Yes, it all makes perfect sense to me now... - - - Updated - - - I'm not sure you now what misogynist means...
Who knows? I simply pointed out that people bar entrance from their establishments all the time based on the way people are dressed. So why is this different? Which you didn't answer. Which kind of proves my point, doesn't it? "You will either accept me exactly as I am, or I will make you pay!" That's not what indifference to being accepted looks like. It is a spoiled princess complex.
1. So you made a point about dress codes that has nothing to do with THIS discussion because you thought it was pertinent to THIS discussion? Weird... 2. No. They could care less if you "accept them as they are", as I said they are way beyond ever desiring or expecting people like you accepting them. but they will sue your ass off and laugh all the way to the bank if you deprive them of their rights or break the law. You just don't get it. This is just the beginning....I'm popping my popcorn.
Alright, let's try this again. If bar owners tell people all the time how they have to dress in order to enter their place of business, why is this such a big deal? How is this any different from places that don't let patrons inside wearing jerseys or backwards baseball caps because gang members in the area wear such attire and tend to run off business? Seems like a pretty simple question. I'm not sure how else to ask this. As I understand it, this guy didn't even ask these people to leave. He just asked them not to come there at that specific time. My question is what's hypothetically wrong with him just asking them to leave anyway because of what they are wearing? Can't help but wonder why nobody wants to answer this. No one's depriving them of (*)(*)(*)(*). They're just being bratty little pains in the ass because society won't change all of its customs to accommodate their precious little feelings. What they are doing is called wagging the dog. And it's extremely selfish. And if you want me to prove how selfish it is, I can give you a counter-example. And see, people like you get off on this kind of bullying because - for whatever reason - you feel left out too. And so you get to live vicariously through them "sticking it to the man." You don't really care about these people or any of their problems. You just hate the same people they do. Your only bond is through a common enemy. Because this is what the entire left wing is made up of. It's just a hodgepodge of various different misfit groups that hate and despise tradition, wholesome morality, and happiness in general because they've felt cut off from it for so long that they've developed this sour grapes attitude toward it. And so they want to punish everyone who's got a better life than they do by bringing them all down to their own level. This is why the only thing you can really say to a liberal is "haters gonna hate." Because that's all you people know how to do. And every one of your positions always comes back to this. It doesn't even matter what the topic is.
I spent many years playing music in bars, and I find the statement that people getting drunk on a Friday night in a bar are "bad" because they are being "being bratty little pains in the ass" rather hilarious! How many people are NOT being "being bratty little pains in the ass" while getting drunk in a bar? Particularly compared to "macho males" wearing absolutely absurd "macho clothes" and "macho jewelry and tattoos"! And how RICH have these same people made the bar owners while they drank themselves to self-centered oblivion? If bar owners are going to ban people who are "being bratty little pains in the ass", they may as well just close the doors and open a library.
I'm with the owner on this....I feel bad for him. Bars are where you meet chicks, if there are too many cross-dressers I wouldn't bother going there lest I bring home a cross dresser. Cross dressing is a choice. A choice on what you wear, and I believe restaurants can set their own dress codes, and they can even have different standards for men and women. Refusing to provide service for a man in skirt and heels is the same as refusing to provide service for a man in t-shirt and sandals. The way you dress is completely different from your race or sexual orientation which you cannot control.
The real villain in this mess isn't the T-Girls who as Americans can act trashy and complain about 'discrimination' all they want. Even they admit it's not about money. It's the Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian who is using what may be a poorly written but well meaning anti-discrimination law for his own selfish political ends. He's obviously an ambitious second stringer who got his job through political manuvering and sees sexual discrimination issues as an avenue to greater political recognition. The Rose City T-Girls and Bar owner Chris Penner are just pawns in his sick little power play. So while everyone else is snarling and at each others throats he just laughs and plans for re-election in 2014 and possibly higher office. I'm confident the ruling will be thrown out on appeal. http://www.politifact.com/oregon/statements/2011/sep/20/brad-avakian/oregon-labor-commissioner-investigates-300-housing/ http://www.paramuspost.com/article.php/20130815182821157
