|
0
Nerd-Its
|
|
current event
by The Peel Hotel in Melbourne, Australia has recently won the right to ban Heterosexuals from the hotel bar. In an interview with Australian Radio, hotel manager Tom Freely claimed, "If I can limit the number of heterosexuals entering the Peel, then that helps me keep the safe balance."
What is the safe balance? In this interview, VCAT president Cate Mckenzie explains that not only do straight and lesbian groups become occasionally violent towards the male gay community at the bar, but that straight women also use the gay men as entertainment for Hen Nights.
An example of similar action in a much different venue is found in the Penn State decision to deny registration to the fledgling STRAIGHT Club. Is the day of the heterosexual over? Should more heterosexuals be watching Sex And The City for tips on how to behave in the new, homosexual world?
Add a Comment (10)
Email This
Message Author
So, if I try to go into the bar
and I say I'm gay, but I'm not,
then when found out, I'm arrested?
How would you like that in your record?
Arrested for not being gay
or
Arrested when thrown out of a gay bar.
If people are coming to see the 'freaks'
dressed like "Men at Work" then so be it.
I mean, what could they come to see?
As for keeping the lesbians out of the club,
then that is sexism, first....NO women allowed.
That wouldn't get it in the US would it?
I wonder who the Iranians allow in their gay bars?
News items like this just confuse an old guy like me.
Well, the "offense" isn't "not being gay", and this would be workable in the US, actually.
Ever see a sign in a bar that says, "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone"? As a privately owned establishment, they get that right. It's not so obvious to me why there's such a big question in OZ, to be honest.
I suppose it's probably not. The court here just upheld that bar's rights.
RSS
Are you kidding? by scottb :: NR7 :: on 01 June 2007
Is the day of the heterosexual over?
You can't be serious. The highest number I've ever seen for the percentage of Americans that are gay (as their primary orientation - not counting people who "experimented") is about 10%. Numbers in that range are typically quoted by gay advocates who are probably exaggerating. Their opponents (probably exaggerating on the other side) give numbers around 1%. Most people who are trying to be honest give the number as around 5%.
Are we really so insecure that treating this tiny part of our population with ordinary human dignity should make us fear the end of society as we know it?
RE: Are you kidding? by Brandon :: NR9 :: on 02 June 2007
I don't think the number of Americans who are gay or the concept of treating homosexuals with "ordinary dignity" has anything to do with the post. This issue is about the "tables being turned" in these two cases - heterosexuals not being allowed to form clubs or go into bars whereas the previous "society as we know it" tended to discriminate against homosexuals.
Personally, I think the bar should be able to ban whomever they choose. If they want to just let gay red-heads into the bar, or reserve a special seat for people with extra large moles, that's their right as a private organization. Penn State, on the other hand, is a publicly funded university; a registration denial to a heterosexual group is as uncalled for as a denial to a homosexual group (or a chess club, mechanical engineering society, etc.).
RE: Are you kidding? by scottb :: NR7 :: on 03 June 2007
Oh, I generally agree. I was just taking exception to the "is the day of the heterosexual over" question. It's scaremongering.
As long as they aren't taking government money, they should be able to ban anyone they want.
I think there's probably a little more complexity called for in the Penn State case. I don't think the school should be able to deny them registration on the grounds of their political stance - but I think it's probably inappropriate for the school to recognize groups that unfairly discriminate in their memberships. So if the STRAIGHT charter said "no gays allowed", they probably shouldn't be recognized. If they were willing to accept homosexual members, then they should.
RE: Are you kidding? by Brandon :: NR9 :: on 03 June 2007
So all clubs recognized by the university should not be allowed to choose the members of their own club? I think that's rather ridiculous, as the whole point of a club seems to be to gather with those who share something in common, but I guess I don't see the harm in opening the doors to everyone. Those without "the thing" in common would be very unlikely to join, anyway.
RE: Are you kidding? by scottb :: NR7 :: on 03 June 2007
In my experience, the only "clubs" that want to limit their membership are the ones like these "STRAIGHT" assholes who are basically pushing a thinly-disguised kind of hate.
The black-students or asian-students clubs generally welcome all races, academic clubs don't discriminate, nor do chess clubs or computer clubs. I'd bet that whatever gay or lesbian-friendly groups there are on campus happily welcome straight folks.
Allow Me to Clarify by Anonymous :: NR0 :: on 03 June 2007
I added the bit in at the end about the end of the day of the heterosexual with a bit of sarcasm; my intent wasn't to 'scaremonger' as you said. I apologize if it was taken that way.
As I recall the Gay/Lesbian club at the college I went to not only admitted heterosexuals, but had a couple as members. I met the guy who attempted to found the STRAIGHT club through a mutual friend that he was dating. As I recall there wasn't any particular animosity towards the homosexual community, just a feeling that heterosexuals were left out. The reason I brought it into this news post was that I thought it highlighted reverse discrimination a bit. I personally feel that unless you are accepting public money you should be able to refuse service/ not allow entrance to anyone you feel like. In particular those smarmy bastards in the church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
RE: Allow Me to Clarify by scottb :: NR7 :: on 03 June 2007
I personally feel that unless you are accepting public money you should be able to refuse service/ not allow entrance to anyone you feel like.
That's the case here. Penn State is a state-funded (public money) school. The registered clubs receive money in subsidy - not a large amount, but school money (and thus, public money) just the same.
RE: Allow Me to Clarify by Bortnyk :: NR6 :: on 03 June 2007
It seems reasonable to me. I feel there are probably more productive venues for young people to put their eforts towards besides sexual orientation and clubs to discuss the same.