman ran her baby carriage into the dog? Do you know how easy it was for her to see the dog, or how hard she pushed it, or how badly it hurt the dog? We know you think there's some kind of stereotyping going on here. You're only too eager to throw that accusation around. However, since you weren't present on any of these occasions, I'd like to know what justifies YOUR criticism of so many of the people who've contributed to this thread.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 3:01 PM

I'd also like to know why it isn't stereotyping when 1:25 accuses moms on the Upper East side, West Village and Carroll Gardens of rudeness.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 3:04 PM

3:01, I think he's obviously stereotyping us :)

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 3:06 PM

Going up: South Slope/Greenwood Heights (with even more new construction), nicer areas in Sunset Park (like those near Sunset Park itself), definitely Ditmas and victorian Flatbush, Gowanus particularly around upper 4th Ave. (partially due to AY), and still undervalued areas in Queens like Sunnyside, Jackson Heights, etc. which already have vibrant and active commercial areas and pretty quick commutes to Midtown.

A lot of people here seem to see Williamsburg going down, and I think it will for this year when the ridiculous overbuilding of condos comes into the market, but overall there is a lot of population pressure in that area so I would bet that it's temporary. What's really going on there is the replacing of a housing stock that was aged and inadequate for gentrification. Other areas that are still a bit marginal for gentrification, like Bed-Stuy, Crown Heights, areas to the east of Prospect Park, and most especially Bushwick (which doesn't have the fine housing stock of the others) will see sales and prices (and gentrification) stall if the economy takes a downturn, which means that the amenities that will attract gentrifiers will also not occur. Still, this will probably be relatively short term, as most of these neighborhoods are full of housing types that will never be built again.

The impact of AY is difficult to predict, but I would guess that it will cause some reshuffling of population over the next several year, as people who won't like the changes wrought by the project leave for other areas, which will in the end result in significantly elevated prices and a rather different sort of neighborhood even further removed from its former working class state. It also may, at last, spur upscaling and development in Downtown Brooklyn, although this is probably a few years off.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 3:16 PM

"just like i don't know what happened exactly in these instances, you i'm guessing don't know what it's like to be a mother raising kids in a big city."

Correct, but I'm also not criticising anyone for being a mother raiding kids in a big city, so I don't see how that's relevant.

"so what if every mom isn't ms. cleaver walking down the street..."

No one has criticised anyone for failing to be June Cleaver. So, I don't know who you're addressing here.

"i could say the same thing for yupster girls in their 20's in this city."

No one in this thread has denied that yupster girld in their 20's in this city can be criticized for various things. So, I don't know what you're getting at here.

"feel free to criticize away...i guess i just don't understand how one group can be so singled out in such a fashion."

In what fashion?

"There are people who read this post who are newcomers to our neighborhood and those who might be interested in living here, and you are doing them no favors by continuing such stereotypes."

We're painting an accurate picture of the neighborhood, warts and all. I think it's a cool enough neighborhood that it can withstand our frankness. Don't you?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 3:18 PM

I would still like to know where this guy gets off criticizing mothers in parts of Manhattan and Carroll Gardens. He seems to be a complete hypocrite. HE can criticize these mothers (on the basis of who knows what...he hasn't actually described ANY incidents here), but no one is allowed to criticize mothers in PS--even when they can supply details. If that's not hypocrisy, then nothing is.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 3:22 PM

You conveniently failed to mention anything about your criticisms of mothers in parts of Manhattan and Carroll Gardens. Somehow I'm not surprised.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 3:27 PM

Yes. The exposure of your hypocrisy.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 4:02 PM

Technically speaking, Lefferts isn't really even a neighborhood. It's more like a sort of self-directing firing range.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 4:08 PM

I think the chord that was hit by the whole concept of the ficticious creature, "Park Slope mom," is worthy of a more substantive discussion. Today I was walking with a friend and we were both pushing strollers. We live in another nabe though. It is almost impossible for 2 strollers to be anywhere near each other on a sidewalk and not to potentially inconvenience everybody on the sidewalk going both ways. We of course went out of our way to let people by but we can't look behind us at all times, etc. Luckily we live in a nabe that is more accepting of minorities in general be they moms, or whatever, and I think that's why everybody was totally cool and was not put out by our presence. But perhaps in places like Park Slope and in Manhattan people are feeling so stressed and in such a rush that they don't understand that strollers are part of urban living and so they feel that it's okay to take that hostility out on the ficticious creature, Park Slope mom. It's just like when I'm in a store (bodega, 99 cent, dept. store, whatever) and people are just too on top of one another I go out of my way to remind myself that the problem is not the people in the store, it's the fact that the store chose to make such narrow aisles, or in some cases have no aisles that are clear. I guess I could just think everybody in the store is a jerk. And if I'm in a bad enough mood sometimes I do. But good architecture, good city planning, good design in general is usually helpful in these kinds of situations. And sidewalks with trees, dogs, strollers, garbage cans, newspaper machines are a pain for all of us. Taking it out on our neighbors is not the way to go here. Figure out what the problem is and try to fix it. Do we need Sharpton to come over and have a town hall meeting on CNN so we can all work it out?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 7:25 PM

I'm the 7:25 post....The point I was trying to make is that it's always possible that people will assume that just because you are in their way and you didn't see them coming that they will think you are a self-righteous jerk when you are pushing a stroller that is in their way. I've seen it happen time and time again. And mainly when I'm in Park Slope or Manhattan. I think it's just the nature of a too crowded sidewalk. My husband says he never gets these kinds of attitudes from other pedestrians though. He thinks it is because people give him the, "What a great guy, he's out with the kiddies vibe." Which is a nice vibe to be getting, but is sexist isn't it?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 8:59 PM

I've had these experiences too, and the women were not overwhelmed or distracted, which would be clear to see if that were so. They were rude. In the way they spoke to others. And in doing things like plainly seeing someone standing there struggling to look at products on a shelf behind a stroller, and still not move the stroller. For me it comes down to this. If my mother wasn't rude to others in public when raising me and my two insane brothers who must have driven her crazy, then there's no excuse for other mothers to be rude now, in these times. Period. My mother did not have a full-time nanny, had 3 children all close in age, not just one or two, she was not perfect, and yet somehow she managed to always remain gracious, remember her manners, and treat people with civility. Imagine that. It's so sad our generation has lower standards and expectations for ourselves. You can even see from many of these posts, that most people don't see one single problem with being rude, as a general concept. They should be mortified if they recognize themselves in these stories, and instead they are defensive. I've never felt so foreign, so unable to relate to my gender or fellow citizens. It's very strange.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 9:21 PM

When you said excuse me to the mom in the store what exactly did she say to you that was rude? And in what store was this? In some stores they don't allow strollers because they have limited aisle space, which makes sense, even though it's a nightmare for parents. But in other stores it is really hard for a person to navigate with a stroller at times. It's not that we are not worried about you feeling hurt by a rude experience though. It's just that you seem to be stating that your mom was a saint basically and that you think many Park Slope moms are rude. The stroller phenomenon is a relatively new thing. Most parents in other areas and even in our areas in years gone by, didn't have to rely on them as much. They could all pretty much drive where they wanted to go. Many people look at kids in strollers not as actual other human beings too...just as inanimate objects that are totally in their way. Not saying that you fall in to this category. But remember that sometimes if a mother is picking up something from an aisle of a grocery store and you have to wait a sec until she moves the stroller it doesn't mean she thinks you are garbage. It could mean she didn't see you, or she thought you were okay with her finishing up in a second. And in fact there are more Park Slope nannies in our stores on a daily basis than Park Slope parents. So perhaps you were actually interacting with a nanny who came from a different place of cultural understanding?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 10:35 PM

I’ve been following this thread with utter fascination, trying to decide whether I should relate an incident I witnessed this past summer.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained…

I was at a dive bar on 5th Ave called Jackie’s Fifth Amendment talking to a couple of pals of mine. We were sitting at the bar. To our right were a few guys who’d been there for a while. They were a little rowdy and boisterous, using a bit of rough language at times.

At one point a PS mom comes into the bar because her husband is in there with some friends. She has a baby as well as what looked like a 4 year old. She is immediately annoyed with the rowdy guys to our right because of their dirty language. I saw it on her face from the get go, but I didn’t think much about it because Jackie’s is a dive bar and the kind of place where you expect to see a little grit and grime and hear a few dirty words. This all continues and with each passing minute I see the PS mom growing more and more agitated. Eventually she comes over to the rowdies and asks them not to use rough language when her kids are nearby. They were a little stunned by this—as was I—and they didn’t say much in response. I didn’t think there was much chance of their granting PS mom her wish, though, because by this time these guys were deep in their cups. And indeed, the foul language continued until PS mom walked over a second time. This time she’s really hot, and she basically yells at these guys, telling them to watch their language and that she and her kids shouldn’t have to tolerate foul language in a public place.

This is when things got interesting. The rowdies, drunk as they were, realized that PS mom was serious, and they were getting pissed off. PS mom’s husband (aka PS dad) just looked like he wanted to be somewhere else. So anyway, everyone goes about their business and, sure enough, these guys quickly revert to foul language again. This is when PS mom really freaked out. She assailed these guys verbally, screaming at the top of her lungs that she and her family did not have to tolerate their language. One of the rowdies told PS mom to sit down and mind her own business, and that’s when PS mom shocked everyone. She SPAT on one of these guys, in full view of everyone in the bar. I’m not kidding….she SPAT on him!!

At this point PS dad moved quickly. He got his kids and PS mom and got them out of there, and we were all glad he did. I must say though, I couldn’t believe the effrontery of this woman. The rowdies, although they were talking at what I’d regard a loud voice, were not shouting their foul language. They were basically just drunk, trying to talk over a crowd and, yes, probably talking too loudly. However, it’s also important to point out that Jackie’s is a very, very small bar. It is tiny, and it’s so easy to hear what other people are saying.

Anyway, I think the story speaks for itself. You might not like foul language, but everyone knows that they’re apt to encounter foul language in a dive bar and, frankly, I’m glad that is at least one type of public space where such language is lingua franca. PS mom, in my opinion, was wildly over the line, but I’ll let you folks draw your own conclusions.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 11:04 PM

But this is just one story. I have been to a million bars and never seen anything like this occurring. Who knows if the woman you are referring to as PS mom was even really from PS. She could have been a cretin from (gasp!) beloved PLG or beloved FG or even Staten Island or some other island. It's a big city. There are millions and millions of us. Many people who are on this group live elsewhere and hang out or shop or look at housing, or have friends in PS. So they have no problem getting on this blog and bashing somebody else's (not as affordable and overly hyped) neighborhood. If it's a backlash against PS that's fine. But to blame and stereotype woman in one neighborhood is out of line. Perhaps the real issue is living in a city with so many people that are unlike yourselves. And that could be the problem with some of these PS moms too. Sometimes it is really hard to imagine you are not the center of the universe. Certainly that nut at the bar had a problem imagining so. But to some degree in this city we all kind of imagine that we are at least somewhat important, or else why bother getting up in the morning. But calling one person out for rudeness is one thing, branding a whole group of people because of a couple of isolated incidents is another.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 11:19 PM

"...branding a whole group of people because of a couple of isolated incidents is another."

Either you posted this in the wrong thread or you're so full of shit it's not even funny. No one here has "branded a whole group of people" anything. If anyone is stereotyping here, it's you.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 3, 2007 11:32 PM

I am positive lots of people can come up with an anecdote about a rude Park Slope mom. I live in Carroll Gardens, and I can come up with an anecdote about a rude Carroll Gardens mom. Big deal.

What is wrong with all you PS mom bashers is that you don't just tell a story, you offer that as justification for making sweeping generalizations that people who live in Park Slope have the burden of having to contend with those rude Park Slope moms. Well, guess what -- in any neighborhood you live in, you will have to contend with rude moms. You also have to contend with rude yuppies, single people, white people, people of color, and every other group.

Perhaps there are more moms in general in park slope, so if you don't like moms, you'll have to deal with more of them, and of course, will have more interaction and your chances of meeting a rude one are higher.

But if you go to a neighborhood with a high percentage of any group, be it white, asian, african-american, etc., you are likely to have more frequent encounters with a rude person from that particular ethnic group. That's just because there are more chances to have that encounter because the population in that neighborhood is larger.

It doesn't justify making stereotype sweeping judgements.

OK?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 2:11 PM

"What is wrong with all you PS mom bashers is that you don't just tell a story, you offer that as justification for making sweeping generalizations..."

One more time...

No one is inferring from these experiences that all mothers are bad.

No one is inferring from these experiences that all Park Slope mothers are bad.

No one is inferring from these experiences that most Park Slope mothers are bad.

The most that's being claimed is that there are enough rude mothers in Park Slope to explain the occurrence of these incidents.

Next...

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 2:27 PM

yeah! 2:11 is right on.

as an aside, there's a brilliant column in the new yorker this week by adam gopnik about the "soul" of new york. the idea of losing a sense of community and diversity (and gaining mall stores, drive-through banks, and national pharmacy chains) is so relevant to a lot of this thread. one way to start is by reaching out to people with kindness - and getting out of the way of the crazies and the jerks, in whatever form they present themselves. this is new york, after all. threats, physical and otherwise, are abundant and varied.

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/content/articles/070108ta_talk_gopnik

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 2:51 PM

2:27 you have the patience of a saint. This person is obviously a troll. You've made your position clear how many times...and yet s/he still refuses to to acknowledge it? The idea has to be to just stir up emotions for the hell of it. Yawn

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 2:58 PM

This is directed to 2:11PM.

Are you going to keep saying the same thing over and over, even though no one in this thread actually holds the position you're arguing against?

Just curious.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 3:04 PM

Replace PS Moms with any other group, say black Americans, and there would be no debate as to whether stereotyping and generalizations were being made or implied.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 3:07 PM

Kindly explain to me how this is stereotyping, no matter what group is under discussion:

No one is inferring from these experiences that all mothers are bad.

No one is inferring from these experiences that all Park Slope mothers are bad.

No one is inferring from these experiences that most Park Slope mothers are bad.

The most that's being claimed is that there are enough rude mothers in Park Slope to explain the empirical data

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 3:13 PM

2:27 writes: "the most that's being claimed is that there are enough rude mothers in Park Slope to explain the occurrence of these incidents"

Well, one more time for you as well.

There are MORE mothers in Park Slope, so you will encounter more RUDE ones than in other neighborhoods. So what is the point? If you want to avoid encounters with rude mothers, just stay away from neighborhoods with lots of mothers in general. Otherwise, I promise you, you will meet rude mothers, be it in Inwood, Bed Stuy, or Montclair, NJ. Park Slope mothers aren't any more rude than mothers in other neighborhoods.

I don't complain about rude Williamsburg hipsters, but maybe I should start. Clearly, if you go to Williamsburg, you are more likely to have a rude encounter with a hipster than on the upper east side of Manhattan. But are "Williamsburg hipsters" more rude than "Bed Stuy hipsters" or "East Village hipsters"? No, so what is the point of always bashing the Williamsburg ones?

I'm not a troll, and have only posted once before at 2:11. I don't even live in Park Slope. I just don't understand the vitriol when it comes to people who live there. Move on already.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 3:13 PM

People have clearly "inferred" that you are "implying" (not "inferring") that most PS Moms are rude.

It is ok to say because it is ok to make generalizations about well to do (presumably) white women. If this was about a class of people who were not well to do, everyone would say your posts imply stereotypes or were code of something more sinister.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 3:21 PM

"I promise you, you will meet rude mothers, be it in Inwood, Bed Stuy, or Montclair, NJ."

Once again, please, please, please identify even a single post in the above thread in which someone denies that there are rude mothers in nabes other than PS. I guarantee you you will be unable to do it.

"Park Slope mothers aren't any more rude than mothers in other neighborhoods."

Once again, no one claimed that they're ruder in PS than in other nabes. The claim is only that there are ENOUGH rude ones there to explain the empirical facts. Period. Full stop.

"I don't complain about rude Williamsburg hipsters, but maybe I should start. Clearly, if you go to Williamsburg, you are more likely to have a rude encounter with a hipster than on the upper east side of Manhattan. But are "Williamsburg hipsters" more rude than "Bed Stuy hipsters" or "East Village hipsters"? No

Where the hell do you get off saying "No"? That's a generalization! What's your support for it? C'mon...it's put up or shut up time now... Have you examined each hipster in every single one of these nabes? If not, then what's your evidence for this generalization? If you don't have any evidence at all, you're just stereotyping.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 3:23 PM

You don't have to "explain an empirical fact", it stands on its own. We've got some people posting here who clearly are putting on airs of intelligence for the sake of arguing. Using the word "inferring" incorrectly, etc.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 3:28 PM

"period" and "full stop" mean the same thing, clever one.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 3:30 PM

I'm not 2.11, I just read this silly thread and was struck by the sheer idiocy of it, including the pretensions of intelligent debate by people who don't even seem to understand the meaning of the vocabularly they are using.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 3:34 PM

Gee 2:11, sorry you don't like our "vocabularly".

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 3:36 PM

I'm not talking about typos, I'm talking about not understanding the meanings of words.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 3:37 PM

3:13 what "empirical data" are you referring to?

You really don't get it, perhaps on purpose. I'm not making generalizations about Williamsburg versus Bed Stuy hipsters, I'm making fun of your comment that there's "empirical evidence" that justifies bashing one neighborhood's hipsters over another.

For the record, I understand you aren't saying ALL Park Slope mothers are rude or even that MOST are, or that all mothers in general are bad. I'm just wondering why you need to keep harping particularly on Park Slope mothers, who are IN GENERAL no worse than any other neighborhood's mothers. Or do you have some "empirical evidence" as you say, to prove otherwise.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 3:38 PM

The only empirical data we were talking about were observations made of people's behavior. At any rate, that's all I remember.

I never, ever said that there is empirical evidence that justifies "bashing" one nabe's hipsters rather than anothers. YOU said (and I quote) "are "Williamsburg hipsters" more rude than "Bed Stuy hipsters" or "East Village hipsters"? No". I simply asked you to support this claim. How do you know that one group of hipsters isn't more rude than another? It's your claim, not mine. I have no clue whether one is ruder than another.

"I'm just wondering why you need to keep harping particularly on Park Slope mothers, who are IN GENERAL no worse than any other neighborhood's mothers."

I was talking about Park Slope mothers because Park Slope is the only neighborhood in which I regularly have nasty encounters with mothers. That is all. I'm sure there are plenty of rude mothers in other nabes, and I'm sure there are plenty of wonderful moms in all nabes. Perhaps if I walk down a different street in Carroll Gardens, I'll have lots of nasty encounters with moms...more even than in Park Slope. I have no clue. All I'm trying to do is talk about my own friggin' experience, if only the thought police will allow that.

Also, I'd like to know how you justify claiming that "Park Slope mothers...are IN GENERAL no worse than any other neighborhood's mothers." Are you a sociologist who just got through working under a grant from the NSF? What kinds of studies back up this claim? Or are you just stereotyping?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 3:51 PM

STOP IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 3:53 PM

3:37, if you've got a point to make about semantics, dive right in....

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 3:54 PM

Long: Bay Ridge, Ditmas Park, Midwood, Kensington

Short: nabes in the shadow of AY

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 4:48 PM

Agreed. One evil troll had a bad day.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 5:08 PM

Totally. Let's just leave him to his precious bugaboos and Park Slope muthas.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 5:21 PM

you all are missing the point here. Its not the Bugaboos that are the problem but the lesbians. Really, I mean c'mon, how tacky. I used to like to "get some beave" back when I was in Oberlin. But I got over it. Now I have a single family brownstone that used to house three families-we evicted them-and a place in the Catskills. Guess what all you pseudo-class warriors, I win, you lose.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 5:41 PM

I think the problem with a lot of the "beave" in this thread is that it hasn't been "gotten" in a while.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 5:50 PM

Here's a fun one from yesterday: At the Chip Shop on 5th ave., Mommy and Daddy PLAYING with little Sweetiekins in the restaurant for a good 15-20 minutes after they'd paid and the plates had been cleared away. Sweetiekins jumped on empty chairs & benches (with Mommy & Daddy's encouragement), threw toys on the floor, shrieked, etc. Fun for everyone!

That's right, in case you missed it, everyplace in PS is a freakin' playground.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 5:56 PM

LESBIANS!

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 6:00 PM

What really bothers 5:58 is not that we're absorbed with ourselves but that we're not absorbed with her brats.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 6:05 PM

orbit who cares about the brand? rude behavior is rude behavior...period. i think don juan is right. some of these 'muthas' just need a little taste of the old turkey neck.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 6:40 PM

Amen Brother!!!

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 6:41 PM

I expect Victorian Flatbush to take some major strides forward. You can already see it. I think most of the rest of Brooklyn will hold, at least for 2007.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 6:47 PM

I totally agree Tarsier. You hit the nail on the head.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 7:20 PM

LOVE the Jackie's 5th amendment story...sounds like the family walked across the street to regroup at the Chip Shop after the blowup ;)

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 7:48 PM

Please, these mothers are horrible in every way. They're unpleasant to talk to and to look at. The father's are worse total wimps, no backbone. They walk around like they've been castrated, pushing one kid in a stroller one strapped to there chest. I'm a park slope mom of 2. But I'm not a rude old miserable menopausal yuppie. I've lived here my whole life. I remember when this was the ghetto, nobody wanted to live here. I'm 32.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 8:28 PM

Right on 8:28PM. Thanks for telling it like it is.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 8:34 PM

8:28 your post says alot about you. Why does a father pushing one baby in a stroller with another strapped to his chest look "castrated"? Talk about judging people. I would be interested to hear what you consider an "acceptable" appearance for a father?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 8:45 PM

What's wrong, 8:45? Has it been that long since you've seen a real man?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 9:00 PM

My guess is she wants someone to describe a real man so she can put her hands down her pants.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 9:02 PM

In this neighborhood it is hard to find a real man......I see we have some park slope dads on here, or did your wife type that for you. I know its hard to tell the difference between the yuppie men and women they both look and dress so much alike. You can tell the women because at least they have balls.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 9:10 PM

I suspect that 8:28, 8:34, 9:00, 9:02 and 9:10 are the same troll posting. I guess the troll thinks that a Park Slope father would take seriously insults hurled by jealous anonymous posters. I just feel sorry for you. Hopefully all the Park Slope moms you meet in the future will be pleasant and polite, as we all should be.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 9:39 PM

2007 Predictions...

Long on Bugaboos, McLarens and MILF fantasies...

Short on humor and tolerance in the slope.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 9:45 PM

struck a nerve, I see.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 9:51 PM

No 9:39, a Park Slope father wouldn't have time to take anything seriously. He's too busy having his opinions handed to him by his wife.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 9:54 PM

Damn, you people are all crazy. This thread is truly frightening.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 9:56 PM

Was it Patti Smith who said, "Woman are the Niggars of the world??"

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 10:05 PM

No John Lennon: world. Think about it. Do something about it. We make her paint her face and dance. If she won't be a slave, we say that she don't love us. If she's real, we say she's trying to be a man. While putting her down we pretend that she is above us. Woman is the nigger of the world. Yes she is. If you don't believe me take a look to the one you're with. Woman is the slave of the slaves. Better scream about it. We make her bear and raise our children, and then we leave her flat for being a fat old mother hen. We tell her home is the only place she should be, then we complain that she's too unworldly to be our friend. Woman is the nigger of the world. Yes she is. If you don't believe me take a look to the one you're with. Woman is the slave of the slaves. Yeah (think about it). We insult her everyday on TV, and wonder why she has no guts or confidence. When she's young we kill her will to be free. While telling her not to be so smart, we put her down for being so dumb. Woman is the nigger of the world. Yes she is. If you don't believe me take a look to the one you're with. Woman is the slave of the slaves. Yes she is. If you believe me, you better scream about it."

-John Lenon

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 10:07 PM

You liar. You know who you are talking about. And so do we. You have singlehandedly offended more people by your rude, thoughtless remarks than all the possibly rude Park Slope moms who ever breathed on this planet.

And no I'm not a Park Slope mom. Just a member of the human race. And actually a religious person who values other human beings and their concerns.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 10:20 PM

I've said what I have to say. You have demonstrated firsthand what rudeness is all about. My feelings aren't hurt. Quite the opposite. But thanks for showing us once again how your compassion really drives the words you choose to be posted on a public blog.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 4, 2007 10:57 PM

Damn those Park Slope mothers.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 9:56 AM

People please...Lesbians

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 10:02 AM

Don Juan was right. Dem Park Slope mamas love the cack.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 10:13 AM

11:36, nice post. You have nothing to be concerned about though. The kinds of behavior that you describe, which result from frayed nerves and the stress of raising small children, are totally cool, totally understandable, and really not what the folks here are complaining about. I wouldn't really even describe behavior resulting from these things "rude". "Thoughtless" maybe, but not rude. The people here are criticizing behaviors that really are instances of full blown rudeness, that aren't the result of ignorance, fatigue, or whatever. Cases where it seems like the person has to go out of their way in order to be rude. This is very different from what you describe.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 11:42 AM

"well i think what 11:36 is saying is that you and the other people who have been trashing ps moms simply don't know what's going on in their minds."

When you criticize people for inappropriate behavior, or praise them for good behavior, do YOU know what's going on in THEIR minds? If so, what's the trick? If you don't have some special access to the contents of other people's minds that the rest of us lack, then it seems odd to say that it's okay for you to praise/criticize others and yet it's not okay for others to offer praise or criticism. Don't ya think?

"...many of these stories about ps moms have been fabricated.."

Okay..ummm...care to back this up with a little evidence?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 12:09 PM

11:48, tonight I'll be getting some from a nice, tight 22 year old woman. That must eat away at your gut like an acid.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 12:17 PM

12:17,

That comment makes me feel sad for that poor girl. She probably is fantasizing about a stud with a loft in Tribeca, not a slovenly renter in Park Slope pulling caffe lattes for a living. Awww.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 12:21 PM

Well, tomorrow night a nice, tight 20 year old will be in her place, so she'll be able to traipse off to Tribeca or wherever she wants. lol

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 12:23 PM

She must cost you more than your rent

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 12:26 PM

She's worth it.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 12:27 PM

Thanks 12:26. We figured you were just making it all up.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 12:29 PM

You really think all those posts were written by one person, only one person has had a bad experience with the people in park slope, are you crazy?

Ask anyone who is not a yuppie that lives here? Everybody hates yuppies and I know alot of you don't think you're yuppies but you are. If you didn't grow up here you're considered a yuppie. Even the first wave that moved here 20 years ago, are yuppies. If you know people who have lived here their whole lives, they can't stand you. And we know that you hate us. Thats why you're so rude and inconsiderate. The only good thing about yuppies is they brought the property values up so high here its unbelieveable. Just around the block from me they sold a house the size of shack for $1.3 million, who in their right mind would pay that much, its crazy.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 12:39 PM

Oh, and 11:48, have fun bedding down with that sack of potatos you call a 'wife' tonight. LOL

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 12:58 PM

11:48, You think whoever doesn't find PS men attractive and manly must be lesbians or bitter barren spinsters. C'mon you have to admit PS people are a very unnattractive bunch. I work on 7th ave and it would be a miracle to see one attractive man a month, and I use the term attractive very loosely

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 1:04 PM

12:17,

Why? Is tonight your late shift at Gorilla Coffee?

It probably bothers you that the "bugaboos" you talk about cost more than your rent. Socioeconomic destiny. What a bitch.

And for the record, BUGABOOS DON'T COME IN PAIRS, so those of you complaining about them are mistaken. They're probably McClaren.

And if you don't have kids, get the fuck out of 321 please. Thanks.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 1:21 PM

LOL...sounds like 1:21's wife is also an old stretched out sack of potatos...oh well.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 1:28 PM

1:21, thats what people are talking about, you're putting down people because you don't think they have as much money as you or because they work in a coffee shop. That is the attitude that all the PS moms have. Thats the way they treat people who they feel aren't on their level.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 1:29 PM

1:21 IS the old stretched out wife

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 1:31 PM

1:29,

I could care less. We've already made you millionaires. Now let us use the fucking school.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 1:32 PM

What are you even talking about, you moron. Who said anything about school?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 1:34 PM

321. Are you brain-dead?

Complain all you want about bugaboos. It's the rule of the jungle. We want your homes, you want money. Eventually you (or your landlord) will cave.

It's just a matter of time.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 1:39 PM

I don't know what you're talking about 321, my kids don't even go there, and I never seen anyone mention it. I don't care about your stroller. I'm a mother of 2 and I have a stroller also and I will run over whoever gets in my way I don't care if its a dog, a kid or an adult. If you see a woman with a carriage you should have enough consideration to move, if not you get hit. My philosophy is if you're rude to me I'll be rude to you. Some people need to realize they are not the only people who live here.

I don't know why you want these houses. It's not just that we want money most of the people here can't believe anyone would pay these prices. So they take the money and run. And really nobody really wants to live near you people.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 1:51 PM

I am 1:39, and I have been DEFENDING the Moms.

I am pro-gentrification. Pro-diaper slinging Dads. Pro dried out hags and certainly anti-posters who have to farcially elaborate on the "tight" pussy he has, or pretends to have. No "tight" pussy I know wants to date a barista from Gorilla, much less end up getting eaten out on a bedbug ridden couch in some shared apartment in Park Slope.

Give me a hot Mom with kids in Berkley Carroll all jacked up on Smith & Vine booze in the backseat of her 5 series anyday over that "tight" pussy of yours.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 2:50 PM

"By this time I've probably had sex with my wife 5000 times. What's the point of 5001?"

So true.
LOL

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 3:19 PM

I don't want this to ever end.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 3:23 PM

3:01,

Too true. Hopefully I'm his landlord by then.

2:50

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 3:34 PM

Thats because yuppies believe everyone who is not a yuppie is poor and uneducated. That they are not worthy of respect. That somehow the house they own is better than the house I own. But I console myself with the fact that I don't have a mortgage payment to srape together and an illegal nanny to under pay and abuse.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 3:38 PM

That's the spirit, 3:34! If you're his landlord, you can drill a little peephole. Then you can watch him bang the living daylights out of your daughter.

I like you, man. You're kinky.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 3:58 PM

She'll never pay for a latte in this town again!

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 4:13 PM

And hey, the renter could just pimp out this guy's daughter and make his own fortune.

I get first dibbs!

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 4:43 PM

Yo lonely guy. You got some major issues with women. You need therapy/medication/get locked up. Who cares about Park Slope moms?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 9:37 PM

Michael,

Welcome to the 'Hood. You've definitely made a good investment. The demographics of DP are very odd. "Middle class" (Blacks) families rent apartments in the nicer apartment buildings in DP. The "Working Poor" (Mexicans, Pakistanis and other immigrants) rent in the tenement buildings. The more affluent (white) families own million dollar homes. There isn't much interaction between the groups.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 10:27 PM

BB

This is precisely what is happening in DP.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 5, 2007 10:37 PM

I for one am glad that white affluent families are purchasing homes in areas traditionally considered "working class." I purchased my home as white flight began in my neighborhood only to watch property values drop, services decline and crime increase. As a hard working "person of color" I was ready to join the white flight. I stayed put though and it will be extremely profitable for me when I do sell. My mother "immigrated" from the south and my father from Barbados and they didn't take any shit from my siblings and me They worked their asses off to make sure that we got what we needed and $200 sneakers were not included on their list of needs. I was always told that African American, Latinos, Native Americans, etc... were wronged at the hand of whites in this country and I agree with their assessment wholeheartedly. However, we were also taught not to wait for any type of apology or handout as a reparation because it wasn't going to happen. My husband and I like my parents worked hard purchased a home and rasied our children with the same values. They are not at risk for being displaced because they went to college, have good jobs and can afford to live where they want. When other people of color learn to stop whining and complaining and take full advantage of what this city has to offer educationally, they will not be at the whim of their landlords. I don't feel sorry for them if they are displaced. I say good riddance! So welcome white people to Bed-Sty, Crown Heights, Greenpoint, Victorian Flatbush etc... and you have no reason to feel guilty for displacing anybody!

Posted by: Anonymous at January 6, 2007 1:01 PM

Don't you realize its not about skin color, its about money and property values. Of course she wants 'whites' to move in. she's a homeowner. And it's not really whites, its yuppies, black or white they're all the same shit just in different shades. Its not about color it's about money. It's not racism its classism. Rich blacks are the same as rich whites.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 6, 2007 3:27 PM

Who assumed you weren't a homeowmer, you idiot. And stop pulling that "I'm Black" bullshit, once you start that everybody stops listening. Everything is about money.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 6, 2007 4:15 PM

I never said it didn't exist. This argument on this thread has not been about racism. You shouldn't turn it into something that cut and dry. The working class people in Park Slope are all colors, white, black, hispanic, etc. but what they all have in common is that they can't afford to live in this neighborhood. So my point was about classism not racism.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 6, 2007 4:44 PM

Oh really, closely related and entwined. Is that your way of saying all whites have money and non whites don't??????? Talk about ignorant. Sad very sad. I don't know where my monthly check "for just being white" has been for the passed 32 years has been.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 6, 2007 4:57 PM

The people who have self hatred going on are the crackheads, Bloods and Crips who are killing themselves and eachother. Anon 1:01, I agree with you sista'

Posted by: Anonymous at January 6, 2007 6:42 PM

You people should really be ashamed of yourselves. James Brown was right when he sang:

"When some of us get money
We forget about our people"

(RIP James...we'll continue the struggle, even if the people posting above won't)

Posted by: Anonymous at January 6, 2007 9:56 PM

James Brown also sang

"I don't want nobody to give me nothing, jsut open up the door and I'll get it myself"

Posted by: Anonymous at January 7, 2007 7:33 PM

Yes he did. But I don't remember anywhere in that song where he sings:

"I don't want nobody to let me have nothing, block the door so I can't get it myself."

Posted by: Anonymous at January 8, 2007 8:25 AM

RE: Anon 8:25 1/8

You have to come better than that man. Anon 7:33 1/7 got you on that one!

Posted by: Anonymous at January 8, 2007 10:01 PM

I can't even tell who 7:33 is addressing. Looking over the posts above...neither side is wanting handouts for black folks. All people are wanting is an end to discrimination and equal opportunity. Is someone saying that there should not be opportunity? If so, who?

Posted by: Anonymous at January 9, 2007 8:46 AM

9:54

I am 7:33 but not 10:01. I did not quote him out of context and surely it is not my intent to convince anyone that JB was not an advocate of civil rights. I wanted to emphasize the point that Blacks and others ARE NOT looking for handouts but for an equal opportunity (hence Just open up the door.. and I'll get it myself.) From WEB Dubois and Booker T to Martin and Malcolm we have disagreed with the manner in which we go about getting a fair chance. I do not want to see an "underclass" of any color pushed out of neighborhoods as these neighborhoods become fashionable/convenient for PS stroller mom types. James Brown lived an interesting life and I have the utmost respect for the brother but even within his own life there was an interesting dichotomy. Some might perceive it as self hatred. The brother became addicted to drugs and caught a serious case of Jungle Fever in his later years. This of course does not negate all of the good he has done. So 8:25 misquoted and misused JB's lyrics not me and 10:01 as did you misunderstood the situation all together.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 9, 2007 8:42 PM

That's cool 8:42. And yes, you're right. We don't need any handouts...just a fair playing field. And at the same time, people of color should not be pushed out of their neighborhoods by more advantaged groups. I'm glad we're in agreement about this. It truly saddens me when I see one of my brothers or sisters turn his or her back on those who are less fortunate. I'll never do that and I'm glad we're on the same side in this respect. Peace.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 9, 2007 8:55 PM