A black lesbian got booted from an eatery on gay pride day when a bouncer found her in the ladies room. Now Ms. Farmer’s looking for some justice - she filed a lawsuit:
Farmer said she was using the women’s bathroom when a male bouncer burst in and banged on the stall door, saying a customer had complained that there was a man in the women’s room. The lawsuit alleges that the bouncer insisted Farmer was a man and refused to look at her identification, which she offered as proof that she is a woman.
“I was thrown out of the restaurant because of who I am and how I look,” Farmer said. “It was humiliating. No one should be subjected to that type of discrimination.”
I don't know about this one ... Khadijah. I don't care what you do in the privacy of your bedroom yada yada yawn. But I wouldn't send my daughter into the ladies room with your ass either.
Tuesday, May 06, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Actually, aren't male/female restrooms the last vestiges of segregation, to begin with? And outdated in the post-fem era?
Maybe the deeper issue here is whether such blatant gender-discrimination should still be legal?
So what if he were a man? What does the fact that he has a penis have anything to do with pee/pooing?
Don't worry Byrdeye. They are working on that one too. Pretty soon, all bathrooms will be unisex.
Hell, to think about it, all people will be too.
The bouncer certainly gets a pass on questioning why she was in the restroom. But putting aside the political for one second (and focusing on the practical), no one took the time to look at her identification? I'd like more details on that part of the story. That's the part thats potentially actionable, i.e., the failure to look at her identification in an effort to clarify the situation, not the fact that this man-looking -woman was actually taken for a man.
My crystal ball tells me she will win the case. But not because she was actually discriminated against as she claims, but because it appears that somebody failed to use a reasonable, simple and available means to clarify whether she was lawfully in the bathroom at the time in question. I further predict that some folks will take this as evidence of the gay agenda being ever advanced. However, in this instance the reality is, (at least based on what I just read), this was something that could have been easily clarified short of requiring the woman to leave the establishment.
Now if she refused to show her ID on some ol' discrmination bullshit, than that will (rightfully) garner a different analysis.
oh, and BTW, LOL @ Khadijah!
Post a Comment