Aussie bar's conviviality at stake, bans straight men and lesbians
No idea why, but this story makes me laugh. Seems like a gay bar was invaded by a bachlorette party who did enough gawking at the cute gay men at a bar in Melbourne, that the patrons said enough was enough, and banned heterosexuals.
I love this bit.
Quote:
In her findings, the tribunal's deputy president, Cate McKenzie, said Monday that to allow large numbers of non-gays onto the premises could "undermine or destroy" the convivial atmosphere the Peel Hotel sought to create for gay men.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/...ia-Gay-Bar.php
Re: Aussie bar's conviviality at stake, bans straight men and lesbians
So it's okay to be a bigot, so long as you belong to a PC protected group?
The right to discriminate cannot be selectively applied. We either ram integration down everyone's throats, or we allow everyone free association. I wonder how these gents would feel if a bar posted a sign "All men frequenting this bar must be straight. Gay and straight women welcome. No gay men allowed".
Re: Aussie bar's conviviality at stake, bans straight men and lesbians
Same deal as women only gyms.
I don't agree with it and I do think it is discriminatory, the easy test is to reverse the situation and see if that is fair.
Mind you there isn't any gay clubs I'd want to get into, so it isn't limiting what I can or can't do. However if all clubs had this policy it certainly would make me feel like a second class citizen. Human Rights aren't an exclusive format to any one group, it has to be available to all or it is available to none.
Re: Aussie bar's conviviality at stake, bans straight men and lesbians
:laugh4: Well its easy for a straight or lesbian people not to go into a gay mens bar...
Re: Aussie bar's conviviality at stake, bans straight men and lesbians
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Corleone
So it's okay to be a bigot, so long as you belong to a PC protected group?
The right to discriminate cannot be selectively applied. We either ram integration down everyone's throats, or we allow everyone free association. I wonder how these gents would feel if a bar posted a sign "All men frequenting this bar must be straight. Gay and straight women welcome. No gay men allowed".
Check the quote in the OP. "Large numbers". In this case it sounds like a hen party turning up to stare at the regulars and play the "fag-hag" for the evening. The owners of the bar have reacted in order to maintain their customer base. What if it had been a group of guys coming in looking for trouble?
I know of plenty of premises which don't allow stag and hen parties, for example, because the income isn't worth the disruption and damage to normal business.
In this case the bar owners have decided to ban heterosexuals which IMO wrong. You should not more ban people based on their sexuality than you should ban based on their skin colour.
Just turn large parties away at the door unless they have previously booked. Turn away or throw out disruptive individuals as you would anywhere else.
Easy.
Edit:
I see no bigotry in this case, merely an unwise business decision followed by a well-meaning but misguided official judgement.
Re: Aussie bar's conviviality at stake, bans straight men and lesbians
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slyspy
Check the quote in the OP. "Large numbers". In this case it sounds like a hen party turning up to stare at the regulars and play the "fag-hag" for the evening. The owners of the bar have reacted in order to maintain their customer base. What if it had been a group of guys coming in looking for trouble?
I know of plenty of premises which don't allow stag and hen parties, for example, because the income isn't worth the disruption and damage to normal business.
In this case the bar owners have decided to ban heterosexuals which IMO wrong. You should not more ban people based on their sexuality than you should ban based on their skin colour.
Just turn large parties away at the door unless they have previously booked. Turn away or throw out disruptive individuals as you would anywhere else.
Easy.
Edit:
I see no bigotry in this case, merely an unwise business decision followed by a well-meaning but misguided official judgement.
I believe the bigotry comes in the official decision when the court should have given the owner your advice about large parties and hen/stag nights.
I agree with Don, if you can't ban gays/women/blacks you can't ban straights/men/whites. I think the owner doing his job and running a decent pub could have sorted all this out without turning to courts, if I started making the regulars feel uncomfortable or threatened in a pub I would expect a warning to calm down and then an order to leave, doesn't matter who or what the regulars are, even if I was upsetting the regulars dogs.
