Gender again. Sorry!

[matticus]

If Linehan is going to insist he is being discriminated against, then I am going to demand to be booked to blow my trumpet on the main stage at Glastonbury. After all, it is lawful for me to believe I'm good enough and that people will want to pay to listen

I know you've deliberately picked a farcical analogy, but there is a big difference here.
Imagine a festival booked you - having been persuaded and/or done their own research - that you'd make them some money, and had plenty of relevant experience; and then they received some "complaints" and binned you.

They might well be in the green, legally, but I would call that Not Cricket.

 

[multitool]

He's a talented comedy writer but I reckon he'd be a terrible stand up comedian.

Was.

Like all people sucked into this obsessive GC cult, he's lost his mind.

 

[Julia9054]

I know you've deliberately picked a farcical analogy, but there is a big difference here.
Imagine a festival booked you - having been persuaded and/or done their own research - that you'd make them some money, and had plenty of relevant experience; and then they received some "complaints" and binned you.

They might well be in the green, legally, but I would call that Not Cricket.

Imagine they'd booked me on the understanding that I was a brass band. They later found out that I was hiding the fact that I was a string quartet.

 

[matticus]

Imagine they'd booked me on the understanding that I was a brass band. They later found out that I was hiding the fact that I was a string quartet.

That is not remotely like what has happened here [according to my understanding, anyway!]. The complaints are about his views/opinions; not the nature of his performance, lack of specific technical skills etc

 

[Julia9054]

That is not remotely like what has happened here [according to my understanding, anyway!]. The complaints are about his views/opinions; not the nature of his performance, lack of specific technical skills etc

Give over
His views and opinions are his entire personality. What do you think his stand up act is likely to be about?

 

[matticus]

Give over
His views and opinions are his entire personality. What do you think his stand up act is likely to be about?

Are the complaints from ticket HOLDERS? in which case this might be a goer ... maybe ...
... but I think the complaints are from elsewhere.

Besides, it's rare for a stand-up show to stick to ONE TOPIC for the whole gig. (Apart from Stuart Lee repeating the same sentence over and over and over and over and ... ). And can you really ask for your money back because someone is a c*nt ? [Source: NACA forum 16th August 2023]

 

[matticus]

Cancellation can be a bit of a grey area but ultimately a private venue should be free to make their own decisions and then accept the reputational consequences that follow.

Yeah, that's fair enough; as it happens, in my view this is very bad for reputation.
(Other customers are welcome to their own views.)

There have always been comedians making money from views I find unpleasant - but people do pay money to watch that stuff. Not my bailiwick.

 

[newfhouse]

Yeah, that's fair enough

I'm glad.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Give over
His views and opinions are his entire personality. What do you think his stand up act is likely to be about?

We can guess but, were that to be the case, the beliefs that his stand up routine is based on are not illegal to hold. A venue might decide not to proactively seek to book him, just as they might decide not to book a drag act, because it's not what their core patrons are likely to buy tickets for. But what they've basically done is rented a room out then decided to discriminate. I'm astonished that you can't see that if you regard this as acceptable it could apply to any personal prejudices such as refusing to honour a booking for a gay wedding.

The law protects us all from discrimination not just those with beliefs we agree with.

 

[newfhouse]

The law protects us all from discrimination

but only if such discrimination is based upon one or more of the legally protected characteristics.

As has been established, being an ärse is legal but does not guarantee a right to an audience.

 

[Julia9054]

We can guess but, were that to be the case, the beliefs that his stand up routine is based on are not illegal to hold. A venue might decide not to proactively seek to book him, just as they might decide not to book a drag act, because it's not what their core patrons are likely to buy tickets for. But what they've basically done is rented a room out then decided to discriminate. I'm astonished that you can't see that if you regard this as acceptable it could apply to any personal prejudices such as refusing to honour a booking for a gay wedding.

The law protects us all from discrimination not just those with beliefs we agree with.

What is this "rented a room out" nonsense you keep going on about?
They booked an act, found out more about that act, decided it wasn't likely to suit their core audience and cancelled it.
You could argue that the venue were unwise to book without demanding to know who the mystery comedian was but it's nothing like a booking for a gay wedding. Unless they are selling tickets for the wedding with the purpose of making a profit

 

[classic33]

So some beliefs should be protected and others shouldn't? I find the beliefs of Scientologists to be ridiculous but I don't think that they should be given less protection from discrimination than the beliefs of Muslims or Christians.

You seriously think 'You can't change your sex' shouldn't be a protected belief whilst 'Jesus rose from the dead' should be?

Our opinions are based on beliefs. If those opinions are legal to hold, then it is discriminatory to treat people differently just for holding them.

Again though, this is subjective. Should vendors be allowed to deny goods and services based on their subjective view of legally held opinions?

If you don't like the fact that gender critical opinions are legal and protected in law, perhaps you need to campaign to make them illegal.

Not the same because you were in there already, and presumably your behaviour contravened the venue's rules, which would have to be reasonable to be legal. How about if they sold you a ticket then refused you admission because they heard you were a c*unt? Or more accurately, decided to refuse admission because they didn't like your legally held views?

I'm always bemused by the people on here who give the impression of being left of centre but who support discrimination when it targets people they don't like.

Suppose they cancelled just to avoid trouble at the event, or afterwards.

As for it being discrimination, prove it!

 

[classic33]

We can guess but, were that to be the case, the beliefs that his stand up routine is based on are not illegal to hold. A venue might decide not to proactively seek to book him, just as they might decide not to book a drag act, because it's not what their core patrons are likely to buy tickets for. But what they've basically done is rented a room out then decided to discriminate. I'm astonished that you can't see that if you regard this as acceptable it could apply to any personal prejudices such as refusing to honour a booking for a gay wedding.

The law protects us all from discrimination not just those with beliefs we agree with.

You'd do well to remember that bit.

 

[winjim]

You seriously think 'You can't change your sex' shouldn't be a protected belief whilst 'Jesus rose from the dead' should be?

#NotACult

You can believe Jesus rose from the dead but nobody has to provide you with a venue in which to hold an evangelical service.

The rest of your post is also very easily rebutted.

 

[AuroraSaab]

but only if such discrimination is based upon one or more of the legally protected characteristics.

As has been established, being an ärse is legal but does not guarantee a right to an audience.

Gender critical beliefs are protected, just as philosophical beliefs like 'Transwomen are women' are. Things like Holocaust denial aren't. You can't discriminate just because you don't like the beliefs being espoused. It's not about demanding someone gives you a platform for your opinions. It's about whether you can discriminate against people with one set of legally held opinions whilst not discriminating against others.