Some say that discrimination lawsuits are out of control. I happen not to think so, yet the story I have been hearing and reading in the news definitely takes it a bit too far to me as well. A lawyer and his client are suing a night club over ladies night. He claims that the practice is gender discrimination and benefits women to men’s expense. Yet you can also look at this from another perspective and even see how stupid this case is by applying it to other types of benefits.
If you look at it from the point of men might be luckier because of ladies night then the men might not be so offended by this practice. Ladies are less likely to frequent bars as much as men and since the men in these particular bars are there for the women and not male company by offering the women an incentive to come out this benefits the men who now have a plethora of ladies to approach. Also, since the ladies drinks etc are half price and in some cases free, the men that want to buy drinks will do so at with less of an expense than other days. Sure these may be small benefits yet if that particular man gets lucky due to ladies nights will be less likely to hate the discrepancy.
Now is ladies night a discriminatory practice? I guess you can look at it that way. Yet, isn’t men holding a woman’s chair out, holding open a door or putting on her jacket acts of discrimination as well since they are done for women and not men? I don’t think so. Some differences are to be expected in the treatment of men vs. women. I know that the feminists are about to explode right now, yet I do feel that these differences do not amount to anything detrimental or hurtful with respects to men. I personally feel that women should be treated as women and love the gestures associated with being a woman. I like for a man to hold the door or bring me flowers etc.
In order for me to agree with the discrimination charge they would have to show me exactly how the men are being injured by the practice of ladies night. Wasn’t the man going to have to pay for entry and drinks etc anyway so whether the women get in free or at a reduced rate isn’t going to change this. It isn’t going to stop men from getting into the clubs or bar, now if the men are being turned away in order for the women to get into the bar for free then I would agree that the men have been harmed or maligned by the practice.
Now what if like the defense attorney said we start to apply this to other types of situations where one group benefits. I don’t mean such as races, I mean things such as Motel 6 allows kids to stay free, should the elderly sue. Restaurants let kids eat free under a certain age and have special priced menus for those of retirement age. I don’t think that anyone is actually being hurt by these practices. No one is being denied income, housing or medical care with these practices. Also, no one is saying that they won’t serve certain people; they are actually making it easier for some to frequent those businesses. If a family is on a budget they are more likely to go to a place in which their children eat free. Or elderly on a budget probably will frequent places where they get a better deal.
If they want to put an end to ladies night, I could care less since I don’t frequent bars or night clubs. But, I feel that the men who are suing are cutting off their noses to spite their face because if the women no longer frequent the bars and club these same men will be upset that there aren’t a larger number of women to make the night enjoyable. I guess next they will be suing for the right to have women open doors and pull out their chairs as well.