Sign in to follow this  
Ziggy + Angel + Rain

"Gay Hair Salon Owner Installs Anti-Bigotry Sign"

Recommended Posts

I'm talking about in any case, not just that one guy who made a huge deal.

And honestly, both are pretty bad - neither worse than the other. Hypocrisy is toxic and plagues our government. As do bigots. It's two things this whole world could do without.

Hypocrisy is everywhere.  Everyone is, has been, or will at some point be or act a hypocrite.  Hypocrisy is born of human fallibility.  Bigotry is born of ignorance and hatred.

 

It's not about what caused the sign/whatever it is to exist, it's about the sign itself and how it flies in the face of free service.

You can say that once the salon owner actually kicks out a blatant homophobe.  Who probably wouldn't be there for a haircut anyhow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're still refusing someone service because of their viewpoint. That doesn't seem just to me. 

I would argue the opposite. If you are a private business owner, you should be allowed to refuse service for any reason. Any at all. Good or bad. You shouldn't be forced to do business with somebody you don't wish to do business with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

xD Oh god my sides are laughing... Might as well tell the rest of society out there not to be assholes or you won't get any business. This guy is the perfect example of a total douchebag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can say that once the salon owner actually kicks out a blatant homophobe.  Who probably wouldn't be there for a haircut anyhow.

And I'm saying he shouldn't be able to do that. The salon owner provides a service, and the consumer recieves the service. It's the consumer's choice not to be there because the owner is gay, not the owner's choice because the consumer is against gays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're seriously going out of your way here.  It's no secret what inspired the sign.  The behavior of the man who refused to allow his son's hair to be cut by a homosexual was homophobic.  Do you disagree on that point?  If not, I don't think your "what ifs" and any and all personal definitions of "sexist" and "homophobic" necessarily apply.

My what ifs may not be appropriate in the context, but neither was this gentleman's lumping together of all "racists," "sexists," "homophobes," and "assholes" simply because one individual did something rude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hypocrisy is everywhere.  Everyone is, has been, or will at some point be or act a hypocrite.  Hypocrisy is born of human fallibility.  Bigotry is born of ignorance and hatred.

 

You can say that once the salon owner actually kicks out a blatant homophobe.  Who probably wouldn't be there for a haircut anyhow.

You can not be both, but some people just don't want to.

 

That's different, if he's just there to cause trouble that is disturbing the peace and then kicking him out and refusing to let him come back is entirely reasonable.

 

I would argue the opposite. If you are a private business owner, you should be allowed to refuse service for any reason. Any at all. Good or bad. You shouldn't be forced to do business with somebody you don't wish to do business with.

Me too, but that just isn't the case with the law at this point in time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I'm saying he shouldn't be able to do that. The salon owner provides a service, and the consumer recieves the service. It's the consumer's choice not to be there because the owner is gay, not the owner's choice because the consumer is against gays.

You sound as though you're fighting for the rights of a homophobe to receive services he doesn't even want.  Presumably on the grounds that it's absolutely, irrefutably just and / or lawful that a business owner be expected to serve whoever (even a whoever who doesn't want to be served).  If your perspective is a moral one, you've strayed.  If your perspective is a legal one, you haven't a leg to stand on until someone is actually refused their services on the grounds of being a bigot.

 

Unlike being homosexual, being an asshole is a choice.  The asshole could simply choose not to be one and possibly gain immediate entry into the salon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I would agree on the asshole part. But ya know, money is money... So... Keep your grievances in your head.  :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Badges

Unlike being homosexual, being an asshole is a choice.  The asshole could simply choose not to be one and possibly gain immediate entry into the salon.

Also unlike being homosexual, being an asshole is an insult and purely subjective, not a legitimate or objectively meaningful description of a person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My what ifs may not be appropriate in the context, but neither was this gentleman's lumping together of all "racists," "sexists," "homophobes," and "assholes" simply because one individual did something rude.

Perhaps you're right.  It isn't the salon owner who was discriminated against, it was racists, sexists, and homophobes - and especially assholes.  There is no bigotry worse than bigotry towards bigots.

 

Did you feel that there was a hidden attack towards religious individuals in that sign?  Your other post more than suggests as much.  It's as though you assumed "homophobes" meant Christians who regard homosexuality as sinful.  So you've essentially done the lumping together for everyone.

 

The sign was a response to genuine bigotry.  It's not enough just to not be a bigot.  This is not a case where tolerance is the correct response; genuine bigotry ought not be tolerated.

Also unlike being homosexual, being an asshole is an insult and purely subjective, not a legitimate or objectively meaningful description of a person.

Racists and homophobes and sexists are assholes.  Agree or disagree?  Or, rather, racism, homophobia, and sexism are asshole-ish behaviors.  Agree or disagree?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or like thinking you're a girl makes you a girl

 

Is this a sarcastic insult on transgender people?

Edited by Sigma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you feel that there was a hidden attack towards religious individuals in that sign?  Your other post more than suggests as much.  It's as though you assumed "homophobes" meant Christians who regard homosexuality as sinful.  So you've essentially done the lumping together for everyone.

No, I really didn't, and I apologize if my post came off that way. My example was purely for the sake of example. I doubt the sign was specifically targeted at religious people, but as a religious person, I've seen many instances where "homophobe" is essentially used as a derogatory term for any conservative religious person. And such instances comprise a significant portion of times I've heard people slinging the word around, so it does have a bit of a stinging connotation in my mind. I wouldn't accuse this shop owner of using the word in that way, because I don't know his intentions, but I would proffer that he ought to have been a bit more considerate and realized that the word is commonly used in this derogatory way and thus might very well offend many people whom he had no intention of offending.

 

Racists and homophobes and sexists are assholes.  Agree or disagree?  Or, rather, racism, homophobia, and sexism are asshole-ish behaviors.  Agree or disagree?

Disagree on both points. I have no right to judge someone as an individual, and "asshole-ish" is a purely subjective term that means scarcely anything more than "extremely distasteful to me personally."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Disagree on both points. I have no right to judge someone as an individual, and "asshole-ish" is a purely subjective term that means scarcely anything more than "extremely distasteful to me personally."

Would you regard homophobes, racists, and sexists as being "extremely distasteful to [you] personally?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you regard homophobes, racists, and sexists as being "extremely distasteful to [you] personally?"

No. Homophobes, racists, and sexists are human beings. If I regarded people as extremely distasteful simply because of the things they did, I'd have to regard myself as extremely distasteful, because I've done plenty of horrible things in my time, too. I'm in no position to pass moral or evaluative judgment on anyone for his or her beliefs, lifestyle, or choices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Homophobes, racists, and sexists are human beings. If I regarded people as extremely distasteful simply because of the things they did, I'd have to regard myself as extremely distasteful, because I've done plenty of horrible things in my time, too. I'm in no position to pass moral or evaluative judgment on anyone for his or her beliefs, lifestyle, or choices.

Then you don't pass judgment on homosexuals / regard their behavior as sinful?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then you don't pass judgment on homosexuals / regard their behavior as sinful?

No, I don't pass moral or evaluative judgment on them, but judging an individual is not the same as regarding an individual's actions or behavior as sinful. And in my previous comment, I made no such statement on the latter point.

Edited by Henny Penny Benny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People are always going to be judgmental about something or someone. I see no issue as long as they generally keep it to themselves. The real problem are the ones that decide to throw down the gauntlet and make it known to the world.

Edited by Singe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for private property rights and being able to refuse service to whom ever you want. But such is not the case in regards to the law. 

 

No matter how politically correct that sign is, if it was challenged, it would hold no legal water. Theoretically a Klansman could walk in there and demand a haircut from the most flaming stylist in the place and if they refused he could sue them. Much like a gay couple demanding a wedding cake from a religiously conservative bakery.

 

I don't agree with this but that is the law.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree with this but that is the law.   

Is it, though?  People keep saying that, but no one has provided any proof of its legality whatsoever.  Not to mention that the incident in question occurred in Wales.  What does the law in Wales say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about other countries but that's how it is here in the States.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You sound as though you're fighting for the rights of a homophobe to receive services he doesn't even want.  Presumably on the grounds that it's absolutely, irrefutably just and / or lawful that a business owner be expected to serve whoever (even a whoever who doesn't want to be served).  If your perspective is a moral one, you've strayed.  If your perspective is a legal one, you haven't a leg to stand on until someone is actually refused their services on the grounds of being a bigot.

 

Unlike being homosexual, being an asshole is a choice.  The asshole could simply choose not to be one and possibly gain immediate entry into the salon.

Yes, yes I am. Also, I'm talking about rights, not wants, so whether or not he'd/she'd want the service is entirely irrelevant. In fact, no it isn't, because that should be the determining factor of what services what people get, and not just discriminating the discriminators.

 

Is this a sarcastic insult on transgender people?

Not on the people themselves, but the idea you can be a different gender just because you want to. In fact, a trans person is why I still exist.

Edited by Flinchel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about other countries but that's how it is here in the States.

Could you link me to the law itself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Google-fu is not so great but this is as good a place to start as any.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-discrimination_law

Anti-discrimination on grounds of sex, race, ethnicity, etc.  I don't see on grounds of "being a douche." x3  I don't think that sexism, homophobia, and racism are protected against discrimination.  Considering that they are, in and of themselves, forms of discrimination.  Hell, even sexual orientation isn't protected against discrimination by federal law where it had damn well ought to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.