TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Australian pub bans heterosexuals
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

quote:

Originally posted by Jake Benson okay okay I get it I'm gay and so is the thread.

you are?? really?? lol

quote:

It's really annoying when straight people waltz into the gay bar with their entourage of breeders, looking around wildly at the "ironic" scenery where everything is "backwards" to them, expecting gays to be entertaining like circus performers, otherwise getting disgusted and completely mortified when some gay guy "hits on" them.

I had a straight bud of mine come with me to one of my numerous gigs at a gay freindly club I spin at here and he was just like that. He totally tripped on this one cat that hit on him.... I take it as a compliment and move on... but I understand the whole "circus entertainer" stigma that straights have toward gays. Its like gay men should all act like Nathen Lane in the "birdcage" .. however all my "family" men are more like Will from Will & Grace.... or the chef dude from Queer Eye.....smooth

quote:

But I think there's more of a fair approach than just an outright (and discriminatory ban) against hetereosexuals. That's such an overgeneralization. What about all the fag-hag fat chicks that accompany their skinny insecure gay guy friend? And what about the "straight" guys that check out the gay bar for the first time secretly trying to find a venue to come out of the closet? What about the straight guys who are gay porn stars? What about gay for pay? What about TRANNYS?

Fag Hags!!! ewwwwwe and why are they always heavy women?? good points there

quote:

I can understand how much shit gay people go through, but I don't think it's fair to discriminate against the entire group of heterosexuals. Maybe if there were more details about this scenario I'd feel more understanding. Is Melbourne such an awful place that there's only ONE measly little gay place to go to and still that place is swamped by hetereos?

and what about the awesome Djs that are comfortable in thier manhood who take the gigs in Gay Clubs?? I could not spin in a club that would discriminate against hetros or "breeders" ha ha I love that term.... breeders..

quote:

Originally posted by LazFX and what about the awesome Djs that are comfortable in thier manhood who take the gigs in Gay Clubs?? I could not spin in a club that would discriminate against hetros or "breeders" ha ha I love that term.... breeders..

Oh shit, I didn't think of that! Will make an exception to the rule and hire straight people to DJ, kinda like how some clubs let in an underage person if he/she's DJing that night? Or will they rule out 90% of the worlds greatest DJs?

Call me idealistic, but I have a simple method of determining whether or not I believe a ban or admission policy to be just; if it were reversed, would we think it to be fair? I believe that discrimination is discrimination, regardless if it is against a minority or majority group. As said before, if a bar opened up and had an openly anti-gay, anti-black, anti-Jew, or anti-any other minority group, we'd be outraged. But as long as it's an anti-majority group, we seem fine with it? I feel you can't have it both ways. Yes, minority groups need protection, but this is not a case of that. This is not an attempt to keep homosexuals safe, it's an attempt to remove an inconvenience in allowing "breeders" to participate.

quote:

Originally posted by NeoPhono Call me idealistic, but I have a simple method of determining whether or not I believe a ban or admission policy to be just; if it were reversed, would we think it to be fair? I believe that discrimination is discrimination, regardless if it is against a minority or majority group. As said before, if a bar opened up and had an openly anti-gay, anti-black, anti-Jew, or anti-any other minority group, we'd be outraged. But as long as it's an anti-majority group, we seem fine with it? I feel you can't have it both ways. Yes, minority groups need protection, but this is not a case of that. This is not an attempt to keep homosexuals safe, it's an attempt to remove an inconvenience in allowing "breeders" to participate.

It's not just 'breeders' though.
I read today that this ban includes Lesbians...

The only way I can see this working out is if they made it into a private club with actual membership.
I know this doesn't solve the arguments of discrimination, but at least the club would have a determining criteria in which to argue with rather than barring up what was a public place.

there was another case recently in sydney where a pub was found to be enforcing a door policy of no islanders and no middle eastern folk. That only came to light as one of the bouncers told people straight that they were not being allowed in as they were islanders.
Strangely enough the same pub also got complimented by the police just before that on the decrease in fights there in recent times.
Does that justify a discriminatory policy?

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r It's not just 'breeders' though. I read today that this ban includes Lesbians... The only way I can see this working out is if they made it into a private club with actual membership. I know this doesn't solve the arguments of discrimination, but at least the club would have a determining criteria in which to argue with rather than barring up what was a public place.

Ok yeah this is starting to look like a bathhouse to me. Why don't they just call it a bathhouse? There's bathhouses all over the states that bars women from entering and no one seems to care about it there. I think the only difference between the bathhouses in the states and the pub in Melbourne is that men are actually anal bum funning each other in the bathhouse, whereas the Melbourne pub men are courting, foreplaying, and getting ready to anal bum fun.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.