The Gay & Lesbian Times prides itself on pushing the envelope, tackling difficult questions and reporting controversial news. As San Diego’s leading GLBT news source, we have covered many contentious topics, including the recent tsunami disaster, our turbulent election season both locally and nationally, issues surrounding the controversial policy of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, several discussions on HIV/AIDS and of course, marriage equality. All seem to be hot-button items, yet these topics have garnered little or no response from our audience. To be fair, we have received passionate letters, but in general, the community has lingered in hibernation during the recent fall and winter months.

Ironically, there has been a recent clamor from the community regarding a feature story published in our Jan. 6 issue of this year. It is interesting to note, that with all of the recent topics we’ve reported on, our “Get fit for 2005” issue has created the most controversy.

We do admit there were some problems with this issue. First, the personal trainer, Chris Keith, who authored the feature story “Resolutions ready”, has since come under intense scrutiny. Many in the personal training/gym community are outraged that the Gay & Lesbian Times would use someone whose business practices have been deemed questionable, alleging Keith has been convicted of steroid trafficking. This has not yet been confirmed, nor has Keith been available for comment. The Gay & Lesbian Times was unaware of this information prior to publication of the fitness issue.

Keith is smart, eager, and delivered a comprehensive health feature the community can benefit from. It is unfortunate if these allegations prove true because his work for us was admirable. That said, judging from the commotion this feature has caused, the Gay & Lesbian Times would be hard pressed to find someone acceptable to what appears to be a highly competitive industry in San Diego.

Further complaints were received noting the shallow nature of the feature and its ability to perpetuate the “trend that a person is only worth as good as they look.”

Is the gay community in San Diego body obsessed? Absolutely! In the “Get Fit for 2005” issue, the editorial visited the importance of actual health versus the appearance of health, and even analogized the gay community to that of a puddle – backhanding the esteem to which we hold the value of physical beauty and appearance.

That this issue alone has bred so much noise is a sad indication of what really reaches a bulk of our readers.

And the controversy continues. Recently the Gay & Lesbian Times published a letter to the editor containing less than favorable content in regards to the model featured in the fitness issue in question. The author opines his distaste for the personal training industry and doles out a series of insults and generalizations – stating the personal trainer featured on the cover is more akin to an escort than a certified and professional personal trainer.

This letter ignited a powerful response from the community condemning both the author of the letter and the Gay & Lesbian Times for publishing it.

This paper does not in any way support or endorse the opinions written in the letters to the editor section. It has been our policy to publish all letters, unedited and in the order they are received. The letters to the editor portion of the GLT creates a space for the community to communicate openly – unedited. By publishing all letters, we ensure all voices are heard equally and therefore will continue to adhere to this policy regardless of our distaste and objections to the content.

As with any topic featured, we invite the discourse, dialogue and scrutiny. When we receive feedback from the community it’s as if we have reached people. Letters, phone calls – fabulous! We encourage the participation. What remains incomprehensible is the amount of response we received on this specific topic that pales in comparison to the many pressing issues threatening this community every day. How is it that a fitness feature inspires so much discourse while topics containing actual substance elicit most often less than a murmur?