If women are equal to men should ladies nights be made illegal?

[Vegasrunner]

Meaning no free entry or special exceptions given to women visiting eating and drinking establishments.

[EricSummer]

The idea is to better balance the gender ratio at the event and thereby make it more rewarding for men as well.

In everything that concerns dating, sex and procreation women are not equal to men. This is different from education, politics or the workplace where they are equal.

A night out is a borderline case as a man might just want to listen to music, have a few drinks and dance which may be unrelated to dating. Is that realistic though? Personally, I think most men go there because of the women.

[msc545]

It's because men go there and meet women does not mean that it's okay to charge women less than men.

[EricSummer]

Strictly speaking it is discrimination based on gender, but a person would have to be very bitter to sue about this. I would not want to spend time with such a person.
Men will often individually invite a woman for a date or a drink, and here the venue does the same on behalf of all men you could say. It's still consistent with dating culture.

In Europe this promotional concept has become rare anyway. Typically, there used to be a free drink included that was often sweet and surprisingly strong. So the idea was to get women there, but also make them more pliable with alcohol. All in all it's a good thing that this is largely obsolete.

A better way is to give free entry to early guests. However, clubs everywhere in the world will refuse groups of men at some point to adjust the gender ratio.

[exitseven]

yes, when I used to drink a lot it made me angry when women would drink for half price or women got the first drink free or no cover charge for girls. It was not fair.

[exitseven]

Thanks for the MHO😎

[Anonymous]

Sure and then you can enjoy all those venues having 100% men because women won’t pay to get in and would rather stay home. That’s why there are free entries and such given to women in the first place - to encourage them to come there as they won’t otherwise.

[Vegasrunner]

@anonymous I was one of the biggest nightclub promoters in LV so I understand why it's done. My question is in the name of equality shouldn't it be made illegal or are you saying women don't want equality?

[msc545]

Bullshit. Women will always pay a little more to get in knowing that men will buy their drinks. In some cases, men will pay for their admission too.

[purplepoppy]

I think if a woman takes advantage of those things she should accept she's there to entertain the paying male customers.

[Vegasrunner]

@purplepoppy Interesting POV personally I don't think she should be obligated to do anything she doesn't want to. If people are going to allow for inequality she has every right to take advantage.

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

Ladies nights are there to help guys not exclude them. Not sure how this would seem sexist to guys when the whole purpose is to bring in women for the guys to talk to. They should be thanking those establishments.

[Vegasrunner]

@Ez-Bri-Z_v2 So you're saying women don't need equality?

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

... where did you pull that out of my statement?

[Vegasrunner]

@Ez-Bri-Z_v2 Based on the original statement the question that was asked was if you believed ladies night should be made illegal in the name of equality. Since you believe that it should not be made illegal, the only option is that you don't believe in equality for women. The original question never ask who u believe it's there to help. You even go as far as to say men should thank an establishment for providing them w/ less favorable service than women.

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

Guys should be thanking them. Otherwise, women wouldn't be going to those places and then guys would complain that bar/club is all guys. Equality is fine in this case. Women get in free but agree to have to deal with getting hit on all night. Men pay knowing they get the chance to talk to women.

[Vegasrunner]

@Ez-Bri-Z_v2 Lol, that's one of the funniest things I ever read. Are you attempting to make the argument that men should be thanking establishments for financially exploiting them because they get the opportunity to speak w/ women? If so then I stand by original question to you which is that you believe women don't need equality? Telling me that u receive something that I don't because I get the opportunity to talk to you tells me that you believe your more valuable than me. You are not.

[msc545]

@Vegasrunner Well said.

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

To those guys, the time they get to spend talking with those girls is valuable. Just because you don't believe in it doesn't mean they don't

[msc545]

I don't pay to talk to girls.

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

And yet a lot of guys do. Lots of desperation out there

[msc545]

So its ok to take financial advantage of desperation?

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

Capitalist society practically demands for it.

[msc545]

That is not responsive to my question.

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

Sure it is, if you are a supporter of capitalism.

Think about it, it's not just a ladies night at a bar. It's dating apps, beauty supplies, the housing market, you name it. People taking advantage of other people's desperation to make money.

If you aren't a fan of capitalism then your answer is probably no, otherwise it's fine to do.

[Vegasrunner]

@Ez-Bri-Z_v2 Ahh I now understand your confusion. They could talk to those same caliber of women for free so that's not true. However it sounds like you are agreeing that women don't need equality.

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

You should really stop putting words in my mouth.

[msc545]

If women were disadvantaged at nightclubs and bar the way men are, you would be up in arms screaming about it and filing lawsuits.

Since men are the victims, you predictably don't give a shit.

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

You should also stop putting words in my mouth as well.

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

I wouldn't "give a shit" if it was happening to women either, as these business owners are just practicing capitalism, which I'm fine with.

You see, men don't HAVE to go to these bars/clubs. They could boycott using their money as their voice, and if enough did, then ladies' nights wouldn't be a thing. If they just wanted to go to drink/dance then they could do that at so many other places.

This isn't an equality issue, this is an issue with a capitalist society taking advantage of the desperate. Take up arms with that if you must.
Women get cheaper drinks and men get access to women. Its a win/win for both sexes.

[msc545]

Oddly enough the California supreme Court doesn't agree with you at all. This is why this practice of differential pricing based on gender is actually illegal in California and actionable.

[msc545]

Maybe where you live. Men put up with it. In California. We don't put up with it at all. We sue.

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

Neither did Wisconsin, Maryland or Pennsylvania. I dont live in any of those states though. So what's the point?

[msc545]

The point is that you're assertion that men are being helped by. This is false. We are being financially damaged by this. We are also being damaged by the fact that we are being discriminated against. Obviously a bunch of states and at least one state supreme court also agree that it's a problem. You and the other hand have concocted this ridiculous theory that it helps men. That's bullshit.

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

A "bunch" is not 4. 46 states are fine with it.

Are you being financially damaged going to an amusement park where you can have more fun? How about strip clubs? Should we close those down?

Tell you what though, take it away in the name of equality and see if those business make the same kind of money as in comparison to those nights.

[Vegasrunner]

@Ez-Bri-Z_v2 If the message is unclear it is the fault of the general. The fact u feel as if people put words in your mouth proves that your statement is incongrent w/ your message. The original question delt w/ equality your statement addresses perceived value. The fact that you believe women have more value then men is disturbing but not relevant to the question. If what you're saying is true your answer is that u don't believe in equality for women you believe that women should hold an advantage in life. Most intellegent people can respect that answer however making the case that women have an advantage AND equality is served makes you seem bizarre.

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

No, it means your reading comprehension is either lacking or you want to further your point by forcing it into my statements.

All I'm saying is it isn't a problem if you support a capitalist society. Both parties get something out of it. Without it, guys are less tempted to come out and spend money which hurts the business. I never said women don't need equality. You keep trying to make that point for me.

[Vegasrunner]

@Ez-Bri-Z_v2 That would have validity if I was the only one you claim "put words in your mouth. However u seem to be the common denominator. The "capitalistic society" part isn't relevant to the original question your adding it in a failed attempt to justify a position you don't seem to fully believe in. Both parties getting something is a valid point , however you're being told that simply "talking to women doesn't have the value to men as you believe it does. I worked in the LV nightclub industry on the LV strip for nearly a decade so I'm well familiar w/ the business model of ladies night. I'm also aware that in that model an unequal financial advantage for women is vebalized and applied. Anytime you provide the same asset to customers at varying prices an advantage is automatic. Ironically you seem to agree that it's an unequal advantage weighted toward women which is why you're attempting to make the ludicrous claim that women have so much more value that men should be thanking an establishment for providing a financial advantage to them.

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

You'll have to forgive me if I don't take your word for that and the guy following you around like a lost puppy commenting on other posts with you.

What I'm being told about the value women have in this situation doesn't correlate with reality. If it did, ladies' nights wouldn't be a thing, now would they?

You may not personally like it, but yeah, women have more value in this situation because they are the commodity the bar owners are trading on to make more money from the guys.

Don't feel too bad, though. There are plenty of places where guys have had more value than women throughout history, and still to this day, there are employers who still believe it. Hell, half the country still doesn't believe we should ever have a female president, for example. Ever heard of the pink tax? You know where we pay extra for items because they are marketing specifically to women, but the same item for a guy is much cheaper? But please do go on about paying full price for drinks. It's fascinating the mental gymnastics you're making over this in the name of so called equality.

[Vegasrunner]

@Ez-Bri-Z_v2 You don't need to apologize to me. The fact that u struggle to accept things that don't line w/ you belief explains your POV.
Besides from you no one is making the argument that it isn't or shouldn't be. The question asked is if woman want equality should it still exsist? I personally benifited from that model so there's no reason for me to "dislike" anything about it. l In your own explanation men have more value as the ultimate goal is to get them to spend their money at the venue.
Lol, your obsession w/ "feelings" is what is probably stunting your critical thinking. Perhaps the country doesn't believe there should be a female president because they hear arguments like your attempting to make and realize women make decisions based on emotion vs facts. While it may be cute, during social media discourse, attempting to govern a nation like that could prove troublesome. (Although I do feel as if Trump was the closest thing America had to a female president.) I thought the Pink Tax taxed things like Tampoons how could men be taxed for those? Again you were presented a direct question regarding equality, you readily admit the alleged inequality yet are trying to still claim equality. It's rationale like that why people say there shouldn't be a female president as that doesn't make logical sense.

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

Let me simplify this for you.

It's equal because there are other places where men have the advantage over women. So it washes out. There are just going to always be spots where one gender has power over the other in certain situations. A ladies' night is done because the women have more power in sex appeal and men's detriment with their sex drive. Men have a monetary value to these bar owners, but without women, the men aren't showing up. So, chalk one up for the ladies.

It's ok that it happens because of how a capitalist society works.

Jesus, for someone claiming to be so logical, you'd think you'd be able to figure this out without the need for me to break it down for you.

[Vegasrunner]

@Ez-Bri-Z_v2 If that's true please name one establishment that allows men to enter for free while forcing women to pay?
Lol, you're simply regurgitating your same contradictory argument which does not make logical sense. If you are going to make the claim that women do receive preferential treatment, you can't logically make the claim that it's equal. The question provided two alternatives Either you believe woman are equal in which Cade they don't need special treatment or you believe they are not equal in which case providing the special treatment makes sense. Your argument would be laughed out of any official legislative body as lacking congruencey which is probably why people are reluctant to have a female president because they listen to things like this.

[Ez-Bri-Z_v2]

And your responses have been the equivalent of a petulant child crying "I don't get it. I don't get it" but I've tried to be patient with you. However between your feigned ignorance to what I'm telling you and your thinly veiled sexist remarks in the end, I'll just end this by saying "Agree to disagree" and moving on with my life.

[Vegasrunner]

@Ez-Bri-Z_v2 That certainly is a position you're welcome to take, however anyone reading would notice that when asked to validate your position you continually fail to answer. You speak about these hypothetical places that give men an advantage yet to date have been unable to name one. Your position has already been articulated it's simply not a logical one.

[PBandJ_Nerd]

Guys usually go to sports bars for bro nights so I don't see why ladies night would be any different.

[Vegasrunner]

@PBandJ_Nerd Because ladies night comes w/ free entry and drinks.

[BoopBoopBeep]

Those are private enterprises doing that, they should be allowed to do whatever they want.

[Anonymous]

Sure, and while we're at it let's make children's, veterans', and senior discounts illegal as well.

[Opinion Owner]

I don't go to bars and clubs.

[Opinion Owner]

Nobody put a quarter in you anyway.

[Opinion Owner]

That's not what I said, but from your posting pattern reading comprehension is clearly not your strong suit. Now go away.

[Vegasrunner]

@anonymous Children can't go to bars and nightclubs, seniors don't and there are limited and a Veteran is someone that earned the right to receive a discount because of their service to their country

[Opinion Owner]

That’s not the point.

[Vegasrunner]

@opinon Owner I wasn't aware that you had one. What point are you struggling to make?

[DextroShade]

It's literally discrimination on the basis of sex but women don't mind seismic when they benefit from it.

[msc545]

There are no more ladies' nights in CA - they got sued a lot and always lost.

[Vegasrunner]

@msc545 They need to enforce the law then I was literally at one in Bakersfield last month.

[msc545]

The authorities here refuse to enforce the law unless they are prodded. We prod them by visiting bars and clubs that hold ladies nights and discriminate against men by charging them full price for entry and then filing suit against the clubs alleging violations of the Unruh act. Usually the club settle for about $2,000 but in some cases it goes to court and the settlement is much larger. Almost all clubs that discriminate against men are found liable when the facts are examined. We can't go to every club and do this constantly but doing this does have a chilling effect on clubs that are contemplating having ladies nights and discriminating against men. Ideally, the agency that controls liquor in California would take actions against clubs and restaurants that violate the Unruh act but of course they do not. So we do what we can when we can.

[KrakenAttackin]

Ladies nights are illegal but the laws are not enforced.

[BoopBoopBeep]

They're still legal in the majority of the U. S. They were banned in Hong Kong. Strangely (to nobody), the clubs still have tons of hot women in them.

[KrakenAttackin]

@BoopBoopBeep No, it is unlawful everywhere in the U. S. to discriminate on the basis of sex.

[BoopBoopBeep]

Well unfortunately it's not our intpretation of the law that matters, only the courts.

Claims against ladies' nights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution have failed under the state action doctrine. Similar actions have failed under the Civil Rights Act of 1871 (42 U. S. C. § 1983). Ladies' nights may have federal tax implications, though. Federal claims were also involved in the unsuccessful challenge in Washington.

State courts in California, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin have ruled that ladies' night discounts are unlawful gender-based price discrimination under state or local statutes. However, courts in Illinois, Minnesota, and Washington have rejected a variety of challenges to such discounts.

There's the world we WANT to live in, then there's the world we DO live in. Unfortunately at this point the two do not coincide

[msc545]

Private citizens enforce them in CA.

[msc545]

Here is the written decision of the California Supreme Court in Koire v. Metro Car Wash, the foundational case against sex discrimination in California:

law.justia.com/.../24.html

[msc545]

It is, but actions alleging violations of the Equal Protection clause are handicapped by the State Action Doctrine in many cases (maybe).