930 Forums
=> GENERAL DISCUSSION => Topic started by: vansmack on June 03, 2004, 11:34:00 am
-
Wed, Jun. 02, 2004
N.J. bans `ladies nights,' citing gender discrimination
BY CORKY SIEMASZKO
New York Daily News
(KRT) - Sorry, Jersey girls.
The Garden State's top civil rights official ruled yesterday that ladies nights are gender-based promotions that discriminate - against men.
So from now on, girls who just wanna have fun will have to pay the same price for drinks and cover charges as the boys.
Commercial interests do not override the "important social policy objective of eradicating discrimination," said Frank Vespa-Papaleo, director of the state Division on Civil Rights.
Gov. Jim McGreevey criticized the decision, calling it "an overreaction that reflects a complete lack of common sense and good judgment."
But the governor does not have the authority to rescind the ruling. Nonetheless, he met with the state attorney general to tell him the civil rights division had better things to do with its time, an aide said.
In New York, a state Division of Human Rights spokeswoman said officials have had complaints about ladies nights and found them "to be unlawful."
Elsewhere, it's a mixed bag.
Iowa judges have said a racetrack's ladies day was illegal. And Pennsylvania's high court ruled strip joints can't let women in free but make men pay. But courts in Illinois and Washington State have not objected.
Blame the Jersey ban on a disgruntled dude, David Gillespie, who filed the complaint in June 1998 after he had to pony up $5 to get into the Coastline restaurant in Cherry Hill, N.J. Not only were women not charged admission, they drank at a discount.
The Coastline's lawyer argued they weren't trying to keep men out but hoping to lure women in.
Vespa-Papaleo disagreed. "It's the same as if you tried to say Christians can have free drinks but Jews can't," he told the Philadelphia Inquirer.
-
I know I'll get truckloads 'o' shit for this, but....I agree with it.
Unless they are going to offer a "mens night" too, fuck em.
-
but cheaper drinks/no cover=drunker women. if that's not men's night, i don't know what is
-
Originally posted by god's shoeshine:
but cheaper drinks/no cover=drunker women. if that's not men's night, i don't know what is
the most profound thing i have ever heard. whoever thought of Ladies night (college guys) is a genius for barowners and bargoers (college guys) alike.
besides, if they didnt get the ladies into the bar every night, it WOULD be "men's night" and theres plenty of those bars if thats what you like. :eek:
-
Oh I understand the theory behind it...but college age girls are just as eager to go out and get laid as college-age boys, so the theory falls flat in my opinion.
-
Originally posted by Bollocks:
I know I'll get truckloads 'o' shit for this, but....I agree with it.
This is what marriage does to you. Fella's, take note.
-
Originally posted by vansmack:
Originally posted by Bollocks:
I know I'll get truckloads 'o' shit for this, but....I agree with it.
This is what marriage does to you. Fella's, take note. [/b]
Nice one :D ..but I confess to always feeling this way.
I've never had any problem getting laid, but finding cheap beer was the holy grail. Which is why it never seemed fair to me.
-
Originally posted by Bollocks:
Nice one :D ..but I confess to always feeling this way.
I've never had any problem getting laid, but finding cheap beer was the holy grail. Which is why it never seemed fair to me.
First, English girls are much easier than american girls. And second, get the girl to get the drink for you. Damn, this isn't rocket science.
-
All's I have to say is "equal rights", so for once or twice I agree with Mankie. Next thing you know they'll want to vote or run for President. :D
-
Originally posted by vansmack:
Originally posted by Bollocks:
First, English girls are much easier than american girls. And second, get the girl to get the drink for you. Damn, this isn't rocket science. [/b]
Not really easier, although generally speaking, doodlesses are more eff'd up in the head, I'll give you that.
If the idea is to get the girls drunk so the boys will come in trying to get laid, why not just give the girls rufies at the door as they go in, and charge everyone equal prices for the drinks. That way the bar doesn't lose profit on the drinks.
Same principal isn't it?
Why not have $1 malts for blacks only? or $1 Coronas for latinas only? How about $1 Buds for rednecks only?
-
Originally posted by Bollocks:
Not really easier, although generally speaking, doodlesses are more eff'd up in the head, I'll give you that.
If the idea is to get the girls drunk so the boys will come in trying to get laid, why not just give the girls rufies at the door as they go in, and charge everyone equal prices for the drinks. That way the bar doesn't lose profit on the drinks.
Same principal isn't it?
Why not have $1 malts for blacks only? or $1 Coronas for latinas only? How about $1 Buds for rednecks only?
I think the point is to give the girls a reason to be in one place, so I don't have to go to five or six different bars to find the girl I want to hook up with. Getting laid is just an added bonus.
-
Originally posted by Rob_Gee_a.k.a _Guiny:
Next thing you know they'll want to vote or run for President. :D
That gives them equal rights, and I wish they'd find a woman to be el pres, because the bloke you've got at the mo sure is fucking things up.
Ladies nights gives them better than equal rights! :D
-
Originally posted by vansmack:
[/b]
I think the point is to give the girls a reason to be in one place, so I don't have to go to five or six different bars to find the girl I want to hook up with. Getting laid is just an added bonus. [/QB]
I thought the lasses followed you from bar to bar smackie?
-
Originally posted by Bollocks:
I thought the lasses followed you from bar to bar smackie?
Those are usually the ones I'm trying to avoid.
-
speaking of sorry. . .i can't approve of this raul mondesi signing. how obvious does it need to be that he simply wanted out of pittsburgh, and this "lawsuit" was a cover. selig apparently is investigating this. . .how is moreno gonna spin this?
-
Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
speaking of sorry. . .i can't approve of this raul mondesi signing. how obvious does it need to be that he simply wanted out of pittsburgh, and this "lawsuit" was a cover. selig apparently is investigating this. . .how is moreno gonna spin this?
hahaha, that was out of nowhere...
i totally agree here. did he think the buccos would be good or something? take the cash suck it up, get more and play for a contender next year. bitchass
-
Originally posted by god's shoeshine:
hahaha, that was out of nowhere...
i'm too lazy to go back and find an appropriate thread. plus, smackie started this thread and i always relish a chance to bad-mouth the angels.
-
Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
Originally posted by god's shoeshine:
hahaha, that was out of nowhere...
i'm too lazy to go back and find an appropriate thread. plus, smackie started this thread and i always relish a chance to bad-mouth the angels. [/b]
I'd just like it duly noted that there are far more hitty-runny posts that footie ones these days.
Thank you.
Mankie
-
Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
speaking of sorry. . .i can't approve of this raul mondesi signing. how obvious does it need to be that he simply wanted out of pittsburgh, and this "lawsuit" was a cover. selig apparently is investigating this. . .how is moreno gonna spin this?
He doesn't have to. Mondy wanted out of Pittsburgh, the Pirates wanted out of his contract, they waived him, every team had 48 hours to pick him up, nobody did, and the Angels won the free agent pool. Where's the harm in that?
Oh, you mean all of the waiver wire teams that didn't pick him up because he was supposedly out of baseball? That's not the Angels fault, but I think it stinks of a chirade myself. But that's for Bud Selig and Raul Mondesi to sort out, not Arte Moreno.
-
I know what a charade is, but what's a "chirade"? Is it a charade that originates in Chicago?
-
so mondesi basically declares himself a free agent a quarter of the way through the season? ugh, gross for baseball. angels will get theirs, yankees fans warned me he was a cancer before the season, and he'll scuddle the angels, i predict
-
Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
I know what a charade is, but what's a "chirade"? Is it a charade that originates in Chicago?
Thank you Mr. Webster.
If I didn't pride myself on writing complete sentences with proper capitalization and punctuation, I would have taken that as an insult. Instead, I appreciate your correction.
-
i mean, the pirates signed mondesi for a 1 year contract, like the pirates are wont to do these days. . .mondesi tires of the pirates, for whatever reason, and the pirates begin to withhold his pay because he's left the team to be with his family due to some sketchy lawsuit pending against him in the d.r. pirates tire of mondesi's act, and end the contract.
you're right, teams could have picked him up after the contract was terminated, but no one did and the angels stepped right in and signed him to a new contract, and voila, he's in anaheim 48 hours later. there is definately something going on. . .
-
Originally posted by god's shoeshine:
so mondesi basically declares himself a free agent a quarter of the way through the season? ugh, gross for baseball. angels will get theirs, yankees fans warned me he was a cancer before the season, and he'll scuddle the angels, i predict
The Bucs didn't have to let him leave. They could have stopped payment but not waived him, then sued him for breach of contract. But with the performances of Bay, Mack, Ward, the Wilsons, etc., it was more mutual than the Bucs are letting on, and definitely better for the team. They're a .500 club since he left.
As far as the cancer, Dodger fans warned me of the same thing. They said to expect him to tear it up for the first month and half to make everybody love him, but as soon as he stops caring, to look out. "And it will happen," they insisted.
I think this is the wrong team for that, though. Did anybody see Guillen get hit by Pedro yesterday? Guillen is an explosion waiting to happen, but after his public blowup last week and his talking to by the leadership of the team, he just put his head down and took his base. That's unheard of for Guillen.
Mondy is playing for a great manager who knows him well, in hispanic friendly So Cal, surrounded by some of the best Dominican talent out there. Not to mention the lack of media pressure OC has compared to the Dodgers and the Yankees. I think he'll be fine until Lunchbox comes back. Then I'm not sure what will happen, but I trust Scioscia.
-
Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
you're right, teams could have picked him up after the contract was terminated, but no one did and the angels stepped right in and signed him to a new contract, and voila, he's in anaheim 48 hours later. there is definately something going on. . .
Baltimore tried to sign him. Boston tried to sign him. The Angels offered him the same amount he was making in Pittsburgh for the same duration ($1.75 for one year) and he took it to be with Scioscia, Alfredo Griffin, Vlad and Jose. Pittsburgh isn't even crying foul - their GM said that MLB is making a bigger deal of this then need be: "The idea that he manipulated anything, I just don't buy it. As intriguing as it sounds, it didn't happen."
Since the Spiderman 2 thing is over, I guess they need something else to do.
-
I can't believe we're having this discussion over someone like Raul Mondesi, a nobody, a has been, a barely was-be. He won rookie of the year and thats been about his only accomplishment, he pretty much went down hill when I traded for him about seven years ago for my fantasy team. Like an earlier post said, Pittsburgh's young outfielders have a much more upside, I believe Jason Bay came off the disabled list the day after Mondesi left. Pitt. is playing for the future and didnt need a cry baby like Mondesi to stick around, and he definetely wasn't there for veteran leadership.
-
Originally posted by Rob_Gee_a.k.a _Guiny:
All's I have to say is "equal rights", so for once or twice I agree with Mankie. Next thing you know they'll want to vote or run for President. :D
I can just picture you & mankie going out in drag just to get a free beer ;)
-
Originally posted by Celeste:
[/b]
I can just picture mankie going out in drag just to get a free beer ;) [/QB]
It wouldn't be the first time!!!!!!
:eek:
-
Originally posted by Celeste:
Originally posted by Rob_Gee_a.k.a _Guiny:
All's I have to say is "equal rights", so for once or twice I agree with Mankie. Next thing you know they'll want to vote or run for President. :D
I can just picture you & mankie going out in drag just to get a free beer ;) [/b]
Hmmmm......short skirt and knee high boots.....Don't think I have the legs for that.
-
I bet mankie does, since he cycles and all ;)
-
The fact that this thread turned into a sports thread is proof enough why a bar or a club sometimes needs incentives to get we women out! :roll:
Years ago, I too use to think they were unfair (but appreciated them) until a club owner explained the marketing philosophy to me. Then it was all clear and I had no problems with it. Not only will it get the women out but even more men come out looking for the women. Since then, I've also seen that it really does work that way. Originally I had no desire to go to them, regardless of the $$ issue because I wasn't thrilled about the idea of hanging out in a club overloaded with women. Then I saw that there were usually tons of guys there too. (Haven't been to one for years so don't know if it's changed over time.)
As one who has complete contempt for political correctness, the way I see it, if you don't like them and think they are unfair, than quite simply, DON'T GO! Just stop it with taking all of our rights, freedoms and privileges away from us!!! :mad:
For the record, not that I'm condoning them, but there are many other clubs that practice unofficial procedures of whom they require things such as cover charges from. A few examples are Gay clubs that I've known of that charge Straight couples but not Gays in order to keep the environment tipped towards the Gay crowd. I had a friend who went to some club in NOVA where there were mostly Asians who were all (from what he observed) let in free but he (a White man) was charged a cover. Then there are the clubs, especially in NYC, that will only admit those whom they deem cool enough regardless of $$$, race, gender, whom you have sex with or other normally selected classifications. I'm not making a judgement on any of these practices but it goes on all of the time everywhere in the world. Again, if you don't like it, DON'T GO! Next they'll be attacking VIP cards for selected regulars that some clubs offer.
I, for one, refuse to go to a sports bar for one reason and one reason only. I hate sports. In the meantime, you boys who are pratronizing them, have fun! Yes, I know I'm allowed in but I have absolutely no desire to be in one but I'm not going to discourage you from enjoying yourselves.
-
Originally posted by Jaguär:
I, for one, refuse to go to a sports bar for one reason and one reason only. I hate sports. In the meantime, you boys who are pratronizing them, have fun! Yes, I know I'm allowed in but I have absolutely no desire to be in one but I'm not going to discourage you from enjoying yourself.
Jag, what if a sports bar charged those interested in whatever sport was being highlighted less for the exact same drink as those who couldn't give a rats about it....that's discrimination plain and simple. I just get sick of hearing how everyone is discriminated against except the white male....when the reality is the white male is quickly becoming the most discriminated against....and two wrongs don't make a right.
I once tried to get in a club that was specifically marketed to middle eastern men, only I couldn't get in...not because of a cover charge or anything, it's just that the stench of cheap aftershave wafting out of the entrance was overwhelming and giving me a headache.
-
Originally posted by Bollocks:
Originally posted by Jaguär:
I, for one, refuse to go to a sports bar for one reason and one reason only. I hate sports. In the meantime, you boys who are pratronizing them, have fun! Yes, I know I'm allowed in but I have absolutely no desire to be in one but I'm not going to discourage you from enjoying yourself.
Jag, what if a sports bar charged those interested in whatever sport was being highlighted less for the exact same drink as those who couldn't give a rats about it....that's discrimination plain and simple. I just get sick of hearing how everyone is discriminated against except the white male....when the reality is the white male is quickly becoming the most discriminated against....and two wrongs don't make a right.
[/b]
While there are exceptions, personally, I more often than not don't see it as discrimination but as selective marketing. And no, I'm not meaning to twist my words. There is a difference that I don't have the time right now to try and explain.
In the meantime, and I don't see it in anyway related to the core of what is discussed in this thread. I fully agree that the White man is one of the most discriminated against groups in modern American society, second to White women. At least in the job market. Except in a very, very few positions, a White man will more often than not get most jobs that White women won't even be considered for. Also, when an employer is trying to fill a 'women' quota, they will generally select a non-White woman in order to meet 2 quotas at once. When discussing anti-White discrimination, it's usually the White man who is targeted while we White women again get left out in the cold.
Wish I could find the article but I once read a very good and detailed publication that supported what I have witnessed and experienced all along in America for the past couple decades that supports my claim of even more discrimination being placed on White women. (Disclaimer: Yes, unfortunately, there is still discrimination of all other groups too. It's just that the politcally correct set pretend that it's impossible to discriminate against Whites. Bollocks!!! ;) )
-
Originally posted by Bollocks:
Originally posted by vansmack:
Originally posted by Bollocks:
First, English girls are much easier than american girls. And second, get the girl to get the drink for you. Damn, this isn't rocket science. [/b]
Not really easier, although generally speaking, doodlesses are more eff'd up in the head, I'll give you that.
If the idea is to get the girls drunk so the boys will come in trying to get laid, why not just give the girls rufies at the door as they go in, and charge everyone equal prices for the drinks. That way the bar doesn't lose profit on the drinks.
Same principal isn't it?
Why not have $1 malts for blacks only? or $1 Coronas for latinas only? How about $1 Buds for rednecks only? [/b]
$1 MALTS FOR BLACKS? WHAT THE HELL DOES THAT MEAN?
I say $1 GUINNESS and $1 JAGER for the dark folks!!!