Gender again. Sorry!

[theclaud]

Do you mean any booking, or this one? Do they have a legal right under certain circumstances or any circumstances? Have they declined a booking or cancelled an agreed booking? Is there a bloody lawyer in the house?

Like just about every one in this thread, this particular argument is just going round in circles.

AS, your serve, new balls.

No idea, but there is someone who has taken numerous shows to the Fringe, who has set up, programmed and run a Fringe venue, and who runs an independent arts venue that hosts work by others (by various sorts of agreement). And no, I wouldn't programme or collaborate with 2023 Glinner, and I wouldn't lose a second's sleep about some bunch of blowhards claiming that not doing so was some sort of unlawful discrimination or freedom of speech issue.

 

[theclaud]

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.

Is this a pitch for a Fringe show?

 

[AuroraSaab]

You're wrong. When I owned and ran a business I declined to provide goods and services on more than one occasion to entities that were involved in the 'defence' industry.

Nobody can stop you declining to provide goods and services at the point of service - how could they? - but the law protects people from discrimination by allowing them to sue you if the grounds on which you do so are discriminatory. Whether people choose to sue you will depend on many things from the cost of legal action, whether they can easily get the same product elsewhere, whether they want to make a point, or whether they can be arsed.

Not quite, I also think the venue have the right to cancel his appearance because they dislike him. I've been very very clear that I don't consider this to be an issue of discrimination and that I simply think he's an ars*hole.

The implication then is that providers can actively discriminate against anybody they consider an arseh*le. Refusing to give one person goods or services but not another, without very good reason, is discrimination, regardless of whether you think they deserve it.

 

[Rusty Nails]

If it is not illegal there is nothing intrinsically wrong with discrimination. It is essential. We all exercise it at some time or other.

 

[theclaud]

If it is not illegal there is nothing intrinsically wrong with discrimination. It is essential. We all exercise it at some time or other.

Come on now, Rusty, you must agree to have a Jordan Peterson audiobook piped into every room in your house 24/7 or his lawyers will be in touch.

 

[Pale Rider]

No idea, but there is someone who has taken numerous shows to the Fringe, who has set up, programmed and run a Fringe venue, and who runs an independent arts venue that hosts work by others (by various sorts of agreement). And no, I wouldn't programme or collaborate with 2023 Glinner, and I wouldn't lose a second's sleep about some bunch of blowhards claiming that not doing so was some sort of unlawful discrimination or freedom of speech issue.

That's great, I'm sure the country need censors such as yourself to decide what we can and cannot watch.

What of the Fringe?

I thought it was meant to be some sort of edgy all-comers welcome event.

Clearly not, the performers are censored by whoever holds sway over the venues.

Or more accurately, those who have the power to do so, and are dense enough to use that power irresponsibly.

Hardly good for all that worthy stuff about anti-discrimination, freedom to be who you want to be, and so on.

It still comes down to the same thing - everyone is free to do what they like - provided I approve of it.

Those I don't approve of must be gagged.

 

[AuroraSaab]

If it is not illegal there is nothing intrinsically wrong with discrimination. It is essential. We all exercise it at some time or other.

Of course we do, when it's stuff like choosing who we sit next to on the bus or which salesperson we buy a car from. Totally different from discriminating against someone in the provision of goods and services.

 

[Bromptonaut]

That's great, I'm sure the country need censors such as yourself to decide what we can and cannot watch.

What of the Fringe?

I thought it was meant to be some sort of edgy all-comers welcome event.

Clearly not, the performers are censored by whoever holds sway over the venues.

Nobody has, in reality, been censored.

One venue, not liking the cut of his jib, told milado's folks to sling their hook.

It now looks as if another place has welcomed them with open arms.

That's Life.....

 

[theclaud]

That's great, I'm sure the country need censors such as yourself to decide what we can and cannot watch.

 

[CXRAndy]

I hope he does sue. There is a woke cancel culture at play. He has stood tall and critical of gender cults.

The Scottish MP threatened to sue last year for being cancelled and the venue backed down

Oh dear the venue posted this

 

[Deleted member 121]

I hope he does sue. There is a woke cancel culture at play. He has stood tall and critical of gender cults.

The Scottish MP threatened to sue last year for being cancelled and the venue backed down

Oh dear the venue posted this

View attachment 4420

You're dead right. At 6' 5", he does stand pretty tall...

 

[multitool]

The only thing weirder than Linehan is his gaggle of obsessive supporters. What a weird thing to be obsessed about when it concerns a tiny number of people who pose no actual threat, least of all to the people in Linehan's cult.

Absolute freaks.

 

[mudsticks]

All these biffer 'real men' guys objecting to the existence of transwomen, allegedly because they want to 'protect' women from harm.

S'funny but I haven't noticed them rushing nearly so hard to challenge* the misogynists, the routine objectifiers, and other disrespecters of women in general.

*Mind you - I haven't noticed the guys so very very busy telling women off for being even a tad concerned about their safe spaces being preserved, doing so very much of that work themselves either...

Anything to avoid looking at and tackling the underlying root causes of needing 'safe spaces' in the first place eh?

 

[theclaud]

The implication then is that providers can actively discriminate against anybody they consider an arseh*le. Refusing to give one person goods or services but not another, without very good reason, is discrimination, regardless of whether you think they deserve it.

It's OK to admit occasionally that you don't know about a thing, you know. Tell Paley while you're at it.

 

[mudsticks]

Nobody has, in reality, been censored.

One venue, not liking the cut of his jib, told milado's folks to sling their hook.

It now looks as if another place has welcomed them with open arms.

That's Life.....

If you're knowingly allowing hate speech to be done at your venue doesn't that put you in some kind of legal peril too?