top of page

Dirt in a Skirt Group

Public·13 members

Playboy Named Vista Way

BEVERLY HILLS, CA - A former contestant on "America's Next Top Model" was named Playboy's 2016 Playmate of the Year, becoming only the third black woman to ever be so honored, the magazine announced Wednesday.

Playboy Named Vista Way

Of 60 bars and nightclubs, cafes and restaurants mentioned in the story only 10 still exist, and only four -- David's Deli, Fishermen's Grotto, the Buena Vista and the Iron Horse -- look and work the same. So we bolstered the list with some newer joints in town to bridge two generations of nightlife and form our own tour, which has evolved to suit the playgirl as much as the playboy.

From the Iron Horse proceed across Market and Mission streets -- a divide that no playboy would have crossed in 1958 -- to the XYZ bar in the W San Francisco. A beaded silver curtain gives way to a long bar where a drinker can watch a martini change color, red to green to purple to blue to yellow, as it sits atop a plastic counter lit from beneath with fiber optics. Over the railing, diners can be seen eating pumpkin seed-crusted monkfish.

Sure, this is Alamo - not L.A. Neighbors are lawyers and businessmen, not playboy bunnies and Hollywood hotshots. But once you start passing tailored laws about what people can do on their property, where does it end?

Your article on Kevin Degnan brought us quite a few laughs, due to the enormous amount of "rumor" involved describing what happens in his home, and the particularly funny illustrations. People's rights are very important in this country.I feel, the piece could have contained a little more truth. But what is journalism without a dash of drama and a pinch of gossip?As a friend of many years, a "party go-er", married, 36 year old, mother of 2 children, I can say, that many of the adjectives used to describe Kevin, and this situation, are very inaccurate. There are areas that tread on very thin ice, as to the integrity used when publishing things about his practice, his finances, and the "opinions" of a source that wouldn't be named. I support freedom of speech, which can be very defaming at times.Kevin has worked hard to build a referral only business as a plastic surgeon, one of the best in this area. His skills and the results his patients receive are the reason for his success. He in no way uses "gatherings" to get business or offer the delusion that he can make guests look like "young socialites". In fact, he is known for being truthful with patients expectations and what he can and cannot do for them. He is a very professional doctor,who does amazing work. For the "unidentified speaker" to tie in his private, personal life, into his surgical practice, is almost as bad as what his neighbors are doing to him.Anyone who knows Kevin, either professionally, personally or just a "party-goer", would undeniably say that he is a most respectful man. To call him "hedonistic" or "throw" in the statement, "pedophile parties" is unfair and defaming to his character. If the Jones Ranch HOA had given him any respect at all, by knocking on his front door to resolve this situation amicably, and treat him with respect, none of them would be in this boat today.Kevin is a law abiding citizen and has never set out to break any rules or laws. The"unknown" speaker in this article, who has had her 17 year old attend one of his parties, needs to look at her own situation, and get her own daughter in check. Kevin is not responsible for her disobedience. If it wasn't his party, it would be someone else's. Her views are entirely delusional.He is not responsible for what people choose to wear. Kevin goes to great lengths to create a safe environment for his guests, as well as follow the requests of his neighbors. He spends a considerable amount of money to have shuttles take all guests up to the property so there is not a single car driving through the neighborhood. He hires security, I'D's are checked, bartenders sign a liability contract to not serve alcohol to anyone who does not have a "21yr" wristband on. The "beds" around the poolside were built to emulate the finest beach clubs in the world. Adjectives used to describe Kevin's intentions, which the "unidentified speaker" has no ideawhat is in his head, are not in place "to encourage sex." Others have said their children have seen things happen in the streets.. These parties start at 10pm. What are their children doing out in the street at 10pm watching for party go-ers to do something wrong? Possibly in the beginning, these things could have happened. He put things into play, to keep anything from happening that would hurt his neighbors.This lawsuit isn't about noise. If everyone were judged for what they do in their private lives, this would be a very narrow minded world we live in. I'd like to think this world is making some headway. Who is to say who is right or wrong how someone chooses to live their life? Kevin has never asked anyone in his neighborhood to conform to what works in his life. They sued him for voting "no" when it didn't suit them.$400,000 in lawyer fees is a high price to pay for the freedoms others have already died for. To be judged and defamed for his personal choices that are hurting no one? I call that discrimination and defamation of character. Those are not apart of the Constitution.This is America...Isn't it?

Dear Natalie,To imagine that any form of playboy activity is occurring in Alamo seems all together silly. Why would anyone, for any purpose, seek to have fun in Alamo. With Alamo being my death sentence, I can't imagine any opportunity to have fun, or for that matter, any form of celebration, in simply DULL and DEAD Alamo.The thought is very silly.I am very sure you did a very in-depth story, but I wonder how much fact there is in the reality portrayed to you. Your work is excellent and I will defend that you were thorough. Alamo is a canard and simply the issue those reporters that try to report the lack of reality.Simply look at how AIM lied to you!A fan, Hal

I believe the story (about the Alamo plastic surgeon) focused around personal freedoms: His right to live his life the way he wanted to on his property amidst a neighborhood that wanted him to follow its own set of rules, which were created specifically for him. The story raises important questions: How much can a person decide or act according to his wishes on his property? When does a person's actions encroach on another person's property or well-being? Where is the balance? "But once you start passing tailored laws about what people can do on their property, where does it end?" the story says. This is the point of the story. The party's salacious details, neighborhood complaints, quotes, interviews, and other reportage revolve around the personal freedom issue. The piece contains fair, extensive interviews and quotes about the surgeon's perspective - from his mouth and his lawyer. He talks about cooperating with the police, respecting women, and having more women than men at his parties to protect women. Additionally, the story reports that most of the skirmishes are minor and they happen on his property. The story doesn't take sides. In fact, it strives to bring all sides to the table. A TV reporter once said to Wolf Blitzer that she doesn't know what's going on - but she can only report on what she can see. Journalism is a glimpse of life. And good journalists do their best -under deadlines - extrapoliting information from difficult sources, diving into intense and complicated information to get "a truth" out that is pertinent to the community. And this story is an example of good journalism. It has information from neighbors, cops, party-goers, court documents, the good doctor, visuals, and a lawyer. Additionally, it appears the reporter actually went on the property, too. The views of different sides are expressed with the time at hand. It's balanced and well-written. Now, what irks me about many of the comments above are the accusations of slander, fiction and motive for gossip in the story. First, the reportage has fair comments on a matter of public interest. His parties exist in the neighborhood. Hundreds of people attend. Women wear bikinis. Many neighbors are pissed. It's affecting the surrounding the community. The issue isn't who is right and who is wrong. The issue is that it's a community issue. His parties are affecting people. This also makes him a limited public figure due to the circumstances he is immersed in. If the comments are fair in the matter of public interest, then one would have a difficult time for making a case for slander. Two, let's discuss some of the comments about "Playboy" and "hedonistic." The dictionary says playboy means "a man devoted to the pursuit of pleasure" and hedonism means "pursuit of or devotion to pleasure." These two words are true in describing him. There's nothing wrong with that. That's great. More power to him. Those parties are about pleasure, which could mean many things. If anyone can't see this, then I suggest to get your head out of the sand and read the damn article closely. Moreover, the story says the "pedophile parties" comment is a joke. Two, the quotes from the neighbors are recollections - they may not be regarded as total "fact." They are perspective and they are attributed to a source. Nonetheless, they are important to put in print - in context - because it sheds light on the situation. As far as people who say this story is gossip, I have a few words for this statement. What the story expresses in its focus and all of its details is a truth in this area. This stuff happens. It's a reality. I think stories like these reveal that many here like to keep an immaculate and pristine image and hide away their dirty laundry from the public. This whole community likes to isolate itself from the rest of the world, smile and pretend everything is perfect. It's not.As the story says, "In Degnan's case, he feels targeted because he's different - because he doesn't have two kids and a mini-van." 350c69d7ab


Welcome to the group! You can connect with other members, ge...
bottom of page