I'm not crazy about gold teeth, but let the guy eat at the restuarant for crying out loud.
QuoteBy Marci Gonzalez
WPTV/NBC News Channel
WEST PALM BEACH, FL -- A man is filing a discrimination suit against a popular West Palm Beach, Florida bar. Shawn Anderson claims it's an issue about race and teeth.
Anderson said he was asked to leave Roxy's on Clematis Street Wednesday night because of his gold teeth. The manager explained Roxy's dress code bans 'grills' -- gold teeth covers.
Anderson feels this rule intentionally targets the black community.
"I think it's discrimination against me because I'm black and a lot of black people have gold teeth now," he explained.
John Webb, the owner of Roxy's, defended the policy.
"It's not discrimination. He just didn't comply with the dress code," Webb said.
Anderson says he plans to file the lawsuit in the coming weeks.
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/florida/news-article.aspx?storyid=99402 (http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/florida/news-article.aspx?storyid=99402)
QuoteI'm not crazy about gold teeth, but let the guy eat at the restuarant for crying out loud.
I agree with the owner. The owner didn't make the rules up as he went along, they were known and posted rules. The man should have complied with the dress code and then there wouldn't have been an issue. Business owners have the right (or so it's said, anyway) to refuse service to anyone. Is it always fair? No, but it's their right. If you, as a patron, don't appreciate it or 'like' it, you have the right to frequent another establishment and put your money into places whose rules and beliefs you support.
The business owner didn't tell the man he couldn't eat there because of his skin color, he told the man he couldn't eat there because of his attire. The man clearly has some sense of entitlement to think he's above the rules. Would you expect to get served if you walked into New York's, Tavern on the Green, wearing swim trunks, flip-flops and a wife-beater tank top?
The owner did make the rules and evidently the guy's teeth are permanent and not removable. This is like me owning a buffet restaurant and saying fat people aren't allowed to eat there. Or someone telling me I can't dine in their establishment because I have a tatoo. If I were this guy I wouldn't eat there anymore.....and I'd sue the hell out of them.
QuoteThis is like me owning a buffet restaurant and saying fat people aren't allowed to eat there.
More appropriately, this is like you owning a buffet and saying portions are limited to one plate, one serving of each item. The owner, again, didn't say he couldn't be there because of his race. He said, "no gold teeth".
QuoteOr someone telling me I can't dine in their establishment because I have a tatoo.
Yes, it's exactly like this, and I defend anyone's right to create these rules. It's their business. If they don't want a dining room filled with tattooed people, and/or people with piercings, they have the right to create and enforce those rules. That's not to say they might do a hell of a lot more business without those rules, just that it's their right...and this if from someone who has tatoos and piercings.
QuoteIf I were this guy I wouldn't eat there anymore.....and I'd sue the hell out of them.
I agree, if I were him I wouldn't eat there. Why would I want to support a business that didn't want me there in the first place? As far as suing, the guy really doesn't have a case...or SHOULDN'T anyway. It's too bad that his teeth are permanent. Maybe he could have called the restaurant prior to showing up, explained that he does not have a "grill" but rather, has permanent gold teeth, and they may have made an exception.
Sounds to me like there is much much more to this story.
Stephen, you're a business owner. Are you saying that it would be good business to open an establishment in Ortega, serving authentic French cuisine, having spent thousands of dollars on interior design, training of staff, and then not having a dress code of any kind? As a consumer, when I want swank, I go to a restaurant that specializes in it. I don't expect to see people (regardless of race, ethnicity, or sexual preference), in torn sneakers, faded t-shirts, torn jeans, and dirt under their nails, sitting next to me. I expect to see people that look pretentious and snooty, lol. Conversely, when I've just rolled out of bed at noon, haven't showered, still have dirt on my feet from gardening the day before, throw on my husband's cargo shorts, a tank-top, expose my unshaven armpits, and go out for lunch; I'm going to go eat someplace where I fit in and there is no dress code. I'm not going to go out to Avondale and walk into Sterlings and expect to be served.
You should know that when you open a business, you do so with a vision. You know exactly what kind of place you want it to be, the clientele you'll be catering to, where it will be located, and you set your prices accordingly. Anything less would just be a waste of your time and resources. Obviously, this business owner set his rules according to his vision. If there are more blacks that come forward, without grills, that say they were turned away, then you may have a point, but until then, I support the business owner.
I'd be suing the hell out the DENTIST I were him.
Roxy's is an irish pub on Clematis Street in downtown West Palm Beach.
http://www.roxyspub.com/ (http://www.roxyspub.com/)
We're talking about a London Bridge type establishment here, not Ruth Chris. They are serving hamburgers, nachos and loaded fries, not filet mignon, not that this should matter anyway.
My order of potato skins are going to taste the same regardless of whether its a guy with few real gold teeth, a yuppie, a 300lb woman, or a tree hugger eating in the same bar.
I guess the major difference is lumping this as a fashion statement, similar to coming in with no shoes, but to me this is more like banning someone for having glasses instead of contacts, or for missing teeth, in an attempt to "weed" out a certain demographic the restaurant owner personally doesn't like.
QuoteRoxy's is an irish pub on Clematis Street in downtown West Palm Beach.
OMG. I guess he should've worn a Celtics jersey, lol. Thanks for the info.
QuoteMy order of potato skins are going to taste the same regardless of whether its a guy with few real gold teeth, a yuppie, a 300lb woman, or a tree hugger eating in the same bar.
True, they might taste the same but your dining experience is going to be a hell of a lot different, don't you think? If you went into an Italian restaurant and the decor depicted pictures of beer steins and people dancing around a maypole, and the staff all wore liederhosen, wouldn't it be weird? When you go to Ragland's in 5-points and a family wearing dockers, Cole-haans, and polo shirts walk in, don't you take a second look and think, man, that looks odd? Ok, so maybe it's the designer in me talking, but I do all those things. Yes, it's weird that this restaurant is so casual and yet has this dress code, but again, I don't blame the guy for enforcing his rules.
Have you guys been up to Amelia Island lately? The Palace has a very strict dress code now. They won't allow any men wearing tank-tops to enter. Interesting, considering tourism is the island's primary source of income and this is FL where it's not uncommon to see guys walking around public streets with no shirt at all, and the Palace is a bar that no longer serves food. But, I know the manager personally and they've had some problems with specific people (non-race related) who are causing them to lose business. So, while the decisions are obviously made in an attempt to control the clientele, why does it have to be "race related?"
QuoteOMG. I guess he should've worn a Celtics jersey, lol. Thanks for the info.
Yeah, maybe they would called him a "boy" and told him to go out back and order instead of completely throwing him out, lol.
QuoteTrue, they might taste the same but your dining experience is going to be a hell of a lot different, don't you think?
No. As long as everyone sticks to their business, which is eating food, then my experience will be the same. If someone is getting loud or making a scene, then that's a different story.
QuoteYes, it's weird that this restaurant is so casual and yet has this dress code, but again, I don't blame the guy for enforcing his rules.
I don't equate having gold teeth or braces in your mouth the same as wearing a wife beater or no shirt at all. They're apples and oranges to me.
QuoteSo, while the decisions are obviously made in an attempt to control the clientele, why does it have to be "race related?"
Its probably has more to go with blantant ignorance of lifestyles outside of his, more than it has to do with race. However, race gets thrown into it because someone having gold teeth is more likely to be of African American descent.
Quote from: stephendare on January 08, 2008, 11:08:22 AM
Im sorry, Pancake, but these things rarely cross my mind.
But, they DO cross your mind on occasion ;) I guarantee you if I walked into the establishment formerly knows as, Boomtown (no disrespect, just really don't know the current name), you'd do a doubletake ;)
QuoteYeah, maybe they would called him a "boy" and told him to go out back and order instead of completely throwing him out, lol.
I can't believe you're so anti-Irish! For shame. ;)
QuoteIncidentally, last time I was in Paris, dining on authentic French Cuisine, almost all the nicer establishments were playing american Hip Hop.
What the heck does music have to do with dress code??? I'm confused, but the French restaurant you went to in France, liked the music and they chose to play it because it depicts the type of atmosphere they're trying to acheive. I guess I don't understand what point you're driving.
Quoteand yeah, as a business owner, we do have dress codes.
What are YOUR dress codes?
Quote from: stephendare on January 08, 2008, 11:25:29 AM
Meaning that whatever may pass for sophisticated in ortega isnt necessarily a universally shared concept.
I for one, try not to eat in the racist restaurants in the city.
Precisely. So, why is everyone so quick to judge the owner by saying he's a racist when it may very well just be his idea of sophistication (or in this case, Irish Pub), which has less to do with gold teeth and more to do with general preference of what the owner wants/does not want to see while he's there.
Quoteshirts with sleeves, and shoes, general state of cleanliness.
It lets even our ortegan diners join us.
But, sadly, does not allow ME to be there because I very rarely have sleeves on any of my shirts ;) Everyone has their own definitiion of "cleanliness" so there is no generalization about it. My brother-in-law thinks clean is when he runs a comb through his unwashed, greasy hair. Many East Indians don't use deodorants, and many women don't subscribe to a shaving regimne. So, who's to say that given the situation, you turning away someone for not being "clean" could be misconstrued as racist, sexist, or anti-hippy?
QuotePrecisely. So, why is everyone so quick to judge the owner by saying he's a racist when it may very well just be his idea of sophistication (or in this case, Irish Pub), which has less to do with gold teeth and more to do with general preference of what the owner wants/does not want to see while he's there.
I think ignorance is the larger issue here. The problem with this is, it really does open him up to getting his butt sued.
If I may...one big component is missing here, behavior. I agree that a business owner has to right to appropriate any code he/she sees fit. But I also know that this typically goes hand in hand with the patron's demeanor.
Do we know if this guy was behaving in a manner indicative of his rap sheet (posted on Roxy's site)?
I'm not so sure I would lump this in with racists motives simply because 'black' money spends just as well as 'white'. I'm sure if South Florida's hip-hop elite (regardless of race) were to patronize the establishment, there wouldn't have been an issue (but of course there isn't a way to prove this).
I'd say that's a low blow on the restaurant's part and seems like a cop out, the way its presented. Him being held in jail overnight on a charge of false imprisonment has nothing to do with having gold teeth and ordering a burger. If he was behaving badly, the gold teeth issue should have never came up and in the media reports the owner would have stated he was thrown out for bad behavior, not a teeth violation.
I agree with what you say about the pub posting this guy's rap sheet. But, I'm still inclined to believe that there has got to be more to it than just "gold teeth" (for society's sake I hope so).
I made my statement because I've seen "dress code" used in such a way as to guage people. For example, I stood in line at a local nightspot that advertised "no jeans" on a particular night. But I and several other people (wearing jeans) were let into this club while some others with were not, and the reason they gave was because of the "no jeans" dress code. From my stand point, the only difference between those who were let in and those who were not was demeanor.
I know that's not quite the same being Mr. Alexander was already in the bar, but who's to say that his behavior wasn't enough to justifiably kick him out so they used the teeth as a cop out?
or am I reaching? lol
Webini touched on an important point, aside from what the behavior of this particular individual may or may not have been, it comes down to economics...what does and what does not generate a buck. If the business previously had their doors open to anyone and everyone, and through time and trial, realized that every person who frequented their establishment wearing red hats, caused fewer patrons to enter, and were generally rowdy, didn't order very much, or didn't tip well, causing more trouble than it's worth, then they (the business) might establish a dress code saying, no one with red hats may enter.
Then that's discrimination and that's what's getting this bar owner in trouble.
Quote from: Webini on January 08, 2008, 01:45:44 PM
I know that's not quite the same being Mr. Alexander was already in the bar, but who's to say that his behavior wasn't enough to justifiably kick him out so they used the teeth as a cop out?
or am I reaching? lol
It may be me, but there aren't many establishment with a "dress code" stating gold teeth/no service. Seems like the owner is asking for trouble. Hopefully, for the owner's sake there's more to the story. Because if there's not, this event may force Roxy's to lock their doors for good.
Quote from: thelakelander on January 08, 2008, 02:15:25 PM
Then that's discrimination and that's what's getting this bar owner in trouble.
That's his right as a business owner. If he were charging inflated prices for hamburgers, would that be discrimination against poor people? What about having a special place outside for smokers. Is that discrimination against NON-smokers? No, it people are willing to pay $30 for a patty of ground beef, than that's just good business. If by having a special place for smokers, he's bringing in clientele that other businesses dismiss, than that's good business. If he's getting ripped off by people with gold teeth, and he enacts a policy against them, then he's taking a proactive approach to defend his profits...good business. That doesn't mean we can't feel bad about it if we're someone with gold teeth. It just is what it is. Hell, I get a bad rap all the time for being a "tree-hugger". It upsets me, because people's notions of "tree-hugger" are distorted based on some bad apples out there and I don't like being lumped with "those people", but it is what it is. If someone wants to turn me away because I want to drink soy milk instead of cow milk, eat turkey instead of beef, and consume only organically grown produce, well, then that's their right to do so. And it's my right to voice my opinion about the place to all of my friends so they don't go to that place any longer, causing them to lose profit and ultimately go out of business ;D
QuoteIt may be me, but there aren't many establishment with a "dress code" stating gold teeth/no service. Seems like the owner is asking for trouble. Hopefully, for the owner's sake there's more to the story. Because if there's not, this event may force Roxy's to lock their doors for good.
It's only trouble if the owner did this in a neighborhood filled primarily with people with gold teeth, lol.
Quote from: second_pancake on January 08, 2008, 02:26:00 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on January 08, 2008, 02:15:25 PM
Then that's discrimination and that's what's getting this bar owner in trouble.
That's his right as a business owner. If he were charging inflated prices for hamburgers, would that be discrimination against poor people? What about having a special place outside for smokers. Is that discrimination against NON-smokers? No, it people are willing to pay $30 for a patty of ground beef, than that's just good business. If by having a special place for smokers, he's bringing in clientele that other businesses dismiss, than that's good business. If he's getting ripped off by people with gold teeth, and he enacts a policy against them, then he's taking a proactive approach to defend his profits...good business. That doesn't mean we can't feel bad about it if we're someone with gold teeth. It just is what it is. Hell, I get a bad rap all the time for being a "tree-hugger". It upsets me, because people's notions of "tree-hugger" are distorted based on some bad apples out there and I don't like being lumped with "those people", but it is what it is. If someone wants to turn me away because I want to drink soy milk instead of cow milk, eat turkey instead of beef, and consume only organically grown produce, well, then that's their right to do so. And it's my right to voice my opinion about the place to all of my friends so they don't go to that place any longer, causing them to lose profit and ultimately go out of business ;D
So since some would claim Jews don't tip, are you saying its okay to deny service to them? At one point, it was a business owner's right to not hire a woman if he didn't want to or to not serve blacks. This isn't 1950 anymore. Roxy's is walking a thin line that could easily result in them getting successfully sued.
Like I said, we don't have to like it, but a business is opened to make a profit, and if they see reasons as to why they aren't making money, they have to make decisions that will reverse that.
We have law in our country to prevent against discrimination of things that are inherently so...things we couldn't change if we wanted to like race and sex. It's not right to discriminate against women, jews, blacks, asians, whites et al, because they are people and did not make a choice to be born or be born who they are. A person can change a shirt, put on a shirt, change the way their hat sits on their head, cover their tattoos, remove their piercings, even put caps over their teeth if need be. No one should be asked to change who they are, but if it's a matter of cosmetics and the choice is comply or go away, then they should do one or the other.
Btw, to answer your question directly:
QuoteSo since some would claim Jews don't tip, are you saying its okay to deny service to them?
No. One way a business owner might ensure he receives tips from EVERY patron, regardless of race, would be to enact a policy that a 15% gratuity is added to every bill. ;D
I'm really not trying to be difficult. I'm just trying to make the point that you can't have a free-market and also say that every business in America has to serve everyone regardless of what they wear or how they look or what they can afford. Democracy or Communism, you decide.
I missed a lot. Lake, I understand where you're coming from. There aren't many establishments to go on record posting a dress code that is so strict as to mention gold teeth. My point is that there are places that do and there is a lot more to consider when these rules are applied instead of the obvious things like race and discrimination.
Cool. In this case, what else is there to consider, regarding the banning of people with a gold tooth or teeth from dining in a pub?
Considering the wearing/installation of gold teeth has historically been associated with blacks, I can see where the racism or the discrimination angle would play into it.
Quote from: second_pancake on January 08, 2008, 02:51:26 PM
I'm really not trying to be difficult. I'm just trying to make the point that you can't have a free-market and also say that every business in America has to serve everyone regardless of what they wear or how they look or what they can afford. Democracy or Communism, you decide.
But we do. The market has never been as free as you suggest. You can't choose to not serve women if you don't want too. You can't choose to not serve latinos if you don't want to. You can't refuse service to someone because you may have a personal problem against people who shop at Express or Brooks Brothers. That's why we have discrimination laws and offenders getting sued out the wazoo on a common basis.
QuoteDenny's tries to make amends for racial discrimination
WASHINGTON (AP) - Seeking to make amends for racial discrimination, Denny's is giving more than $1.5 million to civil rights groups and the United Negro College Fund. The restaurant chain also announced a policy of ''zero tolerance for discrimination.''
''We are an entirely different company,'' said James B. Adamson, chairman and CEO of Flagstar Companies Inc., parent company of Denny's. ''We are still the butt of some jokes, but we are saying people should give us a second chance.''
Adamson was joined at a Wednesday news conference by representatives of nine civil rights groups, each of which received a check for $100,000.
The United Negro College Fund will receive an additional $625,000 Thursday at a news conference in San Francisco.
The payments are part of a 1994 settlement of two class-action discrimination suits against the company. By December 1995, the company had paid $54 million to nearly 300,000 customers who said they were subjected to racially discriminatory behavior at Denny's restaurants. Denney's operates 1,600 restaurants in the United States.
Since the settlement, Adamson said, Denny's has embarked on an aggressive campaign to increase opportunities for minorities. Purchasing contracts with minority-owned companies have increase sixfold since 1993. Then, Denny's had one black franchise owner. Now it has 28.dinmynririncdmafi
The news conference coincided with the 68th birthday of slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King.
The Rev. Joseph L. Lowery, president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, one of the civil rights groups receiving $100,000, recalled that King was leading a poor people's campaign in Memphis, Tenn., when he was assassinated in 1968. Lowery said the company's effort to diversify its work force and assist minorities would have made King proud.
QuoteThe market has never been as free as you suggest. You can't choose to not serve women if you don't want too. You can't choose to not serve latinos if you don't want to. You can't refuse service to someone because you may have a personal problem against people who shop at Express or Brooks Brothers. That's why we have discrimination laws and offenders getting sued out the wazoo on a common basis.
See my previous post where I address the difference between discrimination and selective business practices.
QuoteThe news conference coincided with the 68th birthday of slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King.
Wow. Don't know that I would've made that business decision. A little superfluous. Any day would've been just as good as the next. I think using that day had more potential negatives than positives around it...one being lessening the importance of why we remember it just to name one.
Quote from: second_pancake on January 08, 2008, 04:10:54 PM
QuoteThe market has never been as free as you suggest. You can't choose to not serve women if you don't want too. You can't choose to not serve latinos if you don't want to. You can't refuse service to someone because you may have a personal problem against people who shop at Express or Brooks Brothers. That's why we have discrimination laws and offenders getting sued out the wazoo on a common basis.
See my previous post where I address the difference between discrimination and selective business practices.
Oh, I saw it. Imo, this seems to fall on the side of "discrimination" more than it does "selective business practices".
Here is a related story...
QuoteREACT: Some SA Apartments Banning Tattoos
Last Update: 9/26/2007 7:53 pm
It's against the law for landlords to discriminate based on the color of a person's skin. But can they reject you because of what's on your skin?
Some San Antonio apartment complexes are refusing to rent to people with tattoos and body piercings. News 4 WOAI Trouble Shooter Jaie Avila investigates the case of one couple who says that policy is unfair.
REACT: News 4 WOAI's Jaie Avila comments about how many of us have seen people with tattoos and body piercings and thought "wait until they try to get an office job, or worse yet, wait until they get older and start losing the battle with gravity." But should people be denied an apartment because of their 'body art'?Jaie wonders if this is a sign of things to come. Click here to read more and tell us what you think about it.
Gilbert Carrillo thinks tattoos are an artform. He's been to tattoo conventions and one of his tattoos was featured in a magazine. "Ever since I was 18, to now, 25, bit by bit, covering up here, covering up there."
But last month, Carrillo's tattoos kept him and his wife, Melissa, from moving into an apartment complex called the Villas at Medical Center. "We liked the apartment, we brought them a check for the deposit and a check for the application fee," says Melissa.
Later, Gilbert went by to look at the apartment wearing a short sleeve shirt. The next day, the Carrillos were told they didn't qualify to live there, because the tattoos on Gilbert's arms violated the policy on personal appearance.
"For them to be so judgmental on a person's appearance, and for them to judge someone based on them having a tattoo is just ridiculous, you know," says Melissa.
The Carrillos were also upset that the manager refused to refund their full $70 application fee. But mostly, they feel the policy is discriminatory.
So the Trouble Shooters went to the Villas at Medical Center to hear their side of it.
The manager, Daisy Salazar, said she wasn't allowed to talk to us. "We have our own lawyers, I can't speak to anyone," said Salazar.
But we didn't give up. We contacted one of the owners of the apartments: A southern California doctor named Edward Frankel.
Frankel e-mailed us a statement saying his apartment complexes do, in fact, "reject prospective tenants who have... tattoos exposed on the neck, head, hands and wrists, or large tattoos that cover over 40% of the lower or upper arm."
Frankel says, "We do not discriminate. The above applies to persons of any race, color, gender, etc."
Frankel, and his partners, have purchased numerous upscale apartment complexes in San Antonio and Dallas, where they've also banned pierced eyebrows and tongues. Tenants can't have more than one nose piercing, or more than five earrings.
Local fair housing officials say the rules may be unusual, but they are not illegal.
"Refusing to rent to somebody because they have tattoos may be unfair, but it's not discrimination under the fair housing act, unless the tattoos are specific to the person's religion or national origin," says Sandy Tamez of the San Antonio Fair Housing Council.
After the Trouble Shooters started looking into the case, the apartment complex refunded the Carrillos' full application fee.
But the couple is still angry that a landlord would consider body art to be the mark of a bad tenant.
REACT: News 4 WOAI's Jaie Avila comments about how many of us have seen people with tattoos and body piercings and thought "wait until they try to get an office job, or worse yet, wait until they get older and start losing the battle with gravity." But should people be denied an apartment because of their 'body art'?Jaie wonders if this is a sign of things to come.
http://www.woai.com/content/troubleshooters/story.aspx?content_id=57db782b-9874-4b37-aa00-0402ab8a7ab1
I don't think its fair either, being that I am mixed race & half black, and I understand the cultural side of the arguement. I cannot agree that it is descrimination though. There are very specific things that are LEGALLY descrimination. If he sues, it will probably get thrown out.
I totally agree, gradco.
It sucks that there are people out there that ruin things for others. You know the reason the apartment complex has this policy is because of the stigma attached to people who have tattoos, and nowadays almost everyone has a tattoo so it's not like it once was where only 'bad' people had them. A shame that the apartment complex feels they have to do this to protect themselves, but i agree it's not discrimination. I believe if we continue to classify things like this (what someone wears, bodyart, piercings, tattoos, etc.) as discrimination, then we negate TRUE discriminatory practices which would be an injustice to everyone. Good story. Thanks for sharing!
Quote from: stephendare on January 08, 2008, 10:55:01 AM
QuoteStephen, you're a business owner. Are you saying that it would be good business to open an establishment in Ortega, serving authentic French cuisine
Incidentally, last time I was in Paris, dining on authentic French Cuisine, almost all the nicer establishments were playing american Hip Hop.
??? When were you in Paris and where did you go? I dont recall any such thing. I seem to recall classical music the last time I dined at Taillevent, the finest restaurant in the world IMO.
http://www.taillevent.com/
For some reason, I bet the outrage would not be so deep if the restaurant threw out a guy for wearing a wifebeater t-shirt - common attire of the white poor. I bet the dress code excludes low rent types of all races and this is perfectly legal. The standard, I believe, is is there discriminatory intent not is there discriminatory effect. If they throw out a black guy who comes in wearing nice clothes and no grills, then he would have a lawsuit. This does not appear to have been the case.
BTW, whatever happened to the age old American right of freedom of association? If a restaurant wants to exclude me, I would not care and would feel in no way diminished. Maybe I just have better self-esteem but I would prefer to dine where I am appreciated anyway. I guess Boomtown is out. ;)
Let me say that that the wonderful thing about america. You don't have to do business with people you don't want to. There's nothing you can do about it. I don't have to server you nor do I have to admit you to our club club.
Who knows, before long we'll be banning people with braids and afros from coming in to get a bite to eat. Maybe its just me, coming from across the tracks and growing up outside of "mainstream" culture, but the body of work, from the media reports to Roxy's website response has Jim Crow era level of ignorance written all over it. Most my disagree and that's fine, but to me it just a reminder that despite the progress our society has made in the past few decades, we're still not completely there yet.
If I were in the victim's situation, assuming he wasn't doing anything other than trying to eat with the same green money everyone else accepts, I'd explore my legal options and at the very least exercise my American right to drive him out of business in an effort to nip this type of crap in the bud.
QuoteThe Carrillos were also upset that the manager refused to refund their full $70 application fee. But mostly, they feel the policy is discriminatory.
They at least could have gave this tattooed up couple their $70 application fee back, since they weren't "qualified" in the first place.
Memory lane? Yeah, I remember when my family had a visit by the KKK because my uncle Doug was a young black business partner with my father, and dad allowed him to stay with us and OMG... EAT with us for several months before he found his own place. This by the way was in MARYLAND right outside of DC. The white boyz caught dad in the yard where he was playing with a bow and arrow set and shooting at an old corn flakes box.
They had seen him put one right in the middle of the box... then as they approached, he let another go which split the first arrow (yes I saw Mythbusters, so did it split all the way? beats me but it DID split the arrow) Suddenly one of the "good ol boyz" sez, "Wow, your REALLY good with that thing..." Dad knew who they were and laid down the bow and said, "Yeah, the nice thing about these is you never know where the shot is coming from..." They thanked him for his time and scooted off down the street.
FUNNY? Yep. Dad almost NEVER used the bow and arrow set, and to put two in the middle, let alone the bale of straw was pure divinely guided.
Another? Yeah. As a hippie I knew this young nurse grad student in Dunlap, California. She was model material and we really hit it off... She went on a sojourn to San Francisco for a few months, then called to tell me she was back in town and we could meet for dinner at our favorite restaurant. I drove over there with all those warm fuzzy visions in my head that a long-haired leaping gnome would have. As she walked up I could see the change in her... She was right out of the tree house in the movie "Without a Paddle"... In fact she looked and smelled more like Big Foot, then the little nurse that had left town a few months before. People moved away as she walked to her seat. We laughed, ate and I tried not to breathe... Finally it was over. REALLY OVER! Simple solution, we never did that (or anything else) again. But I have laughed for 33 years over the incident.
FUNNY? Yes, Just get a life people. Damn, next we'll be telling people you have to bathe with a certain soap to eat in our fine establishments. When that day comes, I'll join my nurse friend and GO BIGFOOT on someplace!
Ocklawaha
QuoteWhen that day comes, I'll join my nurse friend and GO BIGFOOT on someplace!
roflmao!!! You can do that now with me! I'll take my unshaven pits, with my sleeveless shirt and we'll go visit Stephen down at his place. He doesn't allow sleeveless shirts and mandates hygeine as part of his dress code ;) (SD: I'm just giggin ya ;) )
I'll buy a gold grill, get a Tyson face tatoo, grow dreads, put on a wife beater and meet you two at Stephen's place for a burger.
lake: you have no recourse here. If so, don't you think the blacks would have gotten into the country club in West Palm Beach by now? That's the beauty of it. If you don't like to come my place you don't have to. And if I don't want you at my place I don't have to have you. I think that's your right under the constitution of the United States. Your pursuit of happiness. A lot of people, including myself are deeply troubled with some of the 'clubs' out there that exclude people, but that's their right. I have to accept that if I am an American. You know like the Boy Scouts not taking in girls, or allowing gay memebers. Is it bigotry? Which is worse. I don't know.
When it comes to basics like food, and shelter, I don't want ANYONE excluded... not even nurse BIG-FOOT. You mean I'd have a dinner in PUBLIC with every homeless guy, pimp, hooker, and crack head in Jacksonville? Why not? The big question for our citizens is...
Why wouldn't you?
As for my once fair female "Bigfoot", I don't think I'd sleep with her, but I'll be damned if she'd freeze on the walk in front of my house. Got bed? Got Food? End of question.
Ocklawaha
Quote from: gatorback on January 09, 2008, 02:23:50 PM
lake: you have no recourse here. If so, don't you think the blacks would have gotten into the country club in West Palm Beach by now? That's the beauty of it. If you don't like to come my place you don't have to. And if I don't want you at my place I don't have to have you. I think that's your right under the constitution of the United States. Your pursuit of happiness. A lot of people, including myself are deeply troubled with some of the 'clubs' out there that exclude people, but that's their right. I have to accept that if I am an American. You know like the Boy Scouts not taking in girls, or allowing gay memebers. Is it bigotry? Which is worse. I don't know.
This isn't a club or some sort of hidden society. Its a freaking average joe's pub in the middle of a major downtown in Florida's largest metropolitan area.
If I believed this quote 100%, that would mean I would be prefectly fine with some guy calling me a boy and telling me if I want to eat at his restaurant, I'll have to order out back, while the people he likes dine inside. Or I'd be fine with my kids being taught with used outdated school books in poorly maintained buildings while the kids across the tracks get to learn in modern facilities with new supplies.
lake: calm down. couple of things here. First, I'm with you as I said before. Second, there's is no difference in a restaurant in Beverly Hill Bills, or a Country Club in WPB. Both are S-Corps or C-Corps even maybe doing business as in the case of some small eats and neither get money from the State or Federal Governement to do business. Unless, the eat place is like a soup kitchen, or food bank, which serously would feed all, there's going to be no rules as to who the owners can do business with just like the country club in West Palm.
If you are getting to the point of "learning facilities" as in school, library, etc, then yes, those places do get federal/state funding which would quickly be pulled if kids accross the track were denied entrance based on race, sex, etc., et. but if they simple had gold teeth, the library might have rules for that, I know they do with offending tee-shirts and the like just as some school, not just private, but public have uniforms.
Don't worry Lake, when the "New Order" takes charge, your children can use those old books for home schooling. I hear they won't accept men of color, hippies, gays, Jehovah's Witnesses or anyone with mental illness. They're opening a new restaurant in town but nothing we can't work around... Just remember the sign at their gate...
WORK MAKES FREEDOM!
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/Special%20Effects%20Images/Arbeit_macht_frei.png)
Kind of makes you wonder about society's evolution. Up or Down?
OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: gatorback on January 09, 2008, 06:18:49 PM
lake: calm down. couple of things here. First, I'm with you as I said before. Second, there's is no difference in a restaurant in Beverly Hill Bills, or a Country Club in WPB. Both are S-Corps or C-Corps even maybe doing business as in the case of some small eats and neither get money from the State or Federal Governement to do business. Unless, the eat place is like a soup kitchen, or food bank, which serously would feed all, there's going to be no rules as to who the owners can do business with just like the country club in West Palm.
If you are getting to the point of "learning facilities" as in school, library, etc, then yes, those places do get federal/state funding which would quickly be pulled if kids accross the track were denied entrance based on race, sex, etc., et. but if they simple had gold teeth, the library might have rules for that, I know they do with offending tee-shirts and the like just as some school, not just private, but public have uniforms.
Don't worry, I'm not upset, I'm an easy going guy. I was just continuing the discussion.
I learned this the hard way. I told a Sun Bank officer that I think the teller took my money and he immediately closed my account. I really did think she took my money. He said, we don't have to do business with you get out and dont come back. I'm a clean cut white male waring an suit, white shirt and tie. I was devisistated. But learned a lession.
Two years after this situation (2010) snoop dog plays at Roxy's Pub...from the looks of it the no gold grills rule still stands.
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=KH6zsUElssU&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DKH6zsUElssU (http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=KH6zsUElssU&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DKH6zsUElssU)
I don't think he sued.