I was using those tourist areas as geographical points of reference—Golden Gate to the north, Candlestick to the south, etc. I’ve been in many neighborhoods that are definitely not where tourists go, but I’ll admit I’ve never lived in San Francisco itself—couldn’t afford to if I wanted to.
It’s true that San Francisco feels safer than West Oakland—where I once got lost late at night—although in San Francisco, I always try to park on a busy street where my car is less likely to be burglarized. Piles of broken glass on some streets are not very reassuring.
But I have encountered plenty of weirdos in areas outside the Castro—a district that I have never visited.
There's a lot of exaggeration and hyperbole about SF, especially about it being a gay city (actually a loud minority here). I do agree that it is much safer than Oakland. There is a lot of car burglaries in downtown SF - my cars have been targetted a half dozen times over the years. But Oakland is unsafe for people.
One of my daughters lived in Oakland, commuting through the worst parts to get to her job in Emeryville. I was worried as heck for her, especially when people were getting carjacked and shot at the same intersections she stopped at daily. There's stereotyping about Oakland too. It's not all black. The lowlands near the bay are black. Nice affluent white neighborhoods with yuppie shops are on the hills. Until you actually live in a city, you truly can't say you know it.
I've seen a lot of changes in SF over near 70 years. Much of it changed because of outsiders coming in from other states. The one thing that shocked me is that blacks have left the city in droves; used to think they would take over after the 60's but the opposite happened. Lots of white yuppies with money came in (many of whom were gay). There's conflict between them and poor homeless. You don't hear much about regular folks who are busy raising families.