Gender again. Sorry!

[AuroraSaab]

Aiui it's not ok to discriminate against someone who is gay or trans.

You can discriminate against anybody if it's for a legitimate reason under the Equality Act.

But it is ok to 'discriminate' against someone being transphobic, or homophobic .

It's legal to refuse service on those grounds as I understand it, if that's how they are actually behaving, but not simply because you think they might be racist or homophobic etc. if you let them in.

I'm talking about forcing a gay bar to host a non gay friendly show.

Again, this would be the gay guys v the Irish bakery type thing surely.

I can't quite believe we're having this conversation. Linehan's a nasty piece of work. F*ck him all the way to hell.

Who it is is irrelevant. It's about whether you can refuse goods and services because you don't like someone's opinions. The law on discrimination is there to protect all of us, including people we don't like.

 

[Pale Rider]

Why are these LG whatever punters so touchy?

I'm not keen on comedians who do nothing other than slag off the government, but their existence doesn't bother me one bit.

Quite the reverse, I would support them if they were being discriminated against.

Yet the LG lot want to discriminate against comedians they don't like.

As supposed victims of discrimination, you'd have thought they might have a little more self-awareness.

 

[winjim]

Who it is is irrelevant. It's about whether you can refuse goods and services because you don't like someone's opinions. The law on discrimination is there to protect all of us, including people we don't like.

F*ck him. Seriously. Of course you can refuse him, he's an objectionable ars*hole.

 

[AndyRM]

There's nothing "supposed" about the discrimination against the "LG lot".

 

[Rusty Nails]

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.

In some circumstances.

 

[AuroraSaab]

F*ck him. Seriously. Of course you can refuse him, he's an objectionable ars*hole.

Surely you can see that it would be ridiculous and unfair for the world to operate in this way as a general principle?

If legal, 'I think you're an objectionable arseh*le therefore I am refusing to provide you with goods and services...' would quickly become a way for anyone to enact their personal prejudices, whether those prejudices are understandable or not. Pretty soon you might find yourself on the receiving end of such discrimination and then might wish the law protected you.

 

[winjim]

First they came for Graham Linehan, and I said 'he's over there, here let me hold the door for you.'

 

[theclaud]

Venue was booked. People complained when they found out Bindel was speaking. The council cancelled. Legal advice told them it was unlawful. Seems a straightforward comparison.

We are talking about discrimination under UK law, not running an arts venue. The fact it was an arts venue is irrelevant.


Leaving aside that it's possible to be concerned about two things at once, this is just whataboutery and irrelevant to the specific topic being discussed.

Leaving aside the obvious example, I've not see ignorance this belligerent since the Andy in Sig days.

If you can't see the difference between an independent venue pulling a show and a council forcing a venue under its auspices to cancel an event, then I suppose it's consistent with a long thread in which you are not interested in the differences between things that are not the same.

It's relevant that its an arts venue, and furthermore an independent arts venue at the Fringe, because you clearly have zero idea what this means, how things work, or what constitutes a legitimate programming decision. I literally run an arts venue, and a production company which tours to other venues. I literally pulled a recent (hire) event because the person running it was obnoxious to my colleague and I decided she was a pain in the arse and a narcissistic bully. She'd signed a contract, we returned her deposit. I don't care if she goes off on one about how unfair it is or thinks she's been unfairly discriminated against, because I'm entirely confident in the decision. I've been working at the Fringe for over 20 years. We've been f**ked over by venues in big and small ways, we've created and run venues (in Leith!), we've programmed other companies. We've been banned from Worthing and Newbury (which, to be fair, is an endorsement of sorts), and censored by authorities as diverse as the Dylan Thomas estate and the Georgian Orthodox Church. Unlike you, I know what I'm talking about. Glinner is not banned from the Fringe (and nor should he be, but that doesn't mean I would advise anyone to book or host his stand-up). The Leith Arches has been played by a bunch of controversy-spinning GBNews reactionaries, and should probably have seen it coming, but there's else to nothing to see here.

 

[matticus]

F*ck him. Seriously. Of course you can refuse him, he's an objectionable ars*hole.

I admire your enthusiasm and single-mindedness; but I should also point out that each time you write this stuff, it just underlines - in ever-thicker sharpie - what Mr Rider has said about you (and that you keep denying )

 

[winjim]

I admire your enthusiasm and single-mindedness; but I should also point out that each time you write this stuff, it just underlines - in ever-thicker sharpie - what Mr Rider has said about you (and that you keep denying )

I'm deliberately using profanity to emphasise my point and I don't really care what he thinks.

 

[Pale Rider]

Leaving aside the obvious example, I've not see ignorance this belligerent since the Andy in Sig days.

If you can't see the difference between an independent venue pulling a show and a council forcing a venue under its auspices to cancel an event, then I suppose it's consistent with a long thread in which you are not interested in the differences between things that are not the same.

It's relevant that its an arts venue, and furthermore an independent arts venue at the Fringe, because you clearly have zero idea what this means, how things work, or what constitutes a legitimate programming decision. I literally run an arts venue, and a production company which tours to other venues. I literally pulled a recent (hire) event because the person running it was obnoxious to my colleague and I decided she was a pain in the arse and a narcissistic bully. She'd signed a contract, we returned her deposit. I don't care if she goes off on one about how unfair it is or thinks she's been unfairly discriminated against, because I'm entirely confident in the decision. I've been working at the Fringe for over 20 years. We've been f**ked over by venues in big and small ways, we've created and run venues (in Leith!), we've programmed other companies. We've been banned from Worthing and Newbury (which, to be fair, is an endorsement of sorts), and censored by authorities as diverse as the Dylan Thomas estate and the Georgian Orthodox Church. Unlike you, I know what I'm talking about. Glinner is not banned from the Fringe (and nor should he be, but that doesn't mean I would advise anyone to book or host his stand-up). The Leith Arches has been played by a bunch of controversy-spinning GBNews reactionaries, and should probably have seen it coming, but there's else to nothing to see here.

I sympathise with your attempts to explain the ins and outs of running an arts venue.

It's analogous to my attempts to explain the nature of news and the media.

At least a few punters on here like what you say, whereas next to no one likes the truth about news.

 

[Ian H]

Why are these LG whatever punters so touchy?

I'm not keen on comedians who do nothing other than slag off the government, but their existence doesn't bother me one bit.

Quite the reverse, I would support them if they were being discriminated against.

Yet the LG lot want to discriminate against comedians they don't like.

As supposed victims of discrimination, you'd have thought they might have a little more self-awareness.

There are quite a few comedians I don't like. That's life. There are a few who spout inflammatory abuse against certain minorities, the kind of abuse that incites hate or even violence. I'd support a venue that didn't want to promote them.

 

[matticus]

I'm deliberately using profanity to emphasise my point

Oh I see - well thankyou for the explanation. I was really very upset by your language for a while, you know how delicate we are on NACA.

 

[AndyRM]

I sympathise with your attempts to explain the ins and outs of running an arts venue.

It's analogous to my attempts to explain the nature of news and the media.

At least a few punters on here like what you say, whereas next to no one likes the truth about news.

Perhaps if you didn't hold tabloid nonsense in such regard "punters" might pay a bit more attention to your wisdom.

 

[Pale Rider]

Perhaps if you didn't hold tabloid nonsense in such regard "punters" might pay a bit more attention to your wisdom.

They are blinded by their in-built hatred of tabloids, just as all the woke lefties on here are blinded by their in-built hatred of the comedian.

Thus they cannot recognise The Sun for the brilliantly produced newspaper which it is, and they can't see the hypocrisy - and risk - in banning the comedian.