A case of reverse prejudice or a viable precaution?
I’m a firm believer in the phrase, “Two wrongs don’t make a right.” Here’s another little ditty I enjoy: “Treat others as you would like to be treated.”
We, as homosexuals, are sometimes treated as second-class citizens, discriminated against and often seen as sick or disturbed by certain religions based organizations. The emotional and mental effect is down right staggering.
As a result, we have created numerous organizations to battle this kind of treatment on a daily basis. We want others to sympathize with us, to understand the kind of scrutiny we face. We want an equal playing field on which to live our lives and yet, some of us take things to such an extreme, or should I say obtuse, angle that we undoubtedly don’t need to go to.
Australia - A gay pub in the city of Melbourne has won the right to ban heterosexuals - the first time such a decision has been made in Australia.
The Victorian state civil and administrative tribunal ruled the Peel Hotel could ban patrons based on their sexual orientation.
The pub’s management said the move would stop groups of heterosexual men and women from abusing gay people.
“If I can limit the number of heterosexuals entering the Peel, then that helps me keep the safe balance,” the hotel’s manager, Tom McFeely, told Australian radio, according to the Reuters news agency.
Civil liberties groups have supported the decision. Read More
Banning heterosexuals? Sounds like a case of heterophobia to me…
As a homosexual, I find this disheartening for a couple of reasons. First, I’m shocked that this pub felt the need to create a “safe” environment for gay individuals in the first place and that said “safe” environment required banning straight people in order to make it “safe.” Second, how does this help us reach that level playing field that we constantly seek from straight-oriented institutions? How can we maintain the mantra that we are all created equal, and that gay people deserve to be treated the same as straight people when we start barring others from our own institutions simply for being of a different sexual orientation?
Is this what things are coming to?
I understand the need for safety, and for a peaceful place in which we can go to feel a part of a community without the fear of being discriminated against, but why do we have to discriminate in order to secure such a place? I live in Buffalo, NY and our gay community is extremely small. There is strip down town filled with numerous straight bars for all to enjoy. I choose not to go to these bars, not for fear of discrimination, but because it’s not my thing. Instead, I go to a place called Allen St., which is filled with dive bars, coffee shops and a few gay bars. I feel comfortable there, it’s more my style. And I know plenty of straight people who visit the same establishments as I do. There’s no stigma attached, no “gay only” label. And that’s the way it should be. I have the option to go where I want to go, straight, gay, brown, purple, or what not, and others enjoy the same freedom.
How would the GLBT community react if a straight bar in a popular city decided to ban gay people? Would there be an uproar? Of course there would be.
We can’t ask for certain rights and then turn around and deny those same rights to others. It’s like beating your head against a brick wall – It won’t get you anywhere. All you’ll be left with is a headache and a view that never changes.
Be sure to check Lez Keep it Real tomorrow for, “The ‘fag bug’s been spotted!” Erin Davies will guest blog once a week to let us know how her “fag bug” journey is going.
Have you heard about the “fag bug?”
gay, lesbian, homophobia, heterophobia, australia, melbourne, peel hotel, reverse discrimination, reverse homophobia, homosexual bars, straight bars, buffalo, sexual orientation, banning heterosexuals
May 29th, 2007 at 11:29 am
I almost blogged about this one, and now I’m glad I didn’t and instead left it in your capable hands. Reading that article really bothered me and made me wonder what kind of precedent it’s setting for voluntary segregation and intolerance.
What I wonder is…how are they going to enforce this? They could presumably turn away actual couples, but how are they going to otherwise determine the sexuality of a person arriving alone? Force them to prove it somehow?
May 29th, 2007 at 11:32 am
Hmmmmm, the news story doesn’t give me enough information to understand exactly what is the situation. It appears it was the “racuous” hets that were causing a problem. So perhaps ones needs to figure out ways to attract “unracuous” hets, rather than banning hets altogether.
May 29th, 2007 at 11:34 am
Adri - great questions. I was wondering the same thing. This opens the door to so many complicated issues, as far as how do you tell who’s straight and who’s not, how to enforce it, the rippling effect that will most likely ensue, and more. It’s a def. step backwards in my opinion.
June 2nd, 2007 at 4:01 am
Well, from reading other articles online, the reason why they are banning straight men and ALL females, is that there have been many times when hen nights in bars and clubs nearby have spilled over and crashed the party at Peel to party with the ‘fun gay boys’, with the straight men following, which leads to rowdiness and unwanted flirting/aggression from the extremely drunk straight males/females.
Arguments supporting the decision give examples of other ‘one group only’ places, y’know, women only gyms, etc. The owner also says that he has the right to decide who the patrons of his establishment are.
August 18th, 2007 at 11:00 pm
hi i enjoyed the read