Discrimination in the service industry gets you fined

[Hawkmoon]

Noooo.... you have a right to buy time on the internet."

I do?

Which amendment in the Bill of Rights mentions the Internet ... or buying?

[Ron]

So is it illegal to have a mens only club or establishment?

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

So I guess I can force em to let me join girls gym

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[RevDisk]

So I guess I can force em to let me join girls gym

Oh yes, there's a cottage industry in California on doing exactly that. A lawyer named Alfred G. Rava has made good money suing female business stuff, women only gyms, women in technology groups, “ladies night” discounts, mothers day events, etc.  A Voice for Men, the National Center for Men, the Men’s Rights Association and the ManKind Initiative apparently do have lawyers for just such occasions.

[KD5NRH]

This, to me, would be a bit like me rolling up to the local tire shop on my motorcycle asking for a mount & balance.

Your tire shop must suck; the main reason the local bike mechanic is right next to my tire shop is so he can send the ones needing tires right next door.  They'll do anything from a tricycle to a tractor.  (And yes, I've seen them changing the tires on a nicely restored classic Radio Flyer tricycle.)

[Pb]

I wish this country had real freedom of association.

[BlueStarLizzard]

So is it illegal to have a mens only club or establishment?

I think you can get around it by having it be a private club or non profit, maybe?

[wmenorr67]

Todd Starnes' take on this.

But the state says the law is the law — which makes about as much sense as a guy going to a gynecologist for a prostate exam.

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/barber-shop-fined-for-not-cutting-womans-hair.html?intcmp=hplnws

[SADShooter]

Todd Starnes' take on this.

ut the state says the law is the law — which makes about as much sense as a guy going to a gynecologist for a prostate exam.

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/barber-shop-fined-for-not-cutting-womans-hair.html?intcmp=hplnws

These days, expert confirmation seems increasingly appropriate.

[KD5NRH]

I think you can get around it by having it be a private club or non profit, maybe?

Minimum of one testicle required for entry, regardless of gender.

[BlueStarLizzard]

Minimum of one testicle required for entry, regardless of gender.

So, if I go make myself a trophy necklace from my victims testicles, I'm in?

Cool.

[roo_ster]

So, if I go make myself a trophy necklace from my victims testicles, I'm in?

Cool.

Maybe, maybe not.  But it sure would be a ballsy move.

[BlueStarLizzard]

Maybe, maybe not.  But it sure would be a ballsy move.

And if I got denied entry, than I'd have a new sorce for severed testicles (they just don't bare up under wear like skulls)

[zxcvbob]

And if I got denied entry, than I'd have a new source for severed testicles (they just don't bare up under wear like skulls)

Yeah, cheap underwear will do that.

[erictank]

Bah. It was discrimination.

He clearly stated that he would not serve her because she was a woman. Regardless of your opinion of the laws, it was clearly and blantently broken, and I have no pity for the barber.

Furthermore, I personally think he was an ass. He offers a service that is beyond just haircuts, and is operating an establishment that is more of a 'cool' club type place than just being a barber. Since his service is offering atmosphere and entertainment, rather than just haircuts, he hasn't much ground to stand on if he did say it was due to not being able to cut her hair.

And before anyone snaps at me, if it was a stylist pulling the same stunt on a man, I would be of the same opinion.

If he wants to break the law, he can pay the consequences. That's his perogitive and what the courts are for.

According to the article on Reason, she did in fact want a "men's haircut" - a fade, IIRC.

The barber shop in question was designed as a "men's place" - free beer, sports and other "manly" talk, etc.  Also goes into his plan to open a similar "women's place" stylist shop, with champagne and mimosas, flowers, etc.

How is this "men's place" different from, say, Curves?

[Firethorn]

How is this "men's place" different from, say, Curves?

Because it affects men, not a minority*?

That's a good question.  The closest I can think of would be 'no man has decided to try to press the issue yet'.

I wonder what would happen if the Barber in question tried to join, was rejected, pressed for the female only place to be fined, then sued over his ticket citing inequality under the law when it failed?

*Please pay no attention to the fact that women make up slightly more than 50% of the population.

[BlueStarLizzard]

According to the article on Reason, she did in fact want a "men's haircut" - a fade, IIRC.

The barber shop in question was designed as a "men's place" - free beer, sports and other "manly" talk, etc.  Also goes into his plan to open a similar "women's place" stylist shop, with champagne and mimosas, flowers, etc.

How is this "men's place" different from, say, Curves?

It isn't.

But I don't see dudes trying to get into Curves... *shrug*

Tell you what, you go down to one, join and see what happens. You can be the test case. :)

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

Some women's tech group in California bans men

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[RevDisk]

Some women's tech group in California bans men

Not anymore. Lawyers and MRA groups figured out that California's anti-discrimination laws apply to said women's tech groups, so pretty much all of them are trolled by professional plaintiffs and sued to a smoking financial hole in the ground.

[roo_ster]

Not anymore. Lawyers and MRA groups figured out that California's anti-discrimination laws apply to said women's tech groups, so pretty much all of them are trolled by professional plaintiffs and sued to a smoking financial hole in the ground.

Not my preferred technique, but normal folk are no longer making the rules.

[RoadKingLarry]

Not anymore. Lawyers and MRA groups figured out that California's anti-discrimination laws apply to said women's tech groups, so pretty much all of them are trolled by professional plaintiffs and sued to a smoking financial hole in the ground.

Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

Not anymore. Lawyers and MRA groups figured out that California's anti-discrimination laws apply to said women's tech groups, so pretty much all of them are trolled by professional plaintiffs and sued to a smoking financial hole in the ground.

Just recently they sold tickets online to an event then barred men from entering

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[RevDisk]

Just recently they sold tickets online to an event then barred men from entering

If the group has any money, they won't for long.

I'm conflicted. On one hand, it's extremely not polite. I'm a big believer in being polite to folks. If you're not included, while that's not polite either, take it like a grown adult and make your own group. On the other hand, fair is fair is fair. So, I guess the end resolute is "The professional outraged person and professional plaintiff is a (insert mean word here), but legally as well as morally in the right. All groups should have freedom of assembly, but presented with how things are rather than how they should be..."

Edit: I was referring to the professional victims/plaintiffs in the second paragraph.

[Perd Hapley]

It's not necessarily impolite to say, "this is our group, and we don't want just everyone to join us. I'm afraid we don't want you." There may be reasons for such. I don't take offense to the women of our church having female-only gatherings.

On the other hand, if they sold tickets to people, and didn't tell them beforehand that certain people wouldn't be allowed, even w/o tickets, that's another kettle of cis-gendered fish.

[wmenorr67]

Maybe a woman should try to become a fully patched member of a 1% MC.  When denied let her sue and see how that works out for her.