Advertisement

by Nanatsu no Tsuki » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:18 pm
Slava Ukraini
Also: THERNSY!!
Your story isn't over;֍Help save transgender people's lives֍Help for feral cats
Cat with internet access||Supposedly heartless, & a d*ck.||Is maith an t-earra an tsíocháin.||No TGsRIP: Dyakovo & Ashmoria

by Samozaryadnyastan » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:18 pm
Iron States wrote:The policy of the bar is slightly ironic don't you think? For years Homosexual people have been banned from showing public affection even still today in allot of nations. I think its great that Straight people see what its like before judging others.
Malgrave wrote:You are secretly Vladimir Putin using this forum to promote Russian weapons and tracking down and killing those who oppose you.

by Planeia » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:18 pm

by The Serbian Empire » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:18 pm
Iron States wrote:The policy of the bar is slightly ironic don't you think? For years Homosexual people have been banned from showing public affection even still today in allot of nations. I think its great that Straight people see what its like before judging others.

by Galloism » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:18 pm
Norstal wrote:Horsefish wrote:
Well, not really.
Yeah, really. You should know beforehand it's a gay bar and doing anything of the sort is disrespectful.Galloism wrote:Really? You've never been to a gay bar with one of your friends and felt like kissing your SO randomly after a drink or two?
What of my natural urges? It's still wrong. Gays view heterosexual acts icky just as we heterosexuals view gay acts icky.

by Nailed to the Perch » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:18 pm
Myrensis wrote:Neo Art wrote:Because, once again "discrimination = bad!" is how children think. And I'm not a child.
Discrimination in favor of a group in order to correct discrimination against them is not always a bad thing.
Minority scholarships exist because traditionally either due to overt discrimination, or other factors (education, economic) created by discrimination they have been deprived of access to higher education.
'BET' exists because the majority of television is aimed at the white majority, and strong black characters/journalists/etc are a rarity.
The same does not apply to a gay bar regarding allowing heterosexuals to display affection. It is still a 'safe' place for gays to do their thing, there's no quota, "Sorry, we only allow 6 displays of affection an hour, and the straights have used 5 of them.". Unless the idea is that heterosexuals kissing/hugging/grinding whatever is in itself somehow offensive or discriminatory towards gays, which as an argument is qualitatively no different from, "The very existence of gay marriage somehow degrades and devalues my straight marriage!"
Useless Eaters wrote:This is a clear attempt to flamenco.

by Frisivisia » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:18 pm
Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:That phrase irks me. Not because I don't agree with it but because I think there are better ways to shoot down an argument.


by Neo Art » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:18 pm

by IshCong » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:18 pm
Norstal wrote:Planeia wrote:If you would've carefully read the OP, you would've seen that I said sexual orientation themed establishments are okay, but they shouldn't care if a crowd of another sexual orientation comes. Obviously bigots are not gonna go to such a place.
"Obviously"? Where did the gays get their invincible wall of bigots repellent?
Straights should be allowed in gay bars that much is true. But see, this is important. The owner banned heterosexual kissing. It is the act that is inappropriate in a GAY bar. If you're doing that kind of thing in a GAY bar, you're obviously trolling. So this "obviousness" about bigots not going to such a place is clearly wrong.

by Horsefish » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:19 pm
Norstal wrote:Yeah, really. You should know beforehand it's a gay bar and doing anything of the sort is disrespectful.
What of my natural urges? It's still wrong. Gays view heterosexual acts icky just as we heterosexuals view gay acts icky.
Areopagitican wrote:I'm not an expert in the field of moron, but what I think he's saying is that if you have to have sex with Shakira (or another dirty ethnic), at the very least, it must be part of a threesome with a white woman. It's a sacrifice, but someone has to make it.
Geniasis wrote:Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go bludgeon some whales to death with my 12-ft dick.
The Western Reaches wrote:I learned that YOU are the reason I embarrassed myself by saying "Horsefish" instead of "Seahorse" this one time in school.

by Nanatsu no Tsuki » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:19 pm

Slava Ukraini
Also: THERNSY!!
Your story isn't over;֍Help save transgender people's lives֍Help for feral cats
Cat with internet access||Supposedly heartless, & a d*ck.||Is maith an t-earra an tsíocháin.||No TGsRIP: Dyakovo & Ashmoria

by Blekksprutia » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:19 pm
Planeia wrote:Blekksprutia wrote:I like how you skated over the rough patches there. How soon you seem to be forgetting that gays are an oppressed minority.
You can't put out a fire with more fire.
You can't save the planet from nuclear missiles by firing back with more nuclear missiles.
You can't fight discrimination with more discrimination.


by Neo Art » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:20 pm
Nailed to the Perch wrote:
The thing is, bars are typically not actually infinite in size. A bar that is full of straight people is, de facto, not a gay bar, even if it's still named "The Manhole" or "Rods." It's a pretty sound business strategy for a gay bar to discourage straight people from coming there, because the whole way it attracts its core clientele is by advertising itself as a place where most of the patrons will be gay.

by Frisivisia » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:21 pm


by Ifreann » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:21 pm

by Neo Art » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:21 pm
Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:That phrase irks me. Not because I don't agree with it but because I think there are better ways to shoot down an argument.

by IshCong » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:21 pm
Norstal wrote:Horsefish wrote:
Well, not really.
Yeah, really. You should know beforehand it's a gay bar and doing anything of the sort is disrespectful.Galloism wrote:Really? You've never been to a gay bar with one of your friends and felt like kissing your SO randomly after a drink or two?
What of my natural urges? It's still wrong. Gays view heterosexual acts icky just as we heterosexuals view gay acts icky.

by Frisivisia » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:21 pm
Horsefish wrote:Norstal wrote:Yeah, really. You should know beforehand it's a gay bar and doing anything of the sort is disrespectful.
What of my natural urges? It's still wrong. Gays view heterosexual acts icky just as we heterosexuals view gay acts icky.
I don't think gay men kissing is icky. I mean, full on going at it in a club corner? Slightly different kettle of fish (for both straight and gay), but kissing a bit? It's hardly icky.

by Frisivisia » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:22 pm
Ifreann wrote:Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:
Globalize yourself, Iffy.
I don't know is there's enough of me to go around. Maybe if I gorge on cheese...Dumb Ideologies wrote:
Not enough has been said about the localized crisis of gravity caused by high levels of gaydiation
People can't get down in gay bars?Frisivisia wrote:I was beautiful, dammit. I'm making this my flag now.
No one will recognise you now.

by Nanatsu no Tsuki » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:22 pm

Slava Ukraini
Also: THERNSY!!
Your story isn't over;֍Help save transgender people's lives֍Help for feral cats
Cat with internet access||Supposedly heartless, & a d*ck.||Is maith an t-earra an tsíocháin.||No TGsRIP: Dyakovo & Ashmoria

by The Serbian Empire » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:22 pm
Neo Art wrote:Nailed to the Perch wrote:
The thing is, bars are typically not actually infinite in size. A bar that is full of straight people is, de facto, not a gay bar, even if it's still named "The Manhole" or "Rods." It's a pretty sound business strategy for a gay bar to discourage straight people from coming there, because the whole way it attracts its core clientele is by advertising itself as a place where most of the patrons will be gay.
Hey I've been going to the Manhole for years now. I would have noticed if it were a gay bar. I mean, I met my friend James there, and he's a bodybuilder, he can't be gay.

by Olthar » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:23 pm
Planeia wrote:Blekksprutia wrote:I like how you skated over the rough patches there. How soon you seem to be forgetting that gays are an oppressed minority.
You can't put out a fire with more fire.
You can't save the planet from nuclear missiles by firing back with more nuclear missiles.
You can't fight discrimination with more discrimination.

by Soldati Senza Confini » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:24 pm
Neo Art wrote:Soldati senza confini wrote:
Oh no, I am not assuming that straight people who want to go to a gay bar and make out with their significant other is a more valuable demographic. I am just thinking in terms of marginal profit per se. Of course, being a gay bar I would expect for it to be driven towards customers who are homosexual, but at the business level you also want to maximize profits, which this policy in the gay bar is not doing.
I am sincerely not looking at it in terms of demographics, I am looking at it as a financial transaction at this point. If I was the owner of said bar I would not place such a policy that is going to drive away money. Then again I think in maximum profits, he may think differently, which is okay too if he can make a profit with the current clientele he has or that he is projecting in the future.
You're still making the same mistake, just dressing it up to pretend you're not. Yes, clearly, doing something that drives away customers is a bad decision at a business level. I absolutely agree.
Unless, of course, you stand to lose more customers (or better paying ones) if you don't. Your whole assumption here is assuming that he will lose straight customers if he does this, but not lose gay customers if he doesn't. Why, again, would you assume that? Maybe this IS purely a financial decision, maybe his gay customers ARE bothered by this, and this is the best choice for him (sometimes it's not about making money, sometimes it's about reducing the amount you lose).
Or maybe he's just doing it out of principle and cares more for that then the financial gain. I don't see standing up for the comfort of your (traditionally oppressed) clientele to be a "stupid" move, even if it does cost him.
edit: and to add, of course, while his existing clientele might not object, it's entirely possible that there's a market out there who WOULD be going to his bar BUT FOR the concern, which he has removed. He may be attracting new business to supplement, and supplant, the business he lost.
I know the term gets used a lot, but this is really what's meant by "check your privilege". Stop assuming that just because you're white, or straight, or male, or Christian, or young, or cisgendered, or able-bodied, that your dollar is worth more than someone else's dollar. This is where the entitled thinking comes from, that he's "harming his business" by chasing away the straight people.
Once again, gay people have jobs too.
Tekania wrote:Welcome to NSG, where informed opinions get to bump-heads with ignorant ideology under the pretense of an equal footing.

by Frisivisia » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:24 pm


by Frisivisia » Sat Jun 29, 2013 1:24 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Armeattla, European Federal Union, Picairn, Torrocca, Umeria, Z-Zone 3
Advertisement