Only in California/San Francisco

Yesterday: Long story in the paper about this year's high-profile murder case, relating the desire of the victim to raise her family in "small-town" Modesto. The same article called Modesto a "town" elsewhere, noting its population of a few years ago (188,000) in the same sentence. (Population is now 202,000.)

Where but in California could a place of 202,000 population, not in any sense a suburb, be called a town--much less a "small town"?

Today: OK, everybody has cross-dressers or drag queens. But how many places have pageants for "faux queens"? That's right: An event centered on...
women who dress up as men dressing up as women.

You gotta love it.

Relevance to libraries: None.

But here's an extra trivia question for people outside Northern California: What's the largest city in Northern California?

Comments

What's the largest city in Northern California?

Havana?

Re: What's the largest city in Northern California

Cute. No, that's the largest city in Florida; it's just an older version of Havana and goes by a different name.

[San Jose, in case anyone still cares. It's substantially larger than San Francisco, but lacks the carefully-cultivated tourist hype.]

Was gonna guess

Yreka. Depends on how you define N. Calif. :) (I used to work there)

Re:Was gonna guess

Madcow,

Yreka? Really? All 7,290 of 'em?

Now Eureka, pop. 26,000+, I could see--but unless you draw the line VERY far North, I'd say Redding (around 80,000 people) is the largest city for "north of the Central Valley's northern edge" (or "north of the extended Bay Area") as a definition.

But I suppose if you define N. Calif extremely enough, Yreka qualifies...

Of course, if you define Southern California tightly, San Diego becomes the largest city...

Re:Was gonna guess

I was drawing the line at Weed. :)

Syndicate content