General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums‘Plus-Sized’ College Student Claims Discrimination at Bar
Local radio show brought this up and thought I'd put it out.
I thought it was interesting that the bar was able to say that she wasn't pretty enough but couldn't / wouldn't come out and say that she was too fat for their standards.
I've heard a few stories like this and I wonder if we'll see anti-discrimination laws that protect people who are identified as unattractive. It goes beyond the club as well. There's tons of situations where "pretty" people get a leg up.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Plus-Sized College Student Claims Discrimination at Bar
A self-described plus sized college student who was told she was obviously pregnant and not pretty enough to dance on a platform in a bar in Iowa is claiming she was discriminated against by the bars bouncers.Jordan Ramos, a 21-year-old University of Iowa student said she went to Union Bar in Iowa City, Iowa with her friends on March 3. She said she tried to get onto a platform where several of her friends were dancing, but was stopped by the bouncer, who said they were at capacity
Ramos said she waited until a few girls left, and again tried to go up. She was stopped again, which she said prompted her to ask, What is the difference between the other girls up there and myself?
On April 14, Ramos returned to the Union Bar with a group of friends. Ramos friends, who she said are all thin, were able to get up on the platform easily. But Ramos was blocked from entering, she said.
Ramos asked the bouncer repeatedly why she could not dance on the platform.
He said, Youre not pretty enough and youre pregnant. I said, I can tell you with 100 percent certainty that I am not pregnant. He then looked at my stomach and said, You obviously are. They knew I was not pregnant; it was there way of calling me fat without having to actually say it, Ramos said. Ramos approached the Human Rights Commission in Iowa City, but the organization told her they could not do an investigation because size discrimination is not illegal by law, Ramos said.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/04/plus-sized-college-student-claims-discrimination-at-bar/
____________________________________________
pipoman
(16,038 posts)illegal. There are certainly some things which shouldn't be effected by size, OTOH, every structure and mechanical implement is engineered with specific weight limitations necessarily.
There are rides at Disneyland that larger people can't ride and they shouldn't have to design the ride for the largest possible person.
In this case, however, she was denied access because the bar owner only wants "hot" women up on his platform because they bring guys/cash into his bar.
trumad
(41,692 posts)to make that decision.
TedBronson
(52 posts)MineralMan
(146,338 posts)I think. Trouble is, they're never around when they'd be useful...
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)Wow, nice class snobbery there, discrimination warrior.
trumad
(41,692 posts)ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)That's the tactic of the......well, won't say it, it's against DU rules.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)quinnox
(20,600 posts)redqueen
(115,103 posts)Usually the underlying meaning is clear when that happens, but this time it isn't.
Care to summon up the courage to say what's on your mind?
quinnox
(20,600 posts)this is many hours later. I will only say I can have a perverse sense of humor at times, so I restrained myself in this case, some might not appreciate my kind of humor.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)obamanut2012
(26,158 posts)Maybe you should post a photo of yourself so we can all and .
No wonder so many women in this country have such bad self images.
Bladian
(475 posts)Or aggressive. I don't know what it is. Something about the look on her face rubs me the wrong way. Maybe I'm just reading too far into it.
TedBronson
(52 posts)Per the story she has a sort of "I'll be damned if..." attitude that can rub people the wrong way.
ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)I can tell you with 100 percent certainty that I am not pregnant.
That's "I'll be damned if..." ????
Come on now.
TedBronson
(52 posts)... but it is unrealistic to expect that she won't be judged on her looks, especially in a situation like that.
The pregnancy bit was BS and they both knew it. The bouncer just didn't want to come out and claim "too fat" and if a problem ever did arise he could claim safety instead of discrimination.
May not be fair, may not be right... but hot girls have been going to the front of the line since caveman days.
ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)Or be labeled uppity? I don't get your point here.
TedBronson
(52 posts)... is that railing against human nature is pointless.
If she has an issue with the bar then she should go spend her money somewhere else.
ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)with more class than the bouncers showed to her. I'm still scratching my head over how you got to an "I'll be damned..." type of attitude from that article.
Zoeisright
(8,339 posts)So fighting against discrimination against African-Americans was "pointless"? That was labeled "human nature" too.
Let me give you a clue: Democrats fight against discrimination and bias. Do you know how many overweight teens try to commit suicide because of attitudes like yours?
Your posts are disgusting, sexist, and rude.
TedBronson
(52 posts)You're wrong of course but in any case I hope you have a lovely afternoon.
Also, comparing the civil rights movement vs. a big girl not getting on the dance platform at a club is insulting to the civil rights movement.
DLevine
(1,788 posts)Amaril
(1,267 posts)Thanks, you beat me to it!
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)TorchTheWitch
(11,065 posts)Providing a club with entertainment for it's patrons on a stage is a JOB, and I can't fathom the utter stupidity of being willing to do it for free. The club does this because they make tons of money off of the idiots willing to work for them for free. It's thanks to people like this that those of us that USED to get paid for providing entertainment not only can't get the jobs anymore since thanks to scams like this and the fools that are so willing to do it for nothing the jobs no longer exist. And it's thanks to these free entertainment providers even in the strip clubs the customers don't think they need to tip anymore when they know we not only don't get paid by the club we have to pay to work.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)Society constantly rewards and reinforces that kind of stuff, so it seems more than harsh to me to call women who do that idiots or fools...
Especially since your primary objection to it seems to center around the idea that they somehow prevent other women from selling/exploiting their own sexuality for cash.
TorchTheWitch
(11,065 posts)It's dancing. You do realize that women dancing as entertainment can be all kinds of things other than sexual. How interesting that when men dance for entertainment of others it's art, athleticism, strength, expression, etc. but when women dance well it just can't possibly be anything but displaying their sexuality.
This taboo of women being sexual as a commodity or all the things men are sexual for without anyone batting an eye is about as misogynist as it gets. Why NOT sell your sexuality or actual physical sex if you want to? It's pretty much the only thing that women have the control in the man/woman dynamic, yet while men treat sex and their own sexuality however the hell they want to whether a necessary bodily function, for entertainment, amusement, a commodity and just because they haven't got anything better to do, and yes, even the holy sacrament that is the ONLY thing women are permitted when it comes to our own sexuality, and if we treat it the same way men do for themselves we're somehow being exploited and too stupid to know it, damaging other women when it's no one else's damn business how we individually use our own sexuality, and we're always shamed and disgraced for it and mostly by other women. Just why the hell is that? It's just more dictating to women what they aren't permitted concerning their own sexuality that men have always been permitted. There isn't anything more misogynist than that.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)As for taboo or not whatever. I simply found calling them fools and idiots for wanting to just have fun at a night club without being paid for it distasteful. That's it.
bluesbassman
(19,379 posts)If they took that shot during the interview she was probably worked up about reliving the incident.
ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)Bladian
(475 posts)Pissed off is a better word, not mean. Thank you.
Erose999
(5,624 posts)Just kidding, I mean other than the aggressive posturing I think she's pretty attractive.
This bar sounds like a douchebag hangout, for serious.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)If you were ever discriminated against, you'd be mad too.
Bladian
(475 posts)PassingFair
(22,434 posts)Maybe you have no ability to empathize with other humans.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)Me. Between them and me. Me. Probably 98% of the time, the word you're looking for is "me" or "I," not "myself."
Please make the abuse of reflexive pronouns (and especially first person reflexive pronouns) end.
/grammarnazi
FSogol
(45,555 posts)nicely done!
Iris
(15,673 posts)Ilsa
(61,707 posts)That was hilarious. I am so tired of hearing similarly structured sentences end with "I" as often as "myself" instead of "me", as if "me" has become a dirty word.
Great replies to your comment.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)1) She gave a slice to Sally and I - I also visibly flinch when somebody uses this construction. The obvious error, of course, is that the speaker or writer has confused subject and object. If you simply remove the "Sally," the error becomes obvious: "She gave the slice to I." Very few native English speakers would make that error, but many make the "Sally and I" error. Why? Quite simply, because they learned by rote and sound that adding a second actor in the subject slot should result in a "Sally and I" construction, and they simply transfer this to the object slot. Many, many native English speakers (especially as children) will say something like "Sally and me gave a slice of pie to Joey." This is obviously also incorrect (Me gave a slice to Joey), but it is common, so teachers spend a good deal of time correcting it: Sally and I, Sally and I, Sally and I. This construction is drummed into people's heads so frequently that they simply make it a general rule: whenever I am using first person pronouns and include a third person noun or pronoun in a list, place the first person pronoun last and make it "I." This is not a general rule, obviously, but, at best, a rule for constructing subject slot lists of actors. Rather than explain a subject and an object, and other grammatical features, however, most folks just get the general rule version, so they end up with "She gave a slice to Sally and I."
2) When you call the office, ask for either Robert or myself. - I don't think there is any teaching that would produce this, other than the general tendency to teach inflated (or "official" prose for business settings. People attempt to puff themselves up through language, and end up with these little errors of meaning and grammar as a result. (This is ironic, of course, since the speaker's intention is often to make himself sound more adept at language, while the actual usage produces the opposite result). Maybe "me" sounds too simple. Maybe "myself" sounds more sophisticated. Maybe (and I suspect this is the socio-grammatical answer) we have, as a culture, become so self-centered that everything appears to be reflexive: the self acting on the self, always. It's not clear what produces the "myself" nonsense. But -- goddamn -- is it annoying!
Ilsa
(61,707 posts)I use the same logic of removing the third person in explaining why their pronouns are wrong.
I've been giving people more slack on the "it's" vs "its" issue since alot of us have autocorrect features on our devices. The software likes the contraction and requires the user to adjust for a possessive form.
I think I am pretty good at most of the simpler grammatical rules, even if I can't remember all of the terminology. But I will happily yield to others' expertise when it involves complex sentence structures.
tblue37
(65,502 posts)(on my grammar and usage website)
Control Your Self: The Proper Use of Reflexive and Intensive Pronouns
http://www.grammartips.homestead.com/self.html
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)my partner and myself.....
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)I use to be a fan of 'America's Next Top Model' but got so annoyed at how Tyra kept calling girls 'plus-size' when clearly they were the only girls in the show that were NORMAL size.
I respect the fact that one might call me 'plus size' because I am overweight. But back when I was normal weight I was a size that is still called 'plus-size' in the fashion industry. Size 8 is not plus size - it's fricking NORMAL size. Those size 0 and 2 size women - why not call them 'under-size'.
I just wish they would get rid of the word because it's being used for any woman who doesn't look like they have an eating disorder.
Scout
(8,624 posts)meow2u3
(24,774 posts)Those minus-sized women give us plus-sized real women a hard time because they think it's pretty to show every bone in their bodies.
Scout
(8,624 posts)"I don't eat any more than you do, I just don't throw up afterward."
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)You can't see any of my bones. I don't give any woman any grief about their size.
TorchTheWitch
(11,065 posts)And I've never once in my life given larger women a hard time nor am I a bag of bones, thanks much. Saying nasty false shit about small women is not any better than doing that to larger women and I certainly never in my life heard any larger woman actually have the gall to BLAME us small women that wear size 0 or 2 for their own largeness. Until now.
Do you seriously not see how grotesquely rude that statement is???
a la izquierda
(11,797 posts)I'm a size 2, but you won't see any bones. Only muscle.
And I don't care what anyone looks like. I work out with a woman who busts her ass every day, and she, by her own admission, is a large woman. What do I care what she looks like, she's a great person!
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)Size 8 is very small. In the modeling world a 2 would be considered too big. It's crazy. No wonder many women dislike their bodies.
Maine-ah
(9,902 posts)when we start labeling each other either.
whether it's "plus size" or "minus size" (as someone else put it)
or that us smaller women must have an eating disorder - (though I admittedly do, but it's normally controlled unless I'm depressed) I'm also genetically small, under five feet tall...and, even with things under control in my life, I'm still a size four, and 105-110 lbs. When things are bad...well, yeah, I've been known to drop to 90lbs. Some women are just built this way. Some women are going to be bigger too.
People make fun of eating disorders here, (eat a sandwich or what have you) yet other mental illnesses get the pass and if one makes a disparaging comment about someone's mental illness their post is usually shat upon, but eating disorders...those are game. Skinny people, they're game.
SoCalDem
(103,856 posts)http://tess45.hubpages.com/hub/Vintage-Sizing-vs-Modern-Sizing
a size 10 shirtwaist cotton dress measured:
32-24-32
MadrasT
(7,237 posts)From the Union Bar's website:
The Union Bar is consistently listed on Playboy''s list of best parties in the USA and is Iowa City''s best known bar. The Union Bar also recently won Girls Gone Wild Wildest Bar Contest. Established in 1993, The Union is also one of Iowa City''s longest running establishments. As the largest venue in not only Iowa City, but all of the Big Ten conference, we throw one hell of a party!!!
Perhaps she isn't "Girls Gone Wild" enough to suit the Union Bar. If that's the case, I'd take that as a compliment.
That being said, it's shameful that she was discriminated against based on appearance.
Iris
(15,673 posts)male customers?
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)but drunken jackassery is just a part of college life...
redqueen
(115,103 posts)that its actually not a complimentary way to be treated. Thanks to constant media messages about hotness being the be-all-end-all for women, its just taken for granted that it really is the most important thing about you.
MadrasT
(7,237 posts)I was reluctant to come out and say it because of the recent frenzy of feminist bashing on DU.
Now that someone else has said it, yes. That's my question exactly.
Why in the world would a woman want to engage in this behavior to begin with?
TedBronson
(52 posts)... and they enjoy the validation.
Nothing wrong with it but it doesn't have to apply to everyone either.
Iris
(15,673 posts)what the fuck ever. When I was 13, I remember looking in the mirror and thinking "what if I were ugly" and from that moment on realized I wasn't and that's all the validation I've ever needed.
TedBronson
(52 posts)Doesn't mean everyone else has to live by your standards or that they are "pathetic" for not filling whatever your mold of the perfect person is.
My wife is smoking hot and she knows it. It is not her only attribute but it is important to her to look good. She also has the equivalent of two masters degrees and will run rings around you intellectually.
ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)"She also has the equivalent of two masters degrees and will run rings around you intellectually." You cannot tell this simply from a message board. Just as you cannot tell someone has an attitude from an article.
Iris
(15,673 posts)n/t
I lower my average estimates of people when they presume to call other people "pathetic" for not living their lives in the approved manner.
Iris
(15,673 posts)in a way similar to what the article your original post describes.
TedBronson
(52 posts)Cheers...
trumad
(41,692 posts)Admit it---you live with your Mom and you've never been laid.
sharp_stick
(14,400 posts)MineralMan
(146,338 posts)Matariki
(18,775 posts)and what is the 'equivalent' of a masters degree
Chan790
(20,176 posts)but to answer your question:
- Professional Degrees (like a law degree or MD. Only a small portion are actual graduate degrees.)
- Certain graduate certificates.
- Graduate-level professional certifications like ACFRE or ITAC given by professional societies or accrediting boards.
- Several types of professional licensure based on coursework or education.
The likelihood that his wife has any of those are low...they're generally prestigious in their own right and if you had one you'd say "I have a medical degree" (or an advanced nursing certificate or an architecture accreditation) or you'd say "I'm a Certified Public Accountant" (or a Advanced Certified Fund Raising Expert or a member of the Bar.) rather than saying you have a masters degree equivalent.
JI7
(89,279 posts)Scout
(8,624 posts)what boys think of them! gotta be hawt and fuckable! gotta live for those "compliments" from strangers you know!
why, we wouldn't know what to think about ourselves if boys didn't tell us
JI7
(89,279 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)this was about making a jab at women. and not very adeptly.
MadrasT
(7,237 posts)Matariki
(18,775 posts)Sexism is a complicated topic best left to thinking women.
Iris
(15,673 posts)But back to my point, yes, why would a woman want to engage in this behavior. And, frankly, youth isn't an excuse. I wouldn't have behaved that way when I was 20 nor would any of my friends. We were smart enough to "get it."
redqueen
(115,103 posts)not sure how that's supposed to be helpful.
Imagine if your parents bought into it, all your friends, and of course the media is saturated with it...
I guess according to you all pubescent girls who don't manage to see through it all on their own, and end up having fun with their friends the way many others do are just idiots and fools.
Sad. I don't think the world needs our help in tearing down other women.
Iris
(15,673 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Its sometime after ages 21-25 (what I consider the club-going ages) that people tend to become more aware of these things.
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)When I went to school at the University of Iowa it was called the Fieldhouse. It was a big dance club, and it was a very wild fraternity/sorority hangout. All of the beautiful people hung out there and the place had quite the reputation.
The U of I is a huge party school. It was nuts. I think Jack Kerouac said, "I've been all over the world and the most beautiful women in the world are in Iowa City, Iowa.". It's bizarre, but 20 percent of the student population looks like super models. This Iowa City bar is capitalizing on that, and discriminating--and they should be called out.
Edited to add--CORRECTION--Kerouac did say this quote, not about the women of Iowa City, Iowa--but Des Moines, Iowa.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)She's mobilizing more dollars than just her own. That's how you get at stupid motherfuckers like the bouncer and his bar.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)Taverner
(55,476 posts)Fucked up in either situation tho
Iris
(15,673 posts)AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)Response to AngryAmish (Reply #23)
Post removed
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)shcrane71
(1,721 posts)AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)DiverDave
(4,887 posts)I dont understand, was she looking for a fight?
I dont have a problem with her dancing, just a problem
with the culture of gyrating in front of crazed drunken people.
Nothing can go wrong there, huh?
LeftinOH
(5,359 posts)that matters. Especially if there's a dance floor. Find better people to hang out with, Jordan.
Spike89
(1,569 posts)There simply isn't anything new here. It is a cliche' that the beautiful people get into the busy club and the "uglies" wait behind the velvet ropes for a chance that never comes. Pretty people get seated earlier and in better spots in restaurants, they get warnings rather than tickets from cops more often (and lesser sentences from judges). Pretty waiters (male and female) get better tips than less attractive ones.
Is it fair? No, but it isn't fair either that smarter people have advantages--and it is easier to change your attractiveness-level than your IQ. Taller people (to a point) get many of the same perks attractive ones get. Short, ugly, and dumb isn't going to open as many doors as tall, pretty, and smart.
So, the world isn't fair. We can never pass enough laws to make it fair. As long as people have any discretion on how they interact with each other, there will be "unfairness". Even if we wanted to, we couldn't adequately, much less actionably, define who is attractive and who is ugly.
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)Getting back to the facts of the case: A patron of a bar wants to do the same thing allowed to other patrons of the bar, and is barred from doing so by foolish staff, due to prejudice against her type. He's wrong. Morally and logically it's an open and shut case, and if she wants to fight it out in public, good for her. Your tired-wise observations can be countered by the equally prevalent fact that people have always struggled against the phenomena you are observing, and caused changes in attitudes and behaviors. So again, good for her for not accepting some "natural" state of human behavior if it's wrong. That refusal is the root of what we call civilization.
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)Should they be illegal?
Because that's an example of a bar discriminating against people for their physical characteristics (and it's done on a massive scale).
Also I suspect should could become thin more easily than a man could become a woman.
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)Let a man who doesn't like Ladies' Night start his own campaign.
Do you see a difference here? It's easy to understand: that man's campaign wouldn't get very far. This lady's campaign is effective, because she's right. The bar personnel are pigs for not letting her dance. They are pigs for insulting the looks of a patron. Absolute hurtful pigs, they should be ashamed of themselves.
What is your problem with the lady challenging the bar? Does she have the right of free speech to bad-mouth this fucking bar and expose its stupid values? Yes, she does! I hope they lose a lot of business from women and men thanks to her efforts, because that is what they deserve. The bar's idea of "beauty" is itself ugly. (Don't misinterpret: the idea is ugly, not the people they allow to be considered beautiful.)
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)if it's wrong to discriminate based on size to maintain a certain appeal at a bar why is it ok to discriminate based on other cosmetic differences?
What about bars setting dress codes.
And your canard about "does she have the right of free speech", really? That's pretty lame. Obviously she can say whatever she wants. Just as I can.
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)again you seem to mistakenly conflate condescension with a legitimate answer.
I asked what your opinion on that issue was and you said "well someone else can start up that campaign". That's not really your opinion now is it?
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)in the attitude to women expressed by ladies night, as opposed to a rule made up on the spot expressing the sentiment, "No Fat Chicks On the Dance Platform." One is promotional and friendly and disparages no one. The other is a backwards, macho disparagement of paying patrons. Beyond the personal insult and hurfulness, the bouncers' behaviors promote a very fucked-up standard of "beauty" that many do not share. The difference is elementary and one must wonder what your dog-in-the-fight is to bring up such an inapplicable comparison. The lady and her friends have every right to bad-mouth this bar as publicly and effectively as they can muster, and I hope the bar gets a richly deserved reputation for misogyny and goes out of business. I can even hope that hearing about this moves some people to reexamine their own fucked-up attitudes and behaviors toward women as well as overweight people, but judging by this thread (and experience) that's a snowball in hell. Boors don't usually decide to learn manners and respect for others.
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)for their gender is "promotional and friendly and disparages no one".
Huh.
So treat people differently based on their genitals, not their diet.
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)This is about boorish, mean treatment to a paying patron.
Furthermore, Ladies Night comes with a sign announcing it. Strange, for such a horrible discrimination! No one seems to mind it, except now you. Like the lady in the OP you have a right to start a campaign about this outrage, and see where you get with it. You go ahead and do that. Strangely the bar in Iowa did not announce its "We Hate Fat Chicks Dancing" policy. They should have put up a sign like that, right next to a "Ladies Night" announcement. Then there would have been no misunderstandings and the bar would be more popular than ever, right?
Do you have any other totally irrelevant examples with which you can promote pathetic, ignorant prejudices and distract from the subject of this thread?
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)So she wasn't treated differently?
This is about boorish, mean treatment to a paying patron.
My lawd, all this boorish behavior is giving me the vapors! (did I use that phrase right? I'm still not sure what it means).
I'm going to say something that may shock you to your very core: sometimes, people are . . . wow this is hard, give me a moment . . . ok sometimes people are occasionally rude to one another. And this rudeness often takes place in crowded places where alcohol is being served.
Furthermore, Ladies Night comes with a sign announcing it. Strange, for such a horrible discrimination!
Discriminatory polices never have signs associated with them? I guess those black-only water fountains were just for kicks. Of all the arguments you could have used there that ones was . . . wow.
No one seems to mind it, except now you.
I don't mind it, never said I did. I asked you if you minded it. (You made a comment about reading comprehension earlier, projection?). I am being consistent, you are not.
Like the lady in the OP you have a right to start a campaign about this outrage, and see where you get with it.
Exactly as far as she has?
Strangely the bar in Iowa did not announce its "We Hate Fat Chicks Dancing" policy. They should have put up a sign like that, right next to a "Ladies Night" announcement. Then there would have been no misunderstandings and the bar would be more popular than ever, right?
That actually might work . . .
Do you have any other totally irrelevant examples with which you can promote pathetic, ignorant prejudices and distract from the subject of this thread?
It wasn't irrelevant. You just don't understand the relevance. Big difference.
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)And it's all good, because, like, why not? What's the diff? Employee, patron, aggressive shit, six of one, half-dozen of the other. (Liberals!!! Oooooooh they just don't get it.)
Just go get shitfaced with your preferred neanderthals and leave it be, already.
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)No. Never said that. They could have been in a bad mood after a night of dealing with drunk and aggressive patrons however.
Either way telling someone they are too fat to be on the stage isn't "aggressive".
If someone asks you if they're pretty and you say "no" that isn't assault. You get this right?
And it's all good, because, like, why not? What's the diff? Employee, patron, aggressive shit, six of one, half-dozen of the other. (Liberals!!! Oooooooh they just don't get it.)
I'm trying to make this in to a coherent statement. Nothing. Doesn't make any sense.
Just go get shitfaced with your preferred neanderthals and leave it be, already.
Leave what be? The bar? This boycott? This really doesn't make any sense.
You are becoming extremely emotional about this subject. I'm not sure why.
sendero
(28,552 posts)... in some kind of bizarro world that the unicorn and puppies crowd thinks they can create through legislation, people will not be able to discriminate based on appearance.
Never mind that it is at our biological core to do so.
And people wonder why it was so easy to turn the word "liberal" into an epithet of stupidity.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)Do they want to lose customers?
Cave_Johnson
(137 posts)Not to mention there will be quite a few women who want to show that they are "hot" enough to get on the upper level.
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)Matariki
(18,775 posts)funny little guy.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)that was specifically set up to show off for said crowd, but was expecting not to be noticed?
"Everyone look at me! Hey pay attention to me! STOP LOOKING AT ME!!!!!!!!!!"
redqueen
(115,103 posts)Where is the 'expected not to be noticed' from?
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)"Oh haha, women never do anything simply to enjoy themselves."
To my statement that she wasn't prepared to be judged despite putting herself in a position that was inherently judgemental.
The person who wrote that response apparently believed she was getting up on a stage just for herself and was not expecting to be judged or looked at.
Which seems silly.
I'm guessing they wouldn't let guys dance up there either, but you don't hear men complaining. It's ok for the bar to set some standards.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)out of curiosity what is your thought on ladies-night at bars?
redqueen
(115,103 posts)of course.
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)through all of history.
Well ok, the lady involved is white and apparently has the money to go to college and frequent bars. And obviously she is not starving.
So really what right does she have to complain when so many billions are so much worse off?
I'm sure some kid starving to death in Somalia is just devastated that affluent Americans are able to eat so much that people judge them for being too fat. He will no doubt send his condolences should he get access to a computer, and electricity, and so on.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)I think the bouncer was a jerk and more power to the young lady. I hope she feels as passionate about the people you mention who do have much bigger problems than a college student in the richest nation on the world.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)I've danced at clubs where there are raised platforms - all kinds of people get on them to dance, for all kinds of reasons. Some folks enjoy showing off their dancing, or their outfit, or their looks. Some folks enjoy just being out with their friends and getting their move on.
Your insinuation that a woman who isn't 'attractive' according to some arbitrary standard should just hide herself in fear of being 'judged' shows a lot of insensitivity and sexism.
Hell, here in Seattle I've seen dumpy 50+ year old men dressed nothing but a leather harness and chaps dancing on a club's platform and everybody loved them. They exuded Joie de vivre. And that's their right. They were out having fun and good on them. Same goes for the woman in the article and every other woman who wants to go out with their friends and have a good time.
Women don't exist just to be viewed by men, you know. If you don't know, it's about time you learn.
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)so it's not really up to her.
If they're trying to set a certain image they have every right to do that.
You can't use this "women don't want to be objectified, GIRL-POWER!" argument in every situation. It's like joining a wet t-shirt competition for your own personal reasons then becoming outraged when you're judged by your looks. Don't expect much sympathy.
So to recap: girl-power doesn't give you the right to do whatever you wish on private property no matter how many times you insinuate everyone else is bigoted against you.
Scout
(8,624 posts)HangOnKids
(4,291 posts)You could smell the stench off that pant-load from his very first post. "Smoking hot wife" my ass. Trumad and sharp stick just slaughtered him up thread.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)cyberswede
(26,117 posts)vaberella
(24,634 posts)BlueIris
(29,135 posts)I feel sorry for the bouncer, having let his personally fall into a cesspit like that.
crazyjoe
(1,191 posts)redqueen
(115,103 posts)tawadi
(2,110 posts)Crazy story.
Ter
(4,281 posts)If you're heavy, it could break and she could fall. If you're hideous, the customers might leave.
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)Response to TedBronson (Original post)
Post removed
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Which is a shame. The trendy ones are see and be seen places where you need to have the right clothes, the right look and the right sized bank account or you are going to be shunned and/or mistreated.
There have been numerous studies done of people who go to these kind of places and something like 90% of those who go report not enjoying themselves most of the time.
These places are train wrecks.