(source)
For nearly two decades, Minnesota native Steve Horner has crusaded against what he considers a monumental injustice: Ladies’ night.
The complaints he filed with Human Rights Departments in several states have earned him at least $6,000 in damages for being denied ladies’ special prices at bars…
[T]he white, balding, bespectacled Horner compared his quest to Rosa Parks’ refusal to go to the back of the bus…
“I believe that to be vigilantly in defense of the constitution, one needs to speak up about these issues,” Horner said in an interview. (source)
More on gender discrimination (the real stuff) and Rosa Parks (the real one, and another fake one). More human rights nonsense.
Is it okay to discriminate in favor of one sex, or to discriminate against another? Why is a “ladies’ night” acceptable, but not a “white people’s night” or a “black people’s night”? Or are the latter two also acceptable?
I guess it’s because discrimination isn’t just about equal treatment but also about options. Discrimination can’t be only unequal treatment because we accept such unequal treatment all the time (in love, school grades, salaries etc.). Not all unequal treatment is discrimination. It’s discrimination when it also reduces the options of those treated unequally. In this case, if there was only one bar in town, and we consider being able to go to a bar as an important option that people should have, than barring men from going to the bar one night a week might become a case of discrimination.
So, in that case, a “white’s night” or a “black’s night” would be perfectly acceptable?
It would, if not for the “weight of history”, which I grant is a vague concept. Perhaps I could compare it to the swastika. If not for the weight of history, I could draw one on the wall right now without much harm being done (given that it’s originally a Hindu sign I believe). Just like a whites-only night wouldn’t cause harm or discrimination if it weren’t for the history of white supremacy. Given that history, such a night would possibly cause harm (depending on the circumstances, the publicity, the privacy of the event etc.) but not, I believe, discrimination since it wouldn’t diminish the options of the excluded (again depending on the circumstances).
Pingback: Statistical Discrimination | P.a.p.-Blog, Human Rights Etc.
Pingback: Private Discrimination, Freedom of Association and Property Rights | P.a.p.-Blog, Human Rights Etc.
The comments seem to forget that the idea of a ‘ladies’ night’ is a social response that should always be taken in context. “Historical weight,” what an apt term. :D