|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hannity is currently blasting this as over PC. Stating that most men would prefer to be in a bar with more women. Besides, the men are earning more money than the men, so they should bear the brunt of cover charges.
I personally prefer to pay the same for the same project: not based on gender, race, creed, ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hannity is currently blasting this as over PC. Stating that most men would prefer to be in a bar with more women. Besides, the men are earning more money than the men, so they should bear the brunt of cover charges.
Would he happen to be a conservative?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:24 PM June 2nd, 2004 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, he has a radio show. He's on the same network as Limbaugh (at least in my area: New York/New Jersey).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah. And in Apartheid SA, most whites would rather have been in a bar with no blacks...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:39 PM June 2nd, 2004 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Amazing. Hannity, buying into the "pay gap" myth.
The "they're not discriminating against men, just encouraging women" conclusion is so BS it's laughable. It's true that some of these clubs do it only to draw more men. It's certainly debatable whether that's just stereotyping men even more as the ones who have to pay to find love. But in any case, it's illegal here in CA too. And it's also true that some of these clubs do this pricing scheme with the express purpose of *excluding* men. NCFM-LA members have sued alot of these clubs, and some of them expressly did these because they were holding lesbian nights or special ladies' type events and specifically didn't want men there. In fact, car washes do it alot, and they can't claim they do it to "draw" men. We've had some success with these. One night club stopped discriminating and put a sign out that said "there will be no discrimination by gender." And a car wash created a "men's day" discount in addition to its "ladies' day" discount.
But what we are now starting to hear about is local public entities, such as the City of Santa Monica, going around "testing" businesses for sex discrimination and taking legal action against it, but they target *only* the ones that discriminate against women such as hair salons and cleaners, and *not* the ones that discriminate against men, such car washes, night clubs, or others (we've found hotels, shooting ranges, dating services, billiard halls, even a hamburger stand, that charged more for men). When we can free up some time we're going to investigate this Santa Monica thing further and possibly take legal action.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:31 PM June 2nd, 2004 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
Marc,
You write "NCFM-LA members" and then "We" - are you a member?
I have been living in Santa Monica for a good quarter century (business reasons) and know a lot about sex discrimination here. I wouldn't mine corroborating with you guys.
Tom Pollock
www.menstribune.com
spartacus@garbersoft.net
Mars vigila!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:06 PM June 2nd, 2004 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm the president. Yes we should talk. I'm at marcangelucci@hotmail.com
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is the way to go about it--the way to put big dents in the female discrimination racket.
To object to "ladies nights" at a local pub may seem petty to some, but it's tackling this sort of double standard at the local level that is likely to be successful and to encourage legal contests against serious discrimination--such as rapacious divorce settlements and spurious accusations of rape.
A wave of congratulations all the way from Oz to what I assume is the LA chapter of the National Coalition of Free Men.
Well done and good luck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:44 PM June 6th, 2004 EST (#35)
|
|
|
|
|
I live in NJ and I frequent bars and clubs, and I was wondering how I can report bars and clubs still offering ladies night? Many are in violation, and I'd like all to be accountable for this. You can e-mail me at stepn2myride@aol.com for any info. Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:39 AM June 7th, 2004 EST (#36)
|
|
|
|
|
"I live in NJ and I frequent bars and clubs, and I was wondering how I can report bars and clubs still offering ladies night? Many are in violation, and I'd like all to be accountable for this. You can e-mail me at stepn2myride@aol.com for any info. Thanks"
Try emailing these guys: (click) NCFMLA
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:36 PM June 6th, 2004 EST (#34)
|
|
|
|
|
Are you serious? Men make more so they are supposed to pay more? I make practically nothing and every female I knew made more than me. So I should have to pay more?? It's rediculous. Women want to be treated equally, except when it's in their favor. Plus every club or bar I have been to, a group of women go to get cheap drinks, pay no cover charge, get drunk for practically nothing and don't even talk to any guys, therefore throwing the ole saying guys will get lucky at the end of the night when the girls get drunk. I'm glad they mad the ban, and maybe now women will know how it feels to be a guy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The article said:
Judges in Pennsylvania and Iowa have said similar events are illegal, but courts in Illinois and Washington state have said that ladies nights are permissible because they do not discriminate against men but rather encourage women to attend.
Okay, this is so deep in bullshit that it is actually funny. Just imagine the above was about race rather than gender and saying that blacks were not discriminated against getting into these colleges the colleges were merely encouraging whites to attend by lowering their tuition! LMAO! What bullshit.
Do we have True Equality?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:08 PM June 2nd, 2004 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
Had to laugh when I read the article.
Occasionaly justice does come out of hideing, I guess.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Applying the same illogic, it's obvious that the feminists' argument that strip clubs exploit and demean women is absolutely false.
They're merely "encouraging" the transfer of men's wealth to female entrepeneurs who take full advantage of a business concept (like "Ladies Night"...) that disproportionately attracts one gender.
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have found that things that are sold as "for women only" usually if not always turn out to be products or promotions that actually exploit women. The "women only" products are mostly overpriced and average or below in quality.
This "ladies night" gimmit has been around for some time. It is a ploy to get more females into bars and thus attract more men with the intent of having a better chance of "scoring" at closing time. As the old song goes, "the ugly girls seem to get prettier just before closing time."
But I am personally glad this man did win this ruling. Good going! Now if we can get the same gender neutral rulings in cases of child support, divorce, custody, right to chose parenthood after conception and so on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This brings to mind the new automobile that came out just this past month, designed by women for women. I'm awaiting news of the lawsuit...
"Trust will kill you or set you free." -unknown
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:14 PM June 3rd, 2004 EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
This brings to mind the new automobile that came out just this past month, designed by women for women. I'm awaiting news of the lawsuit...
Don't hold your breath. There will be some feminized male that has their balls chopped off who purchases the car, and it will be sold to him. Kind of hard to sue unless they refuse to sell the care to the male sex.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:22 PM June 4th, 2004 EST (#25)
|
|
|
|
|
To be fair, some people pick cars just because they fit them better. For instance, I'm kinda tall with long legs. I usually find that compact cars don't fit me very well. The steering well is usually pressing against by legs ands feels awkward. So, if I find a compact car that I'm comfortable in, I'm liable to buy it. As it is, I usually drive SUVs or pick-up trucks because they have way more leg room.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:57 PM June 3rd, 2004 EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
A magazine (not sure which one, but it was likely about issues of interest to families and kids) had information about entering a contest that was only open to women. Participants had to describe their family dinnertime situation-it was something to do with that. Information on how to enter, etc. was included. Of course, the contest was "void where prohibited by law" so this kind of exclusion might not be allowed everywhere...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I heard on WPHT-AM (Philadelphia) this morning that Governor McGreevey (D-NJ) is going to over-rule this ruling.
Rumor and heresay, but it wouldn't surprise me a bit. It seems that there are a lot of folks out there saying that there are bigger issues to address, and I agree. Where we disagree is on what the issues are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the article above, it says that the governor doesn't have the authority to overrule this.
But it just goes to show you that people consider this a "silly" thing to have made it to the state courts--and yet they still want things back the way they were before. If it was so silly then they wouldn't care what the outcome was, but apparently they do.
bg
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:06 AM June 4th, 2004 EST (#20)
|
|
|
|
|
"But it just goes to show you that people consider this a "silly" thing to have made it to the state courts--and yet they still want things back the way they were before. If it was so silly then they wouldn't care what the outcome was, but apparently they do.'
Our current gender feminized society loves to bash men's hererosexuality so this is a perfect topic for our media and the rest of society to disprespect. Look at all the conditioning we get from beer commercials poking fun at men in bars. Non of those slobs could get a date with the beautiful female no matter how in control they acted, because women are now repeatedly held up as dominate in control superiors who are above men in all ways. Women are just that precious and men are just that stupid. ...so why do women go to bars in the 1st place??? ...to rip off silly men who buy them drinks???
This attempt to level the playing field in this area is taken by chivalrous women as an attack on their privilege, but it's taken by feminists as just one more thing silly men do. Those feminists say the bar scene exploits women, but they really don't care that men are getting ripped off, and women are expoiting men.
Many men themselves (sheep) think this is messing up there chances to pick up on "chicks" and party, when in reality it is sending a message that for meaningful relationships to develope between men and women a more responsible attitude needs to be taken by women.
Women need to be told early and often, you have responsibility now that you're liberated so when are you going to stop expecting men to pay your way through life?
As far as the one night stands that are byproducts of intoxicated sex, that comes out of these bars, any man would have to be a complete fool to go there in today's rabid rape climate. It is easy enough for a sober woman to frame a man for rape. A drunk woman has it even easier. All she has to do when she sobers up in the morning is use the old the old "just because I was drunk doesn't give him a reason to rape me," and the rest of than man's life is history.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This issue is no sillier than the ones the fems come up with. One politician made hay with a campaign against charging more for women's haircuts and dry cleaning women's blouses. The press was supportive. What is important is that we were taken seriously for once,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This issue is no sillier than the ones the fems come up with. One politician made hay with a campaign against charging more for women's haircuts and dry cleaning women's blouses. The press was supportive. What is important is that we were taken seriously for once,
After decades of listening to women whine and complain about the most trivial nonsense imaginable, I'm glad to see them hoisted on their own petard. The practice of charging women more for their haircuts, and to clean highly decorated and intricate blouses has a factual base - it takes longer. "Ladie's nights" are based purely and only on the asymmetry in the dating situation - women go somewhere to be seen so that men will approach them. Of course, I kinda view that men who chase women who are whores for cheap drinks get what they deserve.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:22 PM June 3rd, 2004 EST (#18)
|
|
|
|
|
It seems New Jersey has a truer understanding of sex discrimination than most states. Now might be the time for someone living there to sue all auto lube places that offer ladies day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:54 PM June 3rd, 2004 EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
I was at the Independent Women's Forum today and saw this posted there. I know that Nancy Pfotenhauer has a background in either Economics or Business. Given the IWF's conservative roots I understand their support of Capitolism, but don't agree with their reasoning. I wonder why nothing has been said by them about suits that have been filed previously, when women were discriminated against when going to hair stylists, or when get dry cleaning services. Maybe I'm missing something they've said about that.
Ray
Here is the link to their article, and a brief excerpt from the begining of the article is below that in italics and quotes.
(click) IWF Decries New Jersey Ruling on 'Ladies Night'
"WASHINGTON, DC -- The Independent Women’s Forum denounces the decision by the director of the New Jersey division of civil rights barring businesses from offering discounts to women on so-called "ladies nights,"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:24 AM June 4th, 2004 EST (#21)
|
|
|
|
|
"The IWF whines, 'This is yet another example of the influence of the radical feminist agenda,' adds Holycross."
I was warned about the IWF. The fact that they demand special treatment for women is proof positive that they believe in opressing males to suit their agenda of special priviledge.
They are anti-radical feminist all right, and they are pro-male oppression.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:47 AM June 4th, 2004 EST (#22)
|
|
|
|
|
This guy is a true bigot and hater of male-female equality. If we used his hateful form of logic then we would find that prices would be determined on the basis of a person's sex. This is no less hateful then setting a price on the basis of a person's skin color. Yet Tom argues in favor of businesses being able to set prices because of a person's genetic characteristic; in this case he wants the female sex to pay less and men to pay more. Here is the URL:
Hating the male sex
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:16 PM June 5th, 2004 EST (#31)
|
|
|
|
|
I've seen a whole lot of this same type of attitude on the Fox News cable channel, and it is almost all men doing it. Can anybody say, "macho, chivalrous, b.s., misandric bigots?" It's good to be honest about the right wing too, who don’t care for all the left wing feminist b.s. just like us, but then unlike us they turn around and heap all the same old unfair privileges on women that have been there all throughout the women's liberation movement (double standard). It's good to see the right wing bigotry in this area so flagrantly coming out of the closet for all to fully see, because that thinking is the enemy of equal justice for liberated men too.
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:55 AM June 4th, 2004 EST (#23)
|
|
|
|
|
This quote says it all:
Added Rita Haley, president of the New York City chapter of the National Organization for Women: "I am concerned that he is looking for discrimination in all the wrong places."
Yea right. It's the wrong place if it is a man that wants discrimination against him to end. NOT!
What a male hater Ms. Haley turns out to be; if she wanted equality then it would matter which gender is seeking to stop discrimination. But because it is against a man then it is somehow minor and less significant. LIAR!
Warble
P.S. All expressions on this board are my personal opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:09 AM June 4th, 2004 EST (#24)
|
|
|
|
|
In response to Ms. Haley's "concern" about men wanting equal treatment I say, there is nothing more satisfying than using the discrimination laws that feminists have put in place to sue for male equality. The feminist hate this practice more than anything. Ms. Haley's "concern" is proof of that fact.
Let the law suits roll! I cannot wait till I get more time to file and work through some more of these male discrimination suits in California.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"'If women could now get equal pay for equal work, then they could afford the cover charges,' said Deborah Jacobs of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey." (from USA Today, June 4)
the above is probably the most flimsy and ignorant sounding excuse to justify anti-male price discrimination that I've come across.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:30 AM June 5th, 2004 EST (#28)
|
|
|
|
|
"'If women could now get equal pay for equal work, then they could afford the cover charges,' said Deborah Jacobs of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey." (from USA Today, June 4)
### If women would take jobs and perform them as well as men in the high paying/high death area they wouldn't be earning less than men.
### If women stopped "opting out" to have children, and then deciding to stay home and rear them, women wouldn't be earning less than men.
### If women stopped "opting out" when they just get tired of working they wouldn't be earning less than men.
I don't really buy the whole contorted "earning less" b.s. anyway. Many, many men who earn more pay child support, spousal support, etc. to women who chose to have no job then complain about the unfairness. Many family men also are the family bread winner, while the wife stays home with the kids. He makes all the money, she spends it.
If you want to talk about unfairness talk about all the harassment men take while working themselves to death, while having to listen to glass ceiling lies.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:30 PM June 5th, 2004 EST (#29)
|
|
|
|
|
It all just goes to show that no matter HOW much women are "compensated" the feminists will never be satisfied. Enough will never be enough, EVER.
Their whole idea of "equality" is that they just keep recieveing, but NEVER give back.
"Gimme gimme gimme!"
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
A member of the outlaw gender.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:34 PM June 5th, 2004 EST (#32)
|
|
|
|
|
T.C.
I just had breakfast at a local coffee shop and wore my T-shirt that has the Uncle Sam's recruiting image on it. The one with his finger pointing in your face, only it doesn't say, "I want you." It says, "Men are not disposable." The waitress told me she liked it, and later a kid at the grocery store checking out my groceries told be he really got worried, "When he say those planes fly into those buildings." He told me he really liked the shirt too so I told him about NCFM, then told him where he could get a shirt if he wanted one.
I think people reacted so much today, because of a lot of things (D-day 60th anniversery coming up, war in Iraq, Memorial day just passed), but it was very noticeable today that people where really staring at the shirt, and I've never seen them stare so long or look so serious. I actually ran a couple of extra errands today just because people were reacting so much to the messages. Oh yea, on the back is a stunning photo of Los Angeles City Hall, and around the image it says in big letters, "Government is Sexist and Hostile Against Men.
I'm neither pro war or anti war, I just think war is one more area of life where men are discriminated against, and are made to pay horrendous prices, while ladies are required to pay little or nothing. What goes on at bars and night clubs is the tip of the ice berg. It is just a little prejudice that society condones, then society comitts a little bigger discrimination against men, then a little bigger, right up until it's primarily men who are forced to die in wars, then get blamed for all the violence by the feminazi government that sent them. Nip it in the bud I say. If women want to drink in bars they can wait in line with the men, then pay to get in, and pay to drink. Any thing else, they're just being prostitutes and whores.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Because while I'm a staunch Ayn-Randian-capitalist to the core, I think this ruling is great.
Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not for more government regulation of business. What I am for is seeing feminists get bit in the ass by the very policies they advocate. They whine and complain "Women are discriminated against here, and women are discriminated against there" , well the very anti-discrimination laws they sing the praises of came back to haunt them.
Oh boo hoo, now it's suddenly unfair!
So now Rita Haley of the NY branch of the NOW says that this ruling "concerns" her. This from the same group that complained about a urinal in the shape of a woman's mouth! Good-fucking-grief! Give me a damn break!
So while I can't say that I approve of yet more government regulation of private business, I sure as hell ain't gonna complain that much. Hey, anything that pisses feminists off can't be all bad.
"Existence exists. A is A." -Ayn Rand
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
